Movie Monday
How Hollywood portrayed the rich during the U.S. depression of the 1930s:
Gandalf rises to gi-normous heights in The Fellowship of the Ring after Bilbo accuses him of wanting the Ring for himself. No, Gandalf assures him, I’m not trying to rob you. I’ll trying to help you.
Then Gandalf goes back to normal wizard size; he and Bilbo hug and the world is right again - except for the scary part to follow with Mordor and Orcs and a lot of trouble.
Flash forward from the Shire to reality and I’m picking up vibes that the media thinks the world is right again and we're walking away from this recession/depression. Well, forget the vibes, the talking heads are saying it. (With the exception of Glenn Beck who apparently is still dressed in a chicken suit and reliving the Chicken Little tale.)
As unemployment rises around the world, the President of Brazil tells the world he is tired of white, blue-eyed people ruining the world’s economy and another wave of poverty is going to descend on the U.S.A. as the usurious credit card interest rates come knocking on front doors demanding payments, let’s continue our trip back to the movies in the 1930s.
Probably TCM is the last “free” cable TV station which consistently offers classic and archetypal movies. Last Monday night it did itself proud with a collection of William Wellman pre-code movies. Most of the movies shown were the sexual explicit “women’s movies,” but one was Wild Boys of the Road from 1933. My ears pricked up when host, Robert Osborne, said that this movie was the strongest depression movie made during the time period.
Wild Boys of the Road stars Frankie Darro. It’s a hokey tale:Dad loses his job, son sells beloved jalopy to help, son takes to the road with friends looking for work. However, there were at least two good acting scenes: the speech by the young boy who knows the doctor is about to remove his leg and the look on Darro’s face at the very end after he performs flips and gymnastics along the sidewalk celebrating their new good luck. Then he looks back at his one-legged friend watching his exuberance. No words are said but so much is conveyed.
But as you know, I’m looking at Hollywood in the 30s to analyze their treatment of the rich and I learned a lot from this movie. What I saw:
1. Dad loses his job but blames no one for his bad luck.
2. While a group of railroad guards seem to enjoy the beating they inflict on the boy (and girl) tramps there is a line of dialogue from a cop as the police are sent in to move the kids: I hate doing this. I have kids of my own.
3. The kids set up a tent city on railroad property and say to the cops: But the owner of the property gave us permission.
4. At the end of the movie, when Darro and two others stand before the judge, the judge turns out to be very humane and acts as the deux ex machina to provide the semi-happy (I think Dad is still out of work) ending.
So while we are presented with a few bad guys, especially the rapist railroad guard, the bureaucracy of social order –the police, the rich (railroad owner), the judges – remains unchallenged.
What about the rest of Hollywood in 1933? Here are some of the movies America was watching that year:
Adventure/Horror:
King Kong
Island of Lost Souls
Comedy:
Duck Soup
Sons of the Desert
Adventure:
Laughing at Life
High Gear
Gordon of Ghost City
Mystery:
World Gone Mad
The Ghost Camera
Romance/Drama:
Zoo in Budapest
Dancing Man
Dinner at Eight
Queen Christina
Musicals/Acting:
Morning Glory
Rainbow Over Broadway
The Gold Diggers of 1933)
Depression - themed Movies:
Wild Boys of the Road
Oddities:
The Film Parade
Hitler Youth Quex
http://movies.yahoo.com/browse/year/1933
http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/reviews/The-Times-They-Are-a-Changin-Back-The-Top-10-Old-Depression-Films-for-the-New-Depression
What was America doing this year when it wasn’t at the movies? 1933 is considered the worst year of the depression with 1 in 4 Americans unemployed. 4000 American banks closed, went “in suspension", that year.
The National Bureau of Economic Research divides the Great Depression of the 1930s into three parts - two of recessions; one of recovery:
1. The first recession went from 1929 to March 1933 (coincidence that Roosevelt was sworn in as President that month?).
2. A recovery period to 1937.
3. A second recession starting in 1937 which only WWII ended. http://ingrimayne.com/econ/EconomicCatastrophe/GreatDepression.html
Movies profits also suffered with box-office receipts bottoming out in 1933 at $480 million. Only in 1941 would the receipts top 1929 ($810 million in 1941, $720 million of 1929.) http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Criticism-Ideology/Great-Depression-THE-DEPRESSION-AND-INDUSTRY-FINANCES.html
As seen above, few movies were tackling the social issues of the Depression. Perhaps they knew like Sullivan learned in Sullivan Travels that in times of trouble people don’t want to see their sorry lives on screen.
Next week: I’ll look at the recovery years of the Great Depression (1934 - 1936) and see if Hollywood movies changed.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Knitting Friday
Ah yes, her team won the basketball game on Wednesday. She scored two baskets (Is that what they call it? Or did I just humiliate myself royally regarding my knowledge of sports?) and it was a decisive win. The next game is this afternoon and I’m getting conflicting reports: this is the last game and from the girl: Oh, no, this goes on and on.
But, I am beginning to enjoy the games. Not the unbelievable amount of noise though - forget rock concerts and hearing loss, this gym has them beat. With the boy’s DS charged and working throughout, my stockinette circular knitting to entertain my hands, and a ringside seat (well, we all have ringside seats in this small gym; we’re practically on the court with them) I’m allowing the camaraderie of this modern day coliseum sport to capture me. (Nah, not really, but it’s not a bad half-hour.)
On to Knitting Friday:
Still, the fluffy, Miss Marple style pink shawl is in the works. It’s close to 50" long and I have one and one-half skeins to go before the point where I have to start the finishing section. Right now, I don't think I’ll be using it wrapped around my neck for warmth until next winter. Which is always a problem since spring and summer projects will take priority and this will languish for six months.
But the big news of the week is: I took all my yarn (OK, I left some out-of-the-way bins) out of the dirty side of the basement and put it in my living space. Most of my yarn is stored is 3-bin Sterlite containers on wheels. The sides are transparent; the containers are plastic -probably something The Container Store might disdain - but they all now tucked away behind a screen near my knitting chair (I have a knitting chair?), near the fireplace, near the TV. Heaven!
Then I took all the many, many big pretzel containers, that a neighbor kindly gave me, which I fill with yarn and moved them to “hiding places” around the room. Even my husband said about my “decorating”: You know, this place looks bigger. Talk about trompe-l'œil!
To get to the purpose of these ramblings: Whenever I have a remainder of yarn I put it in the pretzel containers for later use and moving them this week I realized I had enough odds and ends of yarn for at least 2 major projects.
If you’re a knitter, and I guess you are if you’re reading this, you know the bane of the odds and ends. There is this excellent site:
http://simpleknits.blogspot.com/2008/03/500-patterns-to-knit-with-1-285-yards.html
which gives you amazing ideas for pieces of yarn from 1 to 285 yards. You have 5 yards? Make a knitted icicle.
But I collect yards until I have a zillion yards and there’s the problem. Plus, I have this silly preference: I like my variegated yarn (and that is what these odds and ends become) to be smooth looking, not bumpy. So, it’s got to be a plain stockinette stitch or a lace stockinette. Which leads me to my pattern for today:
The Odds and Ends Square for Whatever
First, some background:
1. I don’t claim this as an original pattern. I don’t even claim this is a pattern. It’s really a variation on the mitered square. I know that the mitered square is ubiquitous in knitting and if there is an original designer of this square, please contact me and I’ll be happy to give you credit.
2. This project is a work in progress. I will just give you directions to how far I am today and I hope to post more directions and a picture next week.
What you need to do first:
1. Assemble all your odds and ends and sort for weight.
2. To keep your sanity, I would eliminate all novelty or multi-thread yarns. I’ll have a crochet pattern for them later.
3. Your choice: arrange your yarns by color family or not
4. If you know your yarns’ content, splicing all the wools together would make your work easier.
5. You can decide if you want to Russian join your synthetics at the beginning for one big ball or join them on-the-go.
6. Decide on your needle size. It’s your choice unless your yarn is crinkly - the look your yarn gets when it’s pulled from an earlier project - and larger needles will give the piece a crinkly look. I’m using US8 for that reason now.
7. You may want to cast on with wooden needles (less slipping) and knit with metal ones (sharper tips.)
8. Have a stitch marker ready to delineate the center stitch if you need to.
9. Have a crochet hook ready to pick up stitches. It’s much easier using one.
10. Very Important: You must use circular needles. [Added for clarity: you are using circular needles because after some pick-ups you will have the purl side facing and you will be working your decrease rows on the purl side for that square. (See below for ssk, skp, k2tog, and p2tog instructions.) You can only work this on circulars or double pointed (not recommended) needles.]
Abbreviations:
CO = cast on; CS = center stitch; PU = pick up; st = stitch
K = knit; P = purl; RS = right side; WS = wrong side
K2tog = knit two stitches together
P2tog = purl two stitches together
Sl1 = slip one stitch
ssk = slip one, knit one, pass slip stitch over knit stitch and off the needle (psso)
ssp = slip 1, purl 1, pass slip stitch over P stitch and off the needle (psso)
Tiers = think of the rows of this project as the tiers on a wedding cake. Tier 1 is the first row of squares at the bottom followed by Tier 2, Tier 3, etc.
*...* = repeat between to end of row or next directions
Also very important: Always slip (Sl) the 1st st as the rest of row (Sl1K on K row; Sl1P on P row)
Skill Level: Intermediate
And now, to begin.
Square 1 on Tier 1:
CO 25 sts or any odd number. Mark the center stitch (CS)
**Row 1: Sl 1K, K to 2 stitches before CS, ssk, K CS, K2tog, K to end
Row 2: Sl 1P, *P* ** Repeat 2 rows to 3 sts on RS.
End P 1 row, then sl 1, K2tog, psso for 1 stitch left.
Square 2: With the RS of square facing you and last live stitch in upper left corner, PU 12 sts along the left edge ( your 12th PU st will be the CS) and then CO 12 stitches.(25 total) You will now have the WS facing.
(Options: P 1 row and begin directions for Square 1 or make Row 1: Sl 1P, P to 2 stitches before CS, ssp, P CS, P2tog, P to end and Row 2: Sl1K, *K* End square with: K 1 row, then sl1P, P2tog, psso. Note: If you decide to P 1 row first, to keep the same number of rows as the first square, finish the square on a K row - sl 1, K2tog, psso for 1 stitch left.) [Added for clarity: At times a tier's first square will have an uneven first row. (On Tier 3 of squares, you would CO your 12 new sts, K across them and then PU 13 sts from the base of the previous square. So the beginning half of the square would have a K section and the second half of the square would just have a PU stitches section.) Don't worry about this. Just start your pattern using the P decrease row instructions here.]
At end of second square continue to make squares in tier 1to your desired size. (I’m making a shawl so it was 7 squares at 4 inches each.) (Added for clarity: Don't be concerned if you start some squares RS facing and some WS facing. If you follow the directions for ssk, ssp, k2tog and p2tog where appropriate you will get the same slanted decreases throughout.)
OK, that’s all of the pattern for this Friday. If you cast on enough stitches for your first square you would have a shawl width immediately and you could just keep making squares to your desired length. Or you could make 2 separate large squares and join them for the front and back of a vest. Put a ribbed hem on the bottom and crab stitch around the neck and armholes. Or, you could add sleeves - long or short - for a sweater.
Next week: We add the second tier of squares with some new techniques. See you then.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Website Wednesday
If you stay in a conservative thinking mode (and I don’t mean in the political sense) all your life, your soul (and I definitely don’t mean in a religious sense) will never fly but it will become as Millay says:
And he whose soul is flat -- the sky
Will cave in on him by and by.
So in order to visit all those wonderful places which Dr. Seuss told us about, sometimes you just have to think out of the box.
I guess I did that a little this Monday when I took a second look at the link I had posted for movie statistics:
http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/moviedata.html
and saw “waynesthisandthat embedded within. Hmm, I thought, that sounds worth exploring. It was a easy delete to my website pick for today:
http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/
Now I figure I spend about 6 hours a week getting 3 posts a week done. Maybe I’m slow; maybe I can’t spell for beans. (Now there’s an idiom which should be explored.)
However, whenever I see the information some other people post on their websites, I am in awe.
Where to being in describing “This and That?”
First, let Wayne Schmidt tell you: Wayne Schmidt's multi-topic site covering everything from kaleidoscopes to electric rocket engines (This site is viewed best in Internet Explorer.) And Site Statistics: 350 pages, 1,700 images and 1,000,000 words covering over 100 subjects. Wow! A million words. I don’t even know that many!
While Wayne has a disclaimer that: I am not an expert in any of these subjects, he holds Master’s degrees in mechanical engineering and plasma physics so I think he’s being modest.
I’ll list most of the main topics he covers: Antiques, Astronomy, Chocolate, Gardening, Hobbies (very eclectic), Kaleidoscopes, Music, Movies, Pinball arcade games, Photography, Science, Sports, Weaving, ........ Does the man ever sleep?
Some interesting subtopics are:
Victorian Domestic Servant Hierarchy and Wages;
What Restaurants Show You Is Not What You Get;
How Super Glue Works;
Experiments with Close-up Lenses and Extension Tubes:
Cheap Kaleidoscope Dissection Report:
Chocolate Doctoring: and
Bookbinding 101.
You’ll also find though some topics have been updated recently there are some links which take you to computer language pages (you’ll see what I mean) which need fixing.
This is a great site for entertaining and interesting facts complied by a man with an enormous diversity of interests. Go visit This and That.
Final note: All the sites I present on Website Wednesday are sites that I have found interesting and hope that others will also. Of course, you must use your discretion in deciding the validity of the information presented at these sites. (As we all have to do wherever we get our information.) Additionally, these sites are intended only for adults. They may be perfectly safe for children [depending on your definition of “perfectly safe.”] but they are not vetted for that.
If you stay in a conservative thinking mode (and I don’t mean in the political sense) all your life, your soul (and I definitely don’t mean in a religious sense) will never fly but it will become as Millay says:
And he whose soul is flat -- the sky
Will cave in on him by and by.
So in order to visit all those wonderful places which Dr. Seuss told us about, sometimes you just have to think out of the box.
I guess I did that a little this Monday when I took a second look at the link I had posted for movie statistics:
http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/moviedata.html
and saw “waynesthisandthat embedded within. Hmm, I thought, that sounds worth exploring. It was a easy delete to my website pick for today:
http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/
Now I figure I spend about 6 hours a week getting 3 posts a week done. Maybe I’m slow; maybe I can’t spell for beans. (Now there’s an idiom which should be explored.)
However, whenever I see the information some other people post on their websites, I am in awe.
Where to being in describing “This and That?”
First, let Wayne Schmidt tell you: Wayne Schmidt's multi-topic site covering everything from kaleidoscopes to electric rocket engines (This site is viewed best in Internet Explorer.) And Site Statistics: 350 pages, 1,700 images and 1,000,000 words covering over 100 subjects. Wow! A million words. I don’t even know that many!
While Wayne has a disclaimer that: I am not an expert in any of these subjects, he holds Master’s degrees in mechanical engineering and plasma physics so I think he’s being modest.
I’ll list most of the main topics he covers: Antiques, Astronomy, Chocolate, Gardening, Hobbies (very eclectic), Kaleidoscopes, Music, Movies, Pinball arcade games, Photography, Science, Sports, Weaving, ........ Does the man ever sleep?
Some interesting subtopics are:
Victorian Domestic Servant Hierarchy and Wages;
What Restaurants Show You Is Not What You Get;
How Super Glue Works;
Experiments with Close-up Lenses and Extension Tubes:
Cheap Kaleidoscope Dissection Report:
Chocolate Doctoring: and
Bookbinding 101.
You’ll also find though some topics have been updated recently there are some links which take you to computer language pages (you’ll see what I mean) which need fixing.
This is a great site for entertaining and interesting facts complied by a man with an enormous diversity of interests. Go visit This and That.
Final note: All the sites I present on Website Wednesday are sites that I have found interesting and hope that others will also. Of course, you must use your discretion in deciding the validity of the information presented at these sites. (As we all have to do wherever we get our information.) Additionally, these sites are intended only for adults. They may be perfectly safe for children [depending on your definition of “perfectly safe.”] but they are not vetted for that.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Movie Monday
I don’t know why the death of Natasha Richardson touched me as much as it did. Perhaps because its publicity reminded me so vividly of each human’s appointment in Samarra.* An appointment most of us will go to quietly and forgotten; and some in a blaze of lightening.
Ironically, she was one of the lucky ones in that she was able to leave a legacy on film. In the last scene of The Handmaid’s Tale she is sitting in a trailer, safe, awaiting the birth of her second child, staring out the window with her voice-over saying that she hopes her first child (from whom she was forcibly separated) will never forget her. Ah, yes, I thought, you couldn’t have known it then but you articulated all mothers’ fear and your eulogy.
*see W. Somerset Maugham, John O’Hara, or Wikipedia
1932 at the Movies:
The popular myth says the Great Depression occurred in the U.S.A. in 1929. It didn’t. The steady decline may be traced to that year but the policies which set the economy downward started years earlier and the full blown effects of these policies didn’t hit the entire country until the early 1930s. Another myth is that everyone was poor in the 1930s. There were still Americans who were very, very rich, including Hollywood moguls and stars.
By 1932, 50% of the working class in Harlem (NYC) were jobless; 75% of the nation's poor were not getting government relief; municipal workers (teachers and policeman) who were the last to be fired, had not been paid in 8 months and were being fired. But protests by the poor and unemployed were local, not national. You didn’t have another Bonus Army camping out in D.C.http://www.nps.gov/archive/elro/glossary/great-depression.htm (Scroll down and click: America from the Great Depression to World War II and then click and click until you come to amazing pictures from this time.)
There were 685 movies released in 1932 and ticket price averaged 22 cents, up 1 cents from the previous year. http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/moviedata.html
But, according to an article in the LAT from October 2008, 1932, movie box office receipts were off 26.7% from 1931
Remember that in the 1930s, Hollywood turned out movies nonstop so the movies of 1932 we made in “real time” not in prior years. During the dark days of 1932, this is what Americans saw in their darkened theaters:
Crime and Mystery:
Hell Fire Austin
Rome Express
The Most Dangerous Game
The Mouthpiece; Without Honor
The Roar of the Dragon
Horror films:
The Mummy
White Zombie
Freaks
Vampyr
Murders in the Rue Morgue
Westerns:
The Local Badman
The Big Stampede
Between Fighting Men
When the West Was Young
Lovey-Dovey; Or Not:
As You Desire Me
Back Street
A Farewell to Arms (should have been a war tale, but wasn’t)
Impatient Maiden
Trouble in Paradise
Academy Awards for 1932:
Picture: Grand Hotel
That’s the only category I can use since until 1931, awards were given for movies made two years prior. The award ceremony in 1933 honored the previous year’s pictures - as they do now - and the pictures two years' previous. Therefore, the 1932 Oscars for Best Actors (yes, there were two awards) went to: Wallace Berry in The Champ (1931) and Fredric March in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931.) Which is surprising since there were a great number of pictures made in 1932from which to choose. However, the ceremony was in its infancy and pictures from the awards looked like a bunch of people in a big restaurant. It was some time later before Hollywood realized that the awards production itself could be a money-maker. (Sources: Yahoo, Wikepedia, IMDB)
This is just a sampling of the 600+ movies made this year but you can see the trend. The only socially-conscious popular movie seems to be I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang with Paul Muni. This movie got changes made in the brutal Georgia penal system but I can’t find out if it caught the eye of the “right” people (i.e., policymakers) or was popular with all moviegoers.
Just some final comments on few movies:
Grand Hotel - was this the first of the perennial Hollywood trend of assembling a cadre of stars for interlocking stories? Dinner At Eight, Crash, (including Cronenberg’s ); Death On The Nile; Airport....the list is endless. Usually you get affluent people’s angst or once-affluent people’s angst. Barrymore playing the aging jewel thief here is interesting but his meatier role was the aging actor in Dinner At Eight. Crawford comes off much better than Garbo, who always seems to be making her entrance to trumpet playing.
As You Desire Me - another Garbo. I remember this movie! Either AMC, before it went to the Dark Side, or TCM has shown it. It’s a dog. Garbo emotes. Is she really the lost wife? Who cares? They sure all live pretty though.
White Zombie - with Bela Lugosi. The moral: be careful what you ask for. Local rich guy desires bride-to-be of another and enlists the local zombie controller for help with his plan. Hokey, but the whites did live well.
A Bill of Divorcement – Hepburn emotes; Barrymore emotes. Mentally ill dad returns just before his wife is about to remarry. Meets his grown daughter and therein the reason for the emoting. All live neatly – no poor boys here.
Emma – with Marie Dressler who was nominated for an Oscar. Unusual film and actress. Dressler was no-beauty and in the competitive world of the stars, of which she was a major one in her time, she did not play the “wallpaper” role (background candy.) Just look at her in Dinner at Eight to see what I mean. In Emma she comes to nursemaid three small children when their mother dies and stays on to marry their father later when he becomes a rich inventor. You may look at this film as Hollywood’s slap at the rich but it’s really a slap at spoiled brats. Emma gets no satisfaction is discovering the children she raised turned out so selfish.
That’s it for his Movie Monday. I think I’m dealing with more than I expected when I proposed: How did Hollywood portray the rich during the 1930s depression? But it sure beats having to review Saw XLVI.
I don’t know why the death of Natasha Richardson touched me as much as it did. Perhaps because its publicity reminded me so vividly of each human’s appointment in Samarra.* An appointment most of us will go to quietly and forgotten; and some in a blaze of lightening.
Ironically, she was one of the lucky ones in that she was able to leave a legacy on film. In the last scene of The Handmaid’s Tale she is sitting in a trailer, safe, awaiting the birth of her second child, staring out the window with her voice-over saying that she hopes her first child (from whom she was forcibly separated) will never forget her. Ah, yes, I thought, you couldn’t have known it then but you articulated all mothers’ fear and your eulogy.
*see W. Somerset Maugham, John O’Hara, or Wikipedia
1932 at the Movies:
The popular myth says the Great Depression occurred in the U.S.A. in 1929. It didn’t. The steady decline may be traced to that year but the policies which set the economy downward started years earlier and the full blown effects of these policies didn’t hit the entire country until the early 1930s. Another myth is that everyone was poor in the 1930s. There were still Americans who were very, very rich, including Hollywood moguls and stars.
By 1932, 50% of the working class in Harlem (NYC) were jobless; 75% of the nation's poor were not getting government relief; municipal workers (teachers and policeman) who were the last to be fired, had not been paid in 8 months and were being fired. But protests by the poor and unemployed were local, not national. You didn’t have another Bonus Army camping out in D.C.http://www.nps.gov/archive/elro/glossary/great-depression.htm (Scroll down and click: America from the Great Depression to World War II and then click and click until you come to amazing pictures from this time.)
There were 685 movies released in 1932 and ticket price averaged 22 cents, up 1 cents from the previous year. http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/moviedata.html
But, according to an article in the LAT from October 2008, 1932, movie box office receipts were off 26.7% from 1931
Remember that in the 1930s, Hollywood turned out movies nonstop so the movies of 1932 we made in “real time” not in prior years. During the dark days of 1932, this is what Americans saw in their darkened theaters:
Crime and Mystery:
Hell Fire Austin
Rome Express
The Most Dangerous Game
The Mouthpiece; Without Honor
The Roar of the Dragon
Horror films:
The Mummy
White Zombie
Freaks
Vampyr
Murders in the Rue Morgue
Westerns:
The Local Badman
The Big Stampede
Between Fighting Men
When the West Was Young
Lovey-Dovey; Or Not:
As You Desire Me
Back Street
A Farewell to Arms (should have been a war tale, but wasn’t)
Impatient Maiden
Trouble in Paradise
Academy Awards for 1932:
Picture: Grand Hotel
That’s the only category I can use since until 1931, awards were given for movies made two years prior. The award ceremony in 1933 honored the previous year’s pictures - as they do now - and the pictures two years' previous. Therefore, the 1932 Oscars for Best Actors (yes, there were two awards) went to: Wallace Berry in The Champ (1931) and Fredric March in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931.) Which is surprising since there were a great number of pictures made in 1932from which to choose. However, the ceremony was in its infancy and pictures from the awards looked like a bunch of people in a big restaurant. It was some time later before Hollywood realized that the awards production itself could be a money-maker. (Sources: Yahoo, Wikepedia, IMDB)
This is just a sampling of the 600+ movies made this year but you can see the trend. The only socially-conscious popular movie seems to be I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang with Paul Muni. This movie got changes made in the brutal Georgia penal system but I can’t find out if it caught the eye of the “right” people (i.e., policymakers) or was popular with all moviegoers.
Just some final comments on few movies:
Grand Hotel - was this the first of the perennial Hollywood trend of assembling a cadre of stars for interlocking stories? Dinner At Eight, Crash, (including Cronenberg’s ); Death On The Nile; Airport....the list is endless. Usually you get affluent people’s angst or once-affluent people’s angst. Barrymore playing the aging jewel thief here is interesting but his meatier role was the aging actor in Dinner At Eight. Crawford comes off much better than Garbo, who always seems to be making her entrance to trumpet playing.
As You Desire Me - another Garbo. I remember this movie! Either AMC, before it went to the Dark Side, or TCM has shown it. It’s a dog. Garbo emotes. Is she really the lost wife? Who cares? They sure all live pretty though.
White Zombie - with Bela Lugosi. The moral: be careful what you ask for. Local rich guy desires bride-to-be of another and enlists the local zombie controller for help with his plan. Hokey, but the whites did live well.
A Bill of Divorcement – Hepburn emotes; Barrymore emotes. Mentally ill dad returns just before his wife is about to remarry. Meets his grown daughter and therein the reason for the emoting. All live neatly – no poor boys here.
Emma – with Marie Dressler who was nominated for an Oscar. Unusual film and actress. Dressler was no-beauty and in the competitive world of the stars, of which she was a major one in her time, she did not play the “wallpaper” role (background candy.) Just look at her in Dinner at Eight to see what I mean. In Emma she comes to nursemaid three small children when their mother dies and stays on to marry their father later when he becomes a rich inventor. You may look at this film as Hollywood’s slap at the rich but it’s really a slap at spoiled brats. Emma gets no satisfaction is discovering the children she raised turned out so selfish.
That’s it for his Movie Monday. I think I’m dealing with more than I expected when I proposed: How did Hollywood portray the rich during the 1930s depression? But it sure beats having to review Saw XLVI.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Knitting Friday
Well, her team won the March Madness basketball game - decisively. We will be returning for another turn next week. Before the game someone said it was 4 quarters long with 10 minutes a quarter but it turned out the entire time for both games scheduled was to be 40 minutes. We were out after the first 20.
I sat and knitted work which necessitated no looking (I haven't even looked yet to see the mess I might have spun.) The boy played on the other side of the gym with about 20 multi-age little boys - now that was a scenario ripe for trouble. I didn't get whiplash watching him, watching her, watching him, watching the clock...... it all came together. Note to self: the boy's DS must be charged before the game and bring more snacks.
So that was Wednesday afternoon and when I got home I started to think about Knitting Friday. Yes, I do try to plan ahead, not that I'm always successful.
I have this ruching pattern which I wanted to post today. This one may be my first truly original pattern. I don't mean original like October is for Spinners:
http://www.hanksyarn.com/PDF/October%20is%20for%20Spinners.pdf
or the many more extremely creative works which are posted free on the web. But it's original is that I took the age-old knit and purl stitch, the knit/purl together stitch, and the yarn over needle stitch and tweaked a slight bit of originality into them - a slight bit.
So I picked up my sample yarn, you know the cheap stuff that you can abuse without guilt, and started my swatch for this pattern.
But this time, for the first time, I picked upCaron's Simply Soft as my sample yarn and, not to be too poetic, the earth shook.
I love Simply Soft. It's, well, it's so soft. And, it's very cheap. So I am working with the softest, smoothest yarn probably outside of your extremely expensive custom-dyed, custom spun yarns.
How could I have missed this yarn? Probably because usually I use Caron's One-Pounder for my swatches and I hate it.
Who cares if this yarn will disappoint me by pilling with wear (comments on say "yes" and "no" to this.) It's like taking only the good memories from a relationship that fails; I'm going to enjoy RavelrySimply Soft in the now.
Needless to say this deep purple skein of beauty didn't become no stinking swatch. It's on its way to a simple lace shawl whose pattern is below.
I have to go out today and I may stumble across a yarn shop (yeah, right, the car will just happen to go past one) and I may be lured in for this gorgeous feeling yarn. Maybe I will just look at it. Maybe I will have a 40% off coupon..... I feel for Ulysses as his ship sailed past the sirens.
One-Row Lace Diagonal Shawl
Equipment: US11 needles; 1 skein Simply Soft (I am using a 366 yd., 7 oz. skein); 2 markers
Terms: Kfb - K in front & back of 1 stitch; K2tog - Knit 2 stitches together; K - Knit; P - purl; *...* - repeat instructions between asterisks; YO - from back, take yarn between the needles and over right needle to the back (1 stitch increase)
**There is no right (RS) or wrong side but you need to mark that side.
Increasing section: (mark right side of work)
Row 1 (RS**): K1, *YO, K2tog*, K1
Row 2: (WS**): Kfb, *YO, K2tog*, Kfb
Continue these two rows to your desired width. End ready for Row 1 (RS)
Straight Section: (Keep original RS marker and add a marker on the starting edge of Row 1.
Row 1 (RS**): Kfb *YO, K2tog*, end K1
Row 2 (WS**): K2tog *YO, K2tog*, end K1
You will alternate increasing and decreasing at the beginning of every row. This is different than Increase Section. The marker at the beginning of Row 1 tells you that you increase at this edge. The unmarked edge is the decrease edge. Continue these two rows to your desired length. End ready for Row 1.
Decrease Section: (Your original right side maker tells you to knit even on this side.)
Row 1 (RS**): K1, *YO, K2tog*, K1
Row 2: (WS**): K2tog, *YO, K2tog*, K2tog
Continue to 2 or 3 stitches (I'm not there yet), K them together. And you're finished.
End notes: I'm past the halfway point in knitting this shawl. My width is 19" with no stretching. My length is 36". I have 49 stitches on the needle (the count is odd at the beginning of the row and even at the end in the Straight Section.) I tried the shawl on and I could start the Decrease Section shortly if I wanted only a summer shawl. (This stitch is very stretchy.) I will not get a crisp corners of a rectangular shawl because of the needle size and stitch. Smaller needles would get me a "firmer" rectangle (or closer to one.) 366 yards is not a lot of yarn for a shawl but I think I'll be OK with enough yarn for a crochet chain border. Final look will be slightly similar to the Saturday Market Shawl:
http://knit-fish.blogspot.com/2008/12/sunday-market-shawl.html
Well, her team won the March Madness basketball game - decisively. We will be returning for another turn next week. Before the game someone said it was 4 quarters long with 10 minutes a quarter but it turned out the entire time for both games scheduled was to be 40 minutes. We were out after the first 20.
I sat and knitted work which necessitated no looking (I haven't even looked yet to see the mess I might have spun.) The boy played on the other side of the gym with about 20 multi-age little boys - now that was a scenario ripe for trouble. I didn't get whiplash watching him, watching her, watching him, watching the clock...... it all came together. Note to self: the boy's DS must be charged before the game and bring more snacks.
So that was Wednesday afternoon and when I got home I started to think about Knitting Friday. Yes, I do try to plan ahead, not that I'm always successful.
I have this ruching pattern which I wanted to post today. This one may be my first truly original pattern. I don't mean original like October is for Spinners:
http://www.hanksyarn.com/PDF/October%20is%20for%20Spinners.pdf
or the many more extremely creative works which are posted free on the web. But it's original is that I took the age-old knit and purl stitch, the knit/purl together stitch, and the yarn over needle stitch and tweaked a slight bit of originality into them - a slight bit.
So I picked up my sample yarn, you know the cheap stuff that you can abuse without guilt, and started my swatch for this pattern.
But this time, for the first time, I picked upCaron's Simply Soft as my sample yarn and, not to be too poetic, the earth shook.
I love Simply Soft. It's, well, it's so soft. And, it's very cheap. So I am working with the softest, smoothest yarn probably outside of your extremely expensive custom-dyed, custom spun yarns.
How could I have missed this yarn? Probably because usually I use Caron's One-Pounder for my swatches and I hate it.
Who cares if this yarn will disappoint me by pilling with wear (comments on say "yes" and "no" to this.) It's like taking only the good memories from a relationship that fails; I'm going to enjoy RavelrySimply Soft in the now.
Needless to say this deep purple skein of beauty didn't become no stinking swatch. It's on its way to a simple lace shawl whose pattern is below.
I have to go out today and I may stumble across a yarn shop (yeah, right, the car will just happen to go past one) and I may be lured in for this gorgeous feeling yarn. Maybe I will just look at it. Maybe I will have a 40% off coupon..... I feel for Ulysses as his ship sailed past the sirens.
One-Row Lace Diagonal Shawl
Equipment: US11 needles; 1 skein Simply Soft (I am using a 366 yd., 7 oz. skein); 2 markers
Terms: Kfb - K in front & back of 1 stitch; K2tog - Knit 2 stitches together; K - Knit; P - purl; *...* - repeat instructions between asterisks; YO - from back, take yarn between the needles and over right needle to the back (1 stitch increase)
**There is no right (RS) or wrong side but you need to mark that side.
Increasing section: (mark right side of work)
Row 1 (RS**): K1, *YO, K2tog*, K1
Row 2: (WS**): Kfb, *YO, K2tog*, Kfb
Continue these two rows to your desired width. End ready for Row 1 (RS)
Straight Section: (Keep original RS marker and add a marker on the starting edge of Row 1.
Row 1 (RS**): Kfb *YO, K2tog*, end K1
Row 2 (WS**): K2tog *YO, K2tog*, end K1
You will alternate increasing and decreasing at the beginning of every row. This is different than Increase Section. The marker at the beginning of Row 1 tells you that you increase at this edge. The unmarked edge is the decrease edge. Continue these two rows to your desired length. End ready for Row 1.
Decrease Section: (Your original right side maker tells you to knit even on this side.)
Row 1 (RS**): K1, *YO, K2tog*, K1
Row 2: (WS**): K2tog, *YO, K2tog*, K2tog
Continue to 2 or 3 stitches (I'm not there yet), K them together. And you're finished.
End notes: I'm past the halfway point in knitting this shawl. My width is 19" with no stretching. My length is 36". I have 49 stitches on the needle (the count is odd at the beginning of the row and even at the end in the Straight Section.) I tried the shawl on and I could start the Decrease Section shortly if I wanted only a summer shawl. (This stitch is very stretchy.) I will not get a crisp corners of a rectangular shawl because of the needle size and stitch. Smaller needles would get me a "firmer" rectangle (or closer to one.) 366 yards is not a lot of yarn for a shawl but I think I'll be OK with enough yarn for a crochet chain border. Final look will be slightly similar to the Saturday Market Shawl:
http://knit-fish.blogspot.com/2008/12/sunday-market-shawl.html
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Thoughts on Thursday
I was listening to The Rachel Maddow Show today - in the middle of the night, again - and she had on a NYT reporter who reports extensively from Afghanistan. As the bottom “Breaking News” scroll is showing viewers that Obama is going to double the U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan (oh, when will they ever learn?) the reporter is saying that Afghanistan is living in the 4th century with rampant corruption everywhere. Now I know something about the 4th century in the western world and I don’t think it was a very pretty place to raise your kids - or yourself.
Then the reporter went on to give examples of Afghan corruption: he wanted to visit a regular airport and had to pay a bribe to get in and a news photographer was arrested for no reason and had to bribe his way out.
And that got me thinking.
A U.S. politician would be thoroughly shocked and outraged if a constituent walked into his office with a minor problem (I know this easy access is the first fantasy, but humor me) and offered the politician a modest amount of money to fix it. The constituent would be lucky not to walk out of the building in an orange jumpsuit and shackles.
But change the scene and have a major corporation contact the politician’s aide with a legal offer of substantial money for campaigning, a worthy project - whatever. “Thank you” would fill the air. Appreciation would reign. What a good corporate friend he would be. Nothing more would need to be said.
I think you see where I’m heading.
Afghanistan is in the 4th century. Perhaps the infusion of troops and U.S. values, which we tout always come with them, will help bring them into this century - the one with the corruption so big that it's legal and none (especially the main stream media) dare speak its name.
I was listening to The Rachel Maddow Show today - in the middle of the night, again - and she had on a NYT reporter who reports extensively from Afghanistan. As the bottom “Breaking News” scroll is showing viewers that Obama is going to double the U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan (oh, when will they ever learn?) the reporter is saying that Afghanistan is living in the 4th century with rampant corruption everywhere. Now I know something about the 4th century in the western world and I don’t think it was a very pretty place to raise your kids - or yourself.
Then the reporter went on to give examples of Afghan corruption: he wanted to visit a regular airport and had to pay a bribe to get in and a news photographer was arrested for no reason and had to bribe his way out.
And that got me thinking.
A U.S. politician would be thoroughly shocked and outraged if a constituent walked into his office with a minor problem (I know this easy access is the first fantasy, but humor me) and offered the politician a modest amount of money to fix it. The constituent would be lucky not to walk out of the building in an orange jumpsuit and shackles.
But change the scene and have a major corporation contact the politician’s aide with a legal offer of substantial money for campaigning, a worthy project - whatever. “Thank you” would fill the air. Appreciation would reign. What a good corporate friend he would be. Nothing more would need to be said.
I think you see where I’m heading.
Afghanistan is in the 4th century. Perhaps the infusion of troops and U.S. values, which we tout always come with them, will help bring them into this century - the one with the corruption so big that it's legal and none (especially the main stream media) dare speak its name.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Website Wednesday
Busy day. The painter has returned for what looks like part 2 of a 3-part painting saga. However, this stint is only one bedroom and the laundry room so except for preparing lunch for him I’m on one level and he's working on another.
The big event of the day is: I’m going to a basketball game! Sports seem to mirror the stupidity of this country. We celebrate basketball with a month of March Madness but we can’t even give an academic subject the stinking, short month of February. Though we do call it “March Madness” so perhaps we know how crazy we are.
Whatever. Obviously I didn’t read the fine print on the “do you want your child to play in March Madness basketball” contract (not that there was one) because you are not eliminated if your team loses one game.
Oh, the short-lived joy when her team lost last week. The wave of peace and contentment. Free at last. But not for long. I was informed, probably during the obligatory consoling remarks: You played so well, with: Oh, no. You’re not eliminated after you lose one game. You have to lose two.
The horror! I did the math and unless I trip her entire team today we could be back in the cheering section again next week. (I shudder to think, and perhaps weeks to come!)
This realization led me to make a list of all the Website Wednesdays I have recommended since I started blogging. If I had no memory of the “only after 2 lost games are you out” rule, I knew my memory was slipping and real soon I would be repeating recommended blogs.
I've posted 24 blogs since I started A Shining Town and no, I haven’t repeated any, yet. Plus, I just clicked on a few and they’re still interesting - at least to me.
This Wednesday, in keeping with my above rant concerning sports, I give you a fantastic educational site (with a twist) in:
http://www.desinuts.com/2009/01/07/100-sites-offering-great-literature-for-download/
I think I really feel guilty that my home is an annex of the now defunct wonder-of-the-world library at Alexandria since I do most of my reading online these days. But the siren call of the web is so great and this site makes it so easy.
If you like to read anything - this site has it. Classics, modern fiction (free sample chapters), non-fiction, sheet music (from the 17th century, no less) textbooks. I’m not going to explain too much about this site because the fun is in the exploration. (Of course, some of the more esoteric links are broken, but that happens.)
And the twist? As you can tell from the URL, this website starts at: http://www.desinuts.com/ where it is a blog with more than a touch of India. You’ll learn about Indian culture and events here plus more: 20 pictures from the Victoria Secrets 2008 fashion show; 15 Beautiful Microscopic Images from inside the Human Body (which if they are real, are mind-blowing); or pictures of 80 smiling faces from India (no one goes wrong with a smile.)
You could spend your life at this site - just remember to feed the kids and the pets.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Movie Monday: Continuing look at the movies of the 1930s
I hope if you’re reading this, you’ve looked at the Hollywood Production Code. Isn’t it a hoot? It’s like your strictest teacher follows you into adulthood and continues to give you rules of good conduct and sexual behavior. There’s so much in it that shows the preoccupation with sexual matters this office had. It also shows how a small band of influential zealots can come to power and inflict their beliefs on a supine populace. And don’t think that the Code is dead. It’s been tweaked and morphed into the MPAA (as opposed to its former life as the MPPDA) but watch the movie: This Film Is Not Yet Rated from 2006 to find out what a bane the MPAA is to creative movie makers.
Watching 1930s Code movies I always laugh at the double bed requirement and the deux ex machina endings. Unfortunately, there is so much more to criticize with the code. Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn from GWTW needed a special amendment written into the Code so it could be used (Wikipedia). Your mind could explode if you think too much on this.
Moving on to 1931 movies and believing a Yahoo list, the most popular movie in 1931 were adventures.
For example:
Convicted - a woman unfairly convicted of a crime
Phantom of the West - an early 10-chapter serial about a rancher who disguises himself as the "Phantom" in order to seek justice
Cavalier of the West - a cavalry vs. Indians western
Mystery Train - a late silent; a woman, a train, jewels (To me, the only interesting thing about this movie is that it starred Hedda Hopper who went on to gossip writing fame (infamy?) and whose son played Paul Drake in the long running TV series Perry Mason.)
U-67 - search for a sunken ocean liner
Branded Men - white hat cowboy vs. black hat ones
The Maltese Falcon - sexually-freer than the 1941 classic; a detective, a beautiful woman, crooks and the black bird
The Vanishing Legion - western serial
The Secret Witness - murder mystery
The Drums of Jeopardy - mad scientist seeks revenge (Here’s another movie theme I may explore: how the movies depict scientists)
Chinatown After Dark - the “Chinese dragon lady” and crime
Of the 30 movies Yahoo lists as the most popular in 1931, the majority are crime and adventure. Which makes me think that Hollywood is really in the same track today. Then, the technology only allowed scary movies to use spooky music and wide-eyed actors to depict fear. Today, CGI and all sorts of advanced technology has moved these movies into the realm of horrific gore and mayhem.
In 1931, Hollywood was on the cusp of 100% sound films and silent movies were still being released. Even Charlie Chaplin released a successful silent film, City Lights, that year.
There were a good section of perennial horror classics from1931 with M, Dracula, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and Frankenstein. (Another example of the portrayal of wealth in 1930s movies, is that of these four classics, only M depicted the underbelly of society. Dracula, Jekyll, and Frankenstein all lived in wealth, albeit their antics took them to shady place.)
At present, the American Film Institute lists two 1931 films, City Lights and Frankenstein in their 100 best films list.
There were still 1920's “loose” morals in films this year with:
A Free Soul where the good socialite, Norma Shearer, abandons herself to bad gangster, Clark Gable,
Platinum Blonde where the poor reporter marries the rich socialite but in the end rejects her life style for his friends and reporter gal who has always loved him and
Possessed where Joan Crawford goes from tramp to the mistress of wealthy man. (What I found most interesting about this last movie is a present day poster on a movie forum said that this movie showed: “that all the rich weren’t bad and all the poor weren’t good.”)
Using one web site, http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/1931_in_movies/, the top grossing films in 1931 were Frankenstein (Original version had the creature and child playing at the river. The child throws in flower petals and finally the creature throws in the child.), Ingagi, a pre-King Kong, the ape and the virgin sacrifice film and Mata Hari with the sultry Garbo as the sultry Hari. Another sites has Ingagi as a top-grosser at $12,000,000! (Does this belie common sense? Movie prices averaged 24 cents during the depression: http://www.pictureshowman.com/questionsandanswers4.cfm)
A perusal of 1931 releases didn’t bring up any depression-themed movies. We are still dealing with adventure films, “sneaking under the door before the Code gets teeth” films, and some classic comedies.
Next time: 1932, the Great Depression has arrived. Is there a change in how Hollywood shows us life?
I hope if you’re reading this, you’ve looked at the Hollywood Production Code. Isn’t it a hoot? It’s like your strictest teacher follows you into adulthood and continues to give you rules of good conduct and sexual behavior. There’s so much in it that shows the preoccupation with sexual matters this office had. It also shows how a small band of influential zealots can come to power and inflict their beliefs on a supine populace. And don’t think that the Code is dead. It’s been tweaked and morphed into the MPAA (as opposed to its former life as the MPPDA) but watch the movie: This Film Is Not Yet Rated from 2006 to find out what a bane the MPAA is to creative movie makers.
Watching 1930s Code movies I always laugh at the double bed requirement and the deux ex machina endings. Unfortunately, there is so much more to criticize with the code. Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn from GWTW needed a special amendment written into the Code so it could be used (Wikipedia). Your mind could explode if you think too much on this.
Moving on to 1931 movies and believing a Yahoo list, the most popular movie in 1931 were adventures.
For example:
Convicted - a woman unfairly convicted of a crime
Phantom of the West - an early 10-chapter serial about a rancher who disguises himself as the "Phantom" in order to seek justice
Cavalier of the West - a cavalry vs. Indians western
Mystery Train - a late silent; a woman, a train, jewels (To me, the only interesting thing about this movie is that it starred Hedda Hopper who went on to gossip writing fame (infamy?) and whose son played Paul Drake in the long running TV series Perry Mason.)
U-67 - search for a sunken ocean liner
Branded Men - white hat cowboy vs. black hat ones
The Maltese Falcon - sexually-freer than the 1941 classic; a detective, a beautiful woman, crooks and the black bird
The Vanishing Legion - western serial
The Secret Witness - murder mystery
The Drums of Jeopardy - mad scientist seeks revenge (Here’s another movie theme I may explore: how the movies depict scientists)
Chinatown After Dark - the “Chinese dragon lady” and crime
Of the 30 movies Yahoo lists as the most popular in 1931, the majority are crime and adventure. Which makes me think that Hollywood is really in the same track today. Then, the technology only allowed scary movies to use spooky music and wide-eyed actors to depict fear. Today, CGI and all sorts of advanced technology has moved these movies into the realm of horrific gore and mayhem.
In 1931, Hollywood was on the cusp of 100% sound films and silent movies were still being released. Even Charlie Chaplin released a successful silent film, City Lights, that year.
There were a good section of perennial horror classics from1931 with M, Dracula, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and Frankenstein. (Another example of the portrayal of wealth in 1930s movies, is that of these four classics, only M depicted the underbelly of society. Dracula, Jekyll, and Frankenstein all lived in wealth, albeit their antics took them to shady place.)
At present, the American Film Institute lists two 1931 films, City Lights and Frankenstein in their 100 best films list.
There were still 1920's “loose” morals in films this year with:
A Free Soul where the good socialite, Norma Shearer, abandons herself to bad gangster, Clark Gable,
Platinum Blonde where the poor reporter marries the rich socialite but in the end rejects her life style for his friends and reporter gal who has always loved him and
Possessed where Joan Crawford goes from tramp to the mistress of wealthy man. (What I found most interesting about this last movie is a present day poster on a movie forum said that this movie showed: “that all the rich weren’t bad and all the poor weren’t good.”)
Using one web site, http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/1931_in_movies/, the top grossing films in 1931 were Frankenstein (Original version had the creature and child playing at the river. The child throws in flower petals and finally the creature throws in the child.), Ingagi, a pre-King Kong, the ape and the virgin sacrifice film and Mata Hari with the sultry Garbo as the sultry Hari. Another sites has Ingagi as a top-grosser at $12,000,000! (Does this belie common sense? Movie prices averaged 24 cents during the depression: http://www.pictureshowman.com/questionsandanswers4.cfm)
A perusal of 1931 releases didn’t bring up any depression-themed movies. We are still dealing with adventure films, “sneaking under the door before the Code gets teeth” films, and some classic comedies.
Next time: 1932, the Great Depression has arrived. Is there a change in how Hollywood shows us life?
Friday, March 13, 2009
Knitting Friday
Don't feel much like blogging about knitting today - or anything. Can't say I'm depressed or sad or bored. After all, I have my knitting.
Knitting is interesting as a craft. My knitting sites will have periodic threads about "How can people demean the craft by calling it a hobby?" In fact over 200 people have voiced their displeasure with this appellation since March 10 in a thread titled "What wrong with these people?"
I don't think there's anything wrong with people who demean knitting. It's a right brain, left brain, no brain issue. You either have a creative side or not and if you have a creative side it's either finely honed and your creative craft becomes your life or if it's not finely honed you dabble on the edges.
But for me, there is something different about knitting (and crocheting for that matter): it's a portable craft; neat (in the tidy sense); doable with multi-tasking such as knitting and carrying on a conversation; it's often a conversation starter ("What are you making?); and it's got a very advanced learning curve.
Scrap booking, painting, writing, sewing - I can't think of another craft that allows you such latitude.
And even more than that, it gives you an inner peace which is also portable. Standing on a long return line; pull out your knitting. Waiting for the kids after school; ditto. A boring town meeting; you know the drill. The list of places you can be knitting is endless.
That's why I may not feel like blogging today but I do feel like tackling my endless mohair shawl; my variegated reversible shawl and figuring out how to convert yet another pattern into diagonal knitting. Now that's inner peace.
But this is knitting Friday and here's a simple stitch which you can play with. I'm attempting work this so I get a smooth stockinette look to show off the yarn without getting the dreaded stockinette curl.
A Very Simple Pattern in Two Rows:
Row 1: Knit (K) a twisted elongated stitch* across
Row 2: K front & back (fb) *Purl (P)* Kfb (stockinette look) or
Row 2: Kfb *K* Kfb (modified garter look)
*Twisted elongated stitch:
1, start a K stitch as usual - yarn in back, right needle (RN) through stitch on left needle (LN) then:
2. take the yarn around the back of the RN to the left and:
3. bring the yarn to the front and around the LN then:
4. return the yarn around the right side to the back of the RN then:
5. bring the yarn through the middle of both needles and:
6. make the knit stitch as usual.
It's really simple and you make a twisted long K stitch which really takes the mundane side of garter out of garter stitch patterns.
I've gotten some advice on this pattern: if Row 2 is P, make your increases every 2 rows out of 3 for a less narrow triangle:
Row 1 even
Row 2 inc
Row 1 inc (here Row 1 would become: Kfb *twisted K stitch across*end Kfb)
Row 2 even
Row 1 inc
Row 2 inc
Row 1 even
Row 2 inc
Row 1 inc etc.
If you do this variation, use a row counter to prevent cursing.
I'll leave you with this pattern. This would be a great project for line waiting. See if you can come up with a variation which is smooth looking and non-curling.
If you're more successful than I have been, let me know.
Happy knitting.
Don't feel much like blogging about knitting today - or anything. Can't say I'm depressed or sad or bored. After all, I have my knitting.
Knitting is interesting as a craft. My knitting sites will have periodic threads about "How can people demean the craft by calling it a hobby?" In fact over 200 people have voiced their displeasure with this appellation since March 10 in a thread titled "What wrong with these people?"
I don't think there's anything wrong with people who demean knitting. It's a right brain, left brain, no brain issue. You either have a creative side or not and if you have a creative side it's either finely honed and your creative craft becomes your life or if it's not finely honed you dabble on the edges.
But for me, there is something different about knitting (and crocheting for that matter): it's a portable craft; neat (in the tidy sense); doable with multi-tasking such as knitting and carrying on a conversation; it's often a conversation starter ("What are you making?); and it's got a very advanced learning curve.
Scrap booking, painting, writing, sewing - I can't think of another craft that allows you such latitude.
And even more than that, it gives you an inner peace which is also portable. Standing on a long return line; pull out your knitting. Waiting for the kids after school; ditto. A boring town meeting; you know the drill. The list of places you can be knitting is endless.
That's why I may not feel like blogging today but I do feel like tackling my endless mohair shawl; my variegated reversible shawl and figuring out how to convert yet another pattern into diagonal knitting. Now that's inner peace.
But this is knitting Friday and here's a simple stitch which you can play with. I'm attempting work this so I get a smooth stockinette look to show off the yarn without getting the dreaded stockinette curl.
A Very Simple Pattern in Two Rows:
Row 1: Knit (K) a twisted elongated stitch* across
Row 2: K front & back (fb) *Purl (P)* Kfb (stockinette look) or
Row 2: Kfb *K* Kfb (modified garter look)
*Twisted elongated stitch:
1, start a K stitch as usual - yarn in back, right needle (RN) through stitch on left needle (LN) then:
2. take the yarn around the back of the RN to the left and:
3. bring the yarn to the front and around the LN then:
4. return the yarn around the right side to the back of the RN then:
5. bring the yarn through the middle of both needles and:
6. make the knit stitch as usual.
It's really simple and you make a twisted long K stitch which really takes the mundane side of garter out of garter stitch patterns.
I've gotten some advice on this pattern: if Row 2 is P, make your increases every 2 rows out of 3 for a less narrow triangle:
Row 1 even
Row 2 inc
Row 1 inc (here Row 1 would become: Kfb *twisted K stitch across*end Kfb)
Row 2 even
Row 1 inc
Row 2 inc
Row 1 even
Row 2 inc
Row 1 inc etc.
If you do this variation, use a row counter to prevent cursing.
I'll leave you with this pattern. This would be a great project for line waiting. See if you can come up with a variation which is smooth looking and non-curling.
If you're more successful than I have been, let me know.
Happy knitting.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
A Worry for Wednesday
If this quote is correct as reported in the NYT online today:
“As one Jew to another, I deeply regret that the Sorkin family did not perish in the Nazi death camps.”
I think we, humans, should just pack up our suitcase full of ethics and throw it in the ocean.
Supposedly, a victim of that Ponzi Schemer exemplar, Bernie Madoff, said the above about the attorney defending Madoff.
We could go into how could a Jew say that about another Jew regarding the Nazi Holocaust but the quote is woeful beyond any religious or ethnic context.
Human beings can say horrible things out of ignorance but unless you’ve been living under a rock, humans beings living in the western world know about the Nazi death camps in their most graphical horror.
Yet the above quoted person was able to triage that horror below his “horror” of being a victim of a massive swindle. That’s a neat piece of triaging. Capitalistic swindles trump human degradation and death.
Another piece of news which ties neatly into this is the chimp news.
You know, Santino, that anti-social chimp in the Swedish zoo who stockpiles stones so he can bean the visitors to his cage. Scientists are ecstatic since this behavior helps in tracing human traits back to our ancestors.
So what? Just what did these scientists think? Humans are warlike but our monkey ancestors were peaceful?
Some years ago I was at a Sigma Xi lecture by Francine Patterson of KoKo the ape fame. She told us that she had spent 9 years with the apes and was about to return to civilization to write her book on their peaceful existence. Then, just before her departure, her apes and other group of apes began a bloody, unprovoked war. As she said, if she had left before this occurred, her data would have been incomplete and erroneous.
So, Santino at the Swedish zoo may be unusual in captivity but monkeys possess the killing gene like their descendants.
Just like the person quoted above, humans can accept horrors. After all, we are called rational creatures. It’s not that difficult to tweak rational thinking to fit our beliefs. It becomes pretty easy with time. It becomes even easier when ego trumps empathy. Freud got it. Santino gets it. We just keep pretending.
However, let me leave you with two hopeful entwined thoughts. From Caryle:
No man who has once heartily and wholly laughed can be altogether irreclaimably bad.
And an example of hearty laughter from Jon Stewart: (edit below)
The link posted on Wednesday was time-sensitive but the video is still available at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
However, if you're wandering on this posting even further in the future, go to TheDailyShow.com where they seem to archive past episodes for a month.
If this quote is correct as reported in the NYT online today:
“As one Jew to another, I deeply regret that the Sorkin family did not perish in the Nazi death camps.”
I think we, humans, should just pack up our suitcase full of ethics and throw it in the ocean.
Supposedly, a victim of that Ponzi Schemer exemplar, Bernie Madoff, said the above about the attorney defending Madoff.
We could go into how could a Jew say that about another Jew regarding the Nazi Holocaust but the quote is woeful beyond any religious or ethnic context.
Human beings can say horrible things out of ignorance but unless you’ve been living under a rock, humans beings living in the western world know about the Nazi death camps in their most graphical horror.
Yet the above quoted person was able to triage that horror below his “horror” of being a victim of a massive swindle. That’s a neat piece of triaging. Capitalistic swindles trump human degradation and death.
Another piece of news which ties neatly into this is the chimp news.
You know, Santino, that anti-social chimp in the Swedish zoo who stockpiles stones so he can bean the visitors to his cage. Scientists are ecstatic since this behavior helps in tracing human traits back to our ancestors.
So what? Just what did these scientists think? Humans are warlike but our monkey ancestors were peaceful?
Some years ago I was at a Sigma Xi lecture by Francine Patterson of KoKo the ape fame. She told us that she had spent 9 years with the apes and was about to return to civilization to write her book on their peaceful existence. Then, just before her departure, her apes and other group of apes began a bloody, unprovoked war. As she said, if she had left before this occurred, her data would have been incomplete and erroneous.
So, Santino at the Swedish zoo may be unusual in captivity but monkeys possess the killing gene like their descendants.
Just like the person quoted above, humans can accept horrors. After all, we are called rational creatures. It’s not that difficult to tweak rational thinking to fit our beliefs. It becomes pretty easy with time. It becomes even easier when ego trumps empathy. Freud got it. Santino gets it. We just keep pretending.
However, let me leave you with two hopeful entwined thoughts. From Caryle:
No man who has once heartily and wholly laughed can be altogether irreclaimably bad.
And an example of hearty laughter from Jon Stewart: (edit below)
The link posted on Wednesday was time-sensitive but the video is still available at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
However, if you're wandering on this posting even further in the future, go to TheDailyShow.com where they seem to archive past episodes for a month.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Movie Monday
Yesterday, I probably spent too much time reading online about the Hollywood Production Code which dictated how movies could handle social and moral issues from 1930 to 1967.
Looking at the Code as a rational human, I can’t believe that movies buckled under to this for so many years. However, it makes perfect business sense.
A little background:
1. In 1915, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 236 U.S. 230 voted unanimously that the state of Ohio could censor movies since movies were a business and not an art form; therefore not protected by the first amendment. “The exhibition of moving pictures is a business, pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit....” (Wikepedia) This decision would finally be overturned in the early 1950s.
2. Early on, the movie studios gained control of distribution rights and owned the movie theaters. You could say that this monopoly controlled the movie from “cradle to grave.” Studios decided what the public saw, and when and where. This monopoly was not broken up on anti-trust grounds until middle of the 20th century.
3. During the 1920s, movies were much more realistic in dealing with sexual, moral and social issues. Local and state governments around the country protested and there was piecemeal censorship throughout the country. (Remember that our fundamentalists today did not originally succeed on the national level until they began to win local and state elections thus building a base to establish their take of morality on a national level.)
4. During the 1920s not only were the movies “freer” but silent stars were involved in some major scandals which made national headlines. For a look at pre-Code movies and these Hollywood scandals, go to;
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=9615
This contains “Katie Threads Archive.” Scroll down to Katie Presents: Pre-Code Film at:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=449933
for a comprehensive look at these films. In fact, go back and start reading Katie’s other threads. That’s what kept me busy yesterday.
5. Roman Catholic clergy were incensed about the “immorality” in films and were demanding federal censorship. In the business sense, this threat had legs since movies made their money in the big cities which were filled with a Roman Catholic population.
So, you have lucrative business monopolies, grass roots moral fundamentalism, risque movies and movie stars' real-life scandals: The perfect storm.
Enter ex- Postmaster General Will Hays. Hays arrived on the scene in 1922 when he became President of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) at a $100,000 a year salary. He was the head of the draconian Hollywood censorship arm.
Studio heads were especially concerned about the local censorship of their movies (if Wikepedia is correct, the studios had to pay by the foot for the film removed from the picture by censors) and by the impact of scandals such as the infamous Fatty Arbuckle rape case. The last thing they wanted was federal government censorship.
If you get a chance, go to Internet Archives:
http://www.archive.org/details/feature_films
and take a look at Rain from 1932 and Reefer Madness from 1938. Though Rain is not the best example of pre-Code movies (it was on the cusp) the difference is obvious.
I’ll leave you with The Code. This is a excellent site for reading it completely:
http://productioncode.dhwritings.com/multipleframes_productioncode.php
Read the directions for using this site in the right column and use the “R” and “E” buttons on the left for reasons and examples.
I haven’t forgotten my original hypothesis last week: movies in the 1930s, the rich, and preventing revolution, but this side trip to the Hollywood Production Code will be worthwhile.
Next week: Hollywood as Art; Hollywood as Business.
Yesterday, I probably spent too much time reading online about the Hollywood Production Code which dictated how movies could handle social and moral issues from 1930 to 1967.
Looking at the Code as a rational human, I can’t believe that movies buckled under to this for so many years. However, it makes perfect business sense.
A little background:
1. In 1915, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 236 U.S. 230 voted unanimously that the state of Ohio could censor movies since movies were a business and not an art form; therefore not protected by the first amendment. “The exhibition of moving pictures is a business, pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit....” (Wikepedia) This decision would finally be overturned in the early 1950s.
2. Early on, the movie studios gained control of distribution rights and owned the movie theaters. You could say that this monopoly controlled the movie from “cradle to grave.” Studios decided what the public saw, and when and where. This monopoly was not broken up on anti-trust grounds until middle of the 20th century.
3. During the 1920s, movies were much more realistic in dealing with sexual, moral and social issues. Local and state governments around the country protested and there was piecemeal censorship throughout the country. (Remember that our fundamentalists today did not originally succeed on the national level until they began to win local and state elections thus building a base to establish their take of morality on a national level.)
4. During the 1920s not only were the movies “freer” but silent stars were involved in some major scandals which made national headlines. For a look at pre-Code movies and these Hollywood scandals, go to;
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=9615
This contains “Katie Threads Archive.” Scroll down to Katie Presents: Pre-Code Film at:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=449933
for a comprehensive look at these films. In fact, go back and start reading Katie’s other threads. That’s what kept me busy yesterday.
5. Roman Catholic clergy were incensed about the “immorality” in films and were demanding federal censorship. In the business sense, this threat had legs since movies made their money in the big cities which were filled with a Roman Catholic population.
So, you have lucrative business monopolies, grass roots moral fundamentalism, risque movies and movie stars' real-life scandals: The perfect storm.
Enter ex- Postmaster General Will Hays. Hays arrived on the scene in 1922 when he became President of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) at a $100,000 a year salary. He was the head of the draconian Hollywood censorship arm.
Studio heads were especially concerned about the local censorship of their movies (if Wikepedia is correct, the studios had to pay by the foot for the film removed from the picture by censors) and by the impact of scandals such as the infamous Fatty Arbuckle rape case. The last thing they wanted was federal government censorship.
If you get a chance, go to Internet Archives:
http://www.archive.org/details/feature_films
and take a look at Rain from 1932 and Reefer Madness from 1938. Though Rain is not the best example of pre-Code movies (it was on the cusp) the difference is obvious.
I’ll leave you with The Code. This is a excellent site for reading it completely:
http://productioncode.dhwritings.com/multipleframes_productioncode.php
Read the directions for using this site in the right column and use the “R” and “E” buttons on the left for reasons and examples.
I haven’t forgotten my original hypothesis last week: movies in the 1930s, the rich, and preventing revolution, but this side trip to the Hollywood Production Code will be worthwhile.
Next week: Hollywood as Art; Hollywood as Business.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Knitting Friday
(Note: The patterns below have been edited for ease of understanding.)
Mohair comes from the Angora goat and a cuter goat I have never seen. It’s the kind you want to take home and make into a pet which will probably lead to a disaster for you, the goat, and your house.
But the breed is a cutie. The yarn it produces is a bitch. I guess it may be the closest thing to glue that comes in yarn. Once you start to knit with it, it adheres to itself so that certain stitches like the picot cast-on become impossible to frog.
Saying all this: the Dollar Store had a sale on Patons Lacette which is 25% mohair and I can never resist a bargain - well, almost never. This is the yarn I’ve mentioned before in a “What was I thinking?” section. But I bought 6 skeins in pink, no less, and began a shawl.
While, this yarn was impossible to frog in certain stitches, with others it was more forgiving and I had quite a few starts before I hit on this simple triangular shawl pattern.
Mesh Garter Stitch Triangle Shawl
CO 3 (Mark the Row 1 side of your work.)
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end Kfb
Alternative Row 1: K1 *K* K1 (this makes the pattern all knit)
Row 2: K1, *K2tog*, end K1
Row 3: Kfb, *K1, YO* end Kfb
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: Kfb, *K2tog* Kfb
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Repeat these 6 rows and increase every other row (EOR) to the size you want. You mark the first Row 1 side because this is really a 3-row pattern done in 6 rows. So while the increases are all done EOR, they are done in different rows. Notice that Row 1 and Row 4 are the same but you increase only in Row 1 and not in Row 4. After the 6 rows, you begin the sequence again.
So simple. There I am, knitting along, making a pink, fuzzy, triangular shawl. Paging Miss Marple. It wasn’t until I had 172 stitches on the needles before I realized that never, ever in this lifetime was I going to wearing a pink, fuzzy, mohair triangular shawl.
What to do? With some tugging I might be able to frog back but that wasn’t an option. I knew I would wear this shawl wrapped around my neck as a very large scarf. The problem was turning this pattern into a rectangle knit on the diagonal.
My solution brings me to my knitting tip/pattern for today: Making a diagonal shawl when the increases and decreases change in the different sections of the pattern.
As you know, I try to make diagonally knit shawls; I like the drape so much better than in straight knitting. I’ve discussed before how you can make this conversion easily with any two stitch pattern (and four stitch with slight modifications) if you have EOR as a straight knit or purl row. This time I had a "straight" row only one row out of three. This was different. So I had an idea; I made a swatch; it worked; and here’s the final pattern:
Mesh Garter Stitch Rectangle Shawl Knit Diagonally
Supplies: yarn, needles (appropriate for yarn or larger for an airy look), row counter, markers
Abbreviations: Kfb = knit in the front and back of the stitch; K2tog = knit 2 stitches together; YO = put yarn over R needle and knit next stitch on L needle, gives you an airy increase; *...* = repeat between the stars
Work the following pattern to your desired width. Put a marker on the Row 1 side of your work (increase side.)
CO 3 stitches (sts)
Width Section:
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end Kfb or Alternative Row 1 for garter look: Kfb *K* Kfb
Row 2: K1, *K2tog*, end K1
Row 3: Kfb, *K1, M1* end Kfb
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: Kfb, *K2tog* Kfb
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue this 6-row pattern to your desired width. End after Row 6.
Now you are ready to begin the length section of the shawl. Note: Keep your original marker on the increase side and add a marker to the beginning edge of Row 1.
Length Section:
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end K2tog or Alternative Row 1: Kfb *K* K2tog
Row 2: K1, *K2tog* end K1
Row 3: K1 *K1, M1*end K1
Row 4: K2tog, *P* or *K* end Kfb (this is a backward Row 1)
Row 5: K1, *K2tog* K1
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue these 6 rows to your desired length.
In this section you are only doing your increases/decreases in Row 1. While you increased EOR in the width section; you are now increasing/decreasing only in 1 row out of 3 rows in the length section.
Why the marker on the beginning of Row 1? When you see it there and your counter tells you this is Row 1, you'll know to Kfb first. But when your counter tells you that you are starting Row 4 and you see the marker at the end of the row, you'll know to K2tog first and Kfb at the end by the marker.
Continue knitting the pattern this way till you are happy with the length ending ready to work Row 1. Now your pattern changes back and you will make your decreases EOR. (Your original marker on the increase side for the Width Section will now be on the side where the decreases go.)
Final Section:
Row 1: K2tog, *P* end K2tog or Alternate Row 1: K2tog *K* K2tog
Row 2: K1, *K2tog* end K1
Row 3: K2tog *K1, M1* end K2tog.
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: K2tog, *K2tog* end K2tog
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue to 3 stitches. Bind off. I don’t think you need to block. Your choice.
That’s it. It works. One final note: In the width section it’s important not to add or lose stitches. Any pattern can get more or fewer stitches along the way but a pattern with a *K1, M1* row has a better chance of this. I know I didn’t want to count 172 stitches every row so I divided the stitches into 20 - 60 - 70 - 22 with markers at each division. That way I just counted the 20 and 22 stitches section after every Row 1 That had to add up to 42 stitches (assuming you didn't mess up your 60 -70 sections.) Another final note: You will see that this is a very forgiving pattern and most of the time you can add or subtract one stitch to get back to the count without much or any frogging.
Happy knitting.
(Note: The patterns below have been edited for ease of understanding.)
Mohair comes from the Angora goat and a cuter goat I have never seen. It’s the kind you want to take home and make into a pet which will probably lead to a disaster for you, the goat, and your house.
But the breed is a cutie. The yarn it produces is a bitch. I guess it may be the closest thing to glue that comes in yarn. Once you start to knit with it, it adheres to itself so that certain stitches like the picot cast-on become impossible to frog.
Saying all this: the Dollar Store had a sale on Patons Lacette which is 25% mohair and I can never resist a bargain - well, almost never. This is the yarn I’ve mentioned before in a “What was I thinking?” section. But I bought 6 skeins in pink, no less, and began a shawl.
While, this yarn was impossible to frog in certain stitches, with others it was more forgiving and I had quite a few starts before I hit on this simple triangular shawl pattern.
Mesh Garter Stitch Triangle Shawl
CO 3 (Mark the Row 1 side of your work.)
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end Kfb
Alternative Row 1: K1 *K* K1 (this makes the pattern all knit)
Row 2: K1, *K2tog*, end K1
Row 3: Kfb, *K1, YO* end Kfb
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: Kfb, *K2tog* Kfb
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Repeat these 6 rows and increase every other row (EOR) to the size you want. You mark the first Row 1 side because this is really a 3-row pattern done in 6 rows. So while the increases are all done EOR, they are done in different rows. Notice that Row 1 and Row 4 are the same but you increase only in Row 1 and not in Row 4. After the 6 rows, you begin the sequence again.
So simple. There I am, knitting along, making a pink, fuzzy, triangular shawl. Paging Miss Marple. It wasn’t until I had 172 stitches on the needles before I realized that never, ever in this lifetime was I going to wearing a pink, fuzzy, mohair triangular shawl.
What to do? With some tugging I might be able to frog back but that wasn’t an option. I knew I would wear this shawl wrapped around my neck as a very large scarf. The problem was turning this pattern into a rectangle knit on the diagonal.
My solution brings me to my knitting tip/pattern for today: Making a diagonal shawl when the increases and decreases change in the different sections of the pattern.
As you know, I try to make diagonally knit shawls; I like the drape so much better than in straight knitting. I’ve discussed before how you can make this conversion easily with any two stitch pattern (and four stitch with slight modifications) if you have EOR as a straight knit or purl row. This time I had a "straight" row only one row out of three. This was different. So I had an idea; I made a swatch; it worked; and here’s the final pattern:
Mesh Garter Stitch Rectangle Shawl Knit Diagonally
Supplies: yarn, needles (appropriate for yarn or larger for an airy look), row counter, markers
Abbreviations: Kfb = knit in the front and back of the stitch; K2tog = knit 2 stitches together; YO = put yarn over R needle and knit next stitch on L needle, gives you an airy increase; *...* = repeat between the stars
Work the following pattern to your desired width. Put a marker on the Row 1 side of your work (increase side.)
CO 3 stitches (sts)
Width Section:
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end Kfb or Alternative Row 1 for garter look: Kfb *K* Kfb
Row 2: K1, *K2tog*, end K1
Row 3: Kfb, *K1, M1* end Kfb
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: Kfb, *K2tog* Kfb
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue this 6-row pattern to your desired width. End after Row 6.
Now you are ready to begin the length section of the shawl. Note: Keep your original marker on the increase side and add a marker to the beginning edge of Row 1.
Length Section:
Row 1: Kfb, *P* end K2tog or Alternative Row 1: Kfb *K* K2tog
Row 2: K1, *K2tog* end K1
Row 3: K1 *K1, M1*end K1
Row 4: K2tog, *P* or *K* end Kfb (this is a backward Row 1)
Row 5: K1, *K2tog* K1
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue these 6 rows to your desired length.
In this section you are only doing your increases/decreases in Row 1. While you increased EOR in the width section; you are now increasing/decreasing only in 1 row out of 3 rows in the length section.
Why the marker on the beginning of Row 1? When you see it there and your counter tells you this is Row 1, you'll know to Kfb first. But when your counter tells you that you are starting Row 4 and you see the marker at the end of the row, you'll know to K2tog first and Kfb at the end by the marker.
Continue knitting the pattern this way till you are happy with the length ending ready to work Row 1. Now your pattern changes back and you will make your decreases EOR. (Your original marker on the increase side for the Width Section will now be on the side where the decreases go.)
Final Section:
Row 1: K2tog, *P* end K2tog or Alternate Row 1: K2tog *K* K2tog
Row 2: K1, *K2tog* end K1
Row 3: K2tog *K1, M1* end K2tog.
Row 4: K1, *P* or *K* end K1
Row 5: K2tog, *K2tog* end K2tog
Row 6: K1, *K1, YO* end K1
Continue to 3 stitches. Bind off. I don’t think you need to block. Your choice.
That’s it. It works. One final note: In the width section it’s important not to add or lose stitches. Any pattern can get more or fewer stitches along the way but a pattern with a *K1, M1* row has a better chance of this. I know I didn’t want to count 172 stitches every row so I divided the stitches into 20 - 60 - 70 - 22 with markers at each division. That way I just counted the 20 and 22 stitches section after every Row 1 That had to add up to 42 stitches (assuming you didn't mess up your 60 -70 sections.) Another final note: You will see that this is a very forgiving pattern and most of the time you can add or subtract one stitch to get back to the count without much or any frogging.
Happy knitting.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Website Wednesday
Chris Matthews got me to pick this website. The Chris Matthews who hosts Hardball with Chris Matthews in the U.S., which is so often Dumb Ball with ........
Case in point: the other day he was asking why the Democrats were not allowing the Republicans to carry out their filibuster threat. He mentioned the famous filibuster in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (a typical Frank Capra “capra-corn” movie) and proceeded to show the scene where Jimmy Stewart filibusters in the movie.
Showing movies to prove reality? Gawker is right. We are not a nation of cowards; we’re a nation of retards.
But that got me thinking (again) about the misinformation we get from the main stream media. And that got me thinking about the misinformation kids get from their main stream history textbooks. (I know they’re better in a lot of districts but I bet Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States has never gotten a position on the “History textbooks we should consider for next year” list.)
So Chris Matthews took me to Howard Zinn and Zinn took me to:
http://www.identitytheory.com
the Identity Theory website.
Identity Theorists are not dry, angry people. Just click on “About Us” and you get a picture of a cute, pensive dog, no less. In fact, they define themselves as: (an) online magazine covering literature, music, film, social justice, and art. Notice that the most provocative subject “social justice” is near the end of the list.
There’s a lot of main stream stuff here but with a twist. Their movie reviews encompass Richard Gere’s The Hoax and Cusack’s War Inc.. Their movie links take you to Roger Ebert’s website and Kevin Smith’s. They have 50 black and white photos of modern day Cuba. They have classic and current poetry. (You may not like poetry; you may not like modern poetry; but it makes me happy that humans still think metaphorically.) Read long interviews with people such as historian, Howard Zinn, Pulitzer Prize winning author, Richard Ford, and musician, Jessica Calleiro aka Uncle Owen Aunt Beru.
Identity Theory was started in 2000 by Matt Borondy who is now assisted by more than 20 volunteer editors.
Go take a look at this site. Move beyond the “pop” we put into so much of our history and culture. You don't need the modern history writer who begins the account of Valley Forge with “George Washington awakened to a gray sky and pulled his thin blanket closer to his chin.....”
There are hidden gems waiting for you out there.
Chris Matthews got me to pick this website. The Chris Matthews who hosts Hardball with Chris Matthews in the U.S., which is so often Dumb Ball with ........
Case in point: the other day he was asking why the Democrats were not allowing the Republicans to carry out their filibuster threat. He mentioned the famous filibuster in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (a typical Frank Capra “capra-corn” movie) and proceeded to show the scene where Jimmy Stewart filibusters in the movie.
Showing movies to prove reality? Gawker is right. We are not a nation of cowards; we’re a nation of retards.
But that got me thinking (again) about the misinformation we get from the main stream media. And that got me thinking about the misinformation kids get from their main stream history textbooks. (I know they’re better in a lot of districts but I bet Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States has never gotten a position on the “History textbooks we should consider for next year” list.)
So Chris Matthews took me to Howard Zinn and Zinn took me to:
http://www.identitytheory.com
the Identity Theory website.
Identity Theorists are not dry, angry people. Just click on “About Us” and you get a picture of a cute, pensive dog, no less. In fact, they define themselves as: (an) online magazine covering literature, music, film, social justice, and art. Notice that the most provocative subject “social justice” is near the end of the list.
There’s a lot of main stream stuff here but with a twist. Their movie reviews encompass Richard Gere’s The Hoax and Cusack’s War Inc.. Their movie links take you to Roger Ebert’s website and Kevin Smith’s. They have 50 black and white photos of modern day Cuba. They have classic and current poetry. (You may not like poetry; you may not like modern poetry; but it makes me happy that humans still think metaphorically.) Read long interviews with people such as historian, Howard Zinn, Pulitzer Prize winning author, Richard Ford, and musician, Jessica Calleiro aka Uncle Owen Aunt Beru.
Identity Theory was started in 2000 by Matt Borondy who is now assisted by more than 20 volunteer editors.
Go take a look at this site. Move beyond the “pop” we put into so much of our history and culture. You don't need the modern history writer who begins the account of Valley Forge with “George Washington awakened to a gray sky and pulled his thin blanket closer to his chin.....”
There are hidden gems waiting for you out there.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Movies on Monday
A snowy day in central New Jersey. Apparently this snow is heading for New England but instead of hopping a ride on Amtrak it decided to dump loads along the way. The schools are closed and I won’t be printing my monthly newsletter today, though the electronic copy is out already.
So I have the entire day to think about Movie Monday.
I’m going to try something a little different with movies for the next few weeks. I’ve spoken about the movies during the worldwide 1930s depression as being kind to the rich in that they helped prevent revolution.
Now that might sound like an over-reaching statement but just look at the history in this time period (she says as she lugs the illustrated history of The 20th Century [JG Press] to the computer:
In the 1930s we had: the rise of fascism; the invasion of Manchuria; the rise of Stalin; Japanese expansionism; the destruction of the Bonus Army’s shantytown; the Spanish Civil War; Mussolini in Italy; the dust bowl in the U.S. - and I’m only up to 1934.
It was a time filled with revolution and violence
Not to say that this history was different than other time periods but mix this with a worldwide depression and you have the proverbial lantern in Mrs. O’Leary’s barn. (I know, I know, this probably an urban legend.)
Plus, everyone seemed to go to the movies during the 1930s. Hollywood turned out an unbelievably large number of movies each year. Hollywood studios had enormous publicity departments with connections to columnists and inexpensive fan magazines. Movies were very cheap and you often got prizes (free dishes, etc.) to attend. After all, this was before television; whose effect on the movie industry in the 1950s is another story.
Taking into account that all movies are POV and many movies are propaganda for good and bad, let’s see what the so-called Great Depression viewer saw.
I’m starting with 1930 though the economic depression really got its stranglehold later in 1932.
These are the highest grossing movies of 1930:
Tom Sawyer - classic Twain; Wiki Answers says this was the top grosser of the year
The Indians are Coming - 12 chapter serial
Raffles - gentleman jewel thief
Anna Christie - “Garbo Speaks” was the promo for this one; couple this with a Eugene O’Neill play about a prostitute and you had to have a winner
Romance - Garbo again; young wealthy man wants to marry an actress; family disapproves
Madame Satan - rich woman, with an unfaithful husband, disguises herself at a masked ball to seduce him and teach him a lesson
The Blue Angel -Marlene Dietrich as a cabaret singer who besots a dignified school teacher and reduces him to poverty and humiliation
The Golden Age - Buñuel’s first film; about the obstacles to true love; surrealistic; banned in some countries
Feet First - a Harold Lloyd comedy
Ingagi - pre-King Kong; Congo expedition discovers virgin sacrifice to a giant gorilla - you know the rest
Of course, Hollywood made a lot more movies than these in 1930 but most follow the typical formula: frothy, light and double-entendred since this was pre-Production Code.
The avant-garde films were either foreign, with foreign backgrounds, and/or based on controversial works: Garbo, Dietrich, O’Neill, Buñuel, etc. Included with these should be All Quiet on the Western Front which is still one of the best anti-war films. Based on the German, Erich Maria Remarque’s novel of the same name, it was a very powerful film in its time (and ours) and grossed well in 1930.
Hollywood movies of 1930 were only a few years away from silent movies. Hollywood was just beginning to talk and stars were being made out of stage actors since they were the ones who already knew how to talk. The real talking Hollywood star (as opposed to the silent Chaplin, Pickford, Fairbanks, etc.) was just ahead.
Also ahead were the Production Code standards. Next week, before I tackle 1931 movies, let’s look at this Code since it has affected how we look at life based the movies even to this day.
A snowy day in central New Jersey. Apparently this snow is heading for New England but instead of hopping a ride on Amtrak it decided to dump loads along the way. The schools are closed and I won’t be printing my monthly newsletter today, though the electronic copy is out already.
So I have the entire day to think about Movie Monday.
I’m going to try something a little different with movies for the next few weeks. I’ve spoken about the movies during the worldwide 1930s depression as being kind to the rich in that they helped prevent revolution.
Now that might sound like an over-reaching statement but just look at the history in this time period (she says as she lugs the illustrated history of The 20th Century [JG Press] to the computer:
In the 1930s we had: the rise of fascism; the invasion of Manchuria; the rise of Stalin; Japanese expansionism; the destruction of the Bonus Army’s shantytown; the Spanish Civil War; Mussolini in Italy; the dust bowl in the U.S. - and I’m only up to 1934.
It was a time filled with revolution and violence
Not to say that this history was different than other time periods but mix this with a worldwide depression and you have the proverbial lantern in Mrs. O’Leary’s barn. (I know, I know, this probably an urban legend.)
Plus, everyone seemed to go to the movies during the 1930s. Hollywood turned out an unbelievably large number of movies each year. Hollywood studios had enormous publicity departments with connections to columnists and inexpensive fan magazines. Movies were very cheap and you often got prizes (free dishes, etc.) to attend. After all, this was before television; whose effect on the movie industry in the 1950s is another story.
Taking into account that all movies are POV and many movies are propaganda for good and bad, let’s see what the so-called Great Depression viewer saw.
I’m starting with 1930 though the economic depression really got its stranglehold later in 1932.
These are the highest grossing movies of 1930:
Tom Sawyer - classic Twain; Wiki Answers says this was the top grosser of the year
The Indians are Coming - 12 chapter serial
Raffles - gentleman jewel thief
Anna Christie - “Garbo Speaks” was the promo for this one; couple this with a Eugene O’Neill play about a prostitute and you had to have a winner
Romance - Garbo again; young wealthy man wants to marry an actress; family disapproves
Madame Satan - rich woman, with an unfaithful husband, disguises herself at a masked ball to seduce him and teach him a lesson
The Blue Angel -Marlene Dietrich as a cabaret singer who besots a dignified school teacher and reduces him to poverty and humiliation
The Golden Age - Buñuel’s first film; about the obstacles to true love; surrealistic; banned in some countries
Feet First - a Harold Lloyd comedy
Ingagi - pre-King Kong; Congo expedition discovers virgin sacrifice to a giant gorilla - you know the rest
Of course, Hollywood made a lot more movies than these in 1930 but most follow the typical formula: frothy, light and double-entendred since this was pre-Production Code.
The avant-garde films were either foreign, with foreign backgrounds, and/or based on controversial works: Garbo, Dietrich, O’Neill, Buñuel, etc. Included with these should be All Quiet on the Western Front which is still one of the best anti-war films. Based on the German, Erich Maria Remarque’s novel of the same name, it was a very powerful film in its time (and ours) and grossed well in 1930.
Hollywood movies of 1930 were only a few years away from silent movies. Hollywood was just beginning to talk and stars were being made out of stage actors since they were the ones who already knew how to talk. The real talking Hollywood star (as opposed to the silent Chaplin, Pickford, Fairbanks, etc.) was just ahead.
Also ahead were the Production Code standards. Next week, before I tackle 1931 movies, let’s look at this Code since it has affected how we look at life based the movies even to this day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)