Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Website Wednesday

Busy day so a short posting.

This is a fun but challenging physics game:

http://www.onlyfungames.com/playgame/1436/in-the-bucket.html

(Click the link "In The Bucket" to get to the playing screen.) You have to get 10 balls into a bucket using various props on each level. You may want to turn down the sound since after about 20 replays, the music grates.

I've never been on Only Fun Games before,

http://www.onlyfungames.com/

but it looks like you click the game once and then again in a separate screen before you get to play it Unfortunately, you get the annoying commercial first though turning down your speakers solves the sound part of them.

Planning, physics and logic seem to be involved with most (all?) of the games. Tiger and Monster I get; Escape the Musical Hall (room escape) I've played elsewhere ; Eva - Rescue Tom seems to have controls problems.

Only Fun Games seems to be a middle man site in that clicking their games connects you to games off site. Which, of course, leads to even more games when you hit "More Games" at the new site.

I didn't get any virus alerts as I cruised; always a good sign. So while I can't promise good quality on all the games, take a look. I bet you could kill hours this way.

And speaking about killing hours; gotta go. Enjoy.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Movie Monday

Things, they are a changin'.

Now, I realize that successful capitalism is a Ponzi scheme; you have to convince a vast amount of people that they need and want stuff, a lot of stuff.

Movies are no different. You have to convince millions of people that they want to get in their cars, drive to a movie theater, perhaps gorge at the concession stands on more calories than they should have in a week and then sit for up to 3+ hours, perhaps in a climatically uncomfortable room filled with squeals, shouts and chatter and watch a movie.

Movie PR people have to do a lot of fancy tap dancing to convince the public that week after week, year after year, this is all worth it.

Enter the movie infomercial. Perhaps I was asleep at the switch before but, as I said last week, it was during a Water for Elephants half-hour TV program that I realized all the show was missing was George Foreman hawking his grill (which really wasn't that bad, BTW.)

I heard how great the screen writer, directors, actors......everybody involved with this project was. Geniuses all! Working on this film was one big MENSA party. Great brains, great fun, great product.

And then, like the heroine in Working Girl, I read another blurb about the movies (watch WG and you'll see what I mean): Peter Jackson and others were protesting a new plan to send movies to DVDs about a week after their release. No more lead time so build word of mouth; if you flop at the box office on opening weekend, you're shipped off in a jewel case.

And all this got me thinking: I'm a pretty fair critic of movies but I'm watching them in an ideal setting. No squirming in my seat for 3 hours. No missing a section for a bathroom break. No inability to multitask while watching.

Perhaps, that's why I, unlike so many professional critics can give Robert Pattinson a break. I liked Remember Me. I really like How To Be. (In fact, I think the 2nd movie is his genre: laconic, confused, 1960's rebel, dry wit, fucked-up, messy.)

When I look at movies, I'm comfortable and happy like a warm puppy. Perhaps, that's why I would rate Cassandra's Dream much higher than the 46% on Rotten Tomatoes and How To Be higher than the audience reaction (not enough critics saw it for their rating to be recorded) of 54%.

Which all brings me back to capitalism, the Ponzi scheme and the movies. Decry though I may, for the foreseeable future, capitalism is here to stay. And with it, that very profitable, very large industry called the movies is also.

But perhaps, it's time for the means of distribution to change. Perhaps it's time for only a few movies to land in the movie houses. Perhaps most should be made for near-immediate DVD release. Perhaps, the home viewer should become the movie critic.

Just an idea. Enjoy.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Website Wednesday

There was no Movie Monday because I started to think about the whole medium of movies after I saw a show on ReelZ TV promoting Water for Elephants and I thought: I'm watching a bloody infomercial! The only difference being George Foreman is not going to step out and ask me to buy his grill. More on this next Monday.

I've listened to an entire course on the US Civil War and Reconstruction from the open courses program from Yale. Not my favorite university but then I have a problem with elitism in anything. But, I do think they have excellent free online courses. Here's the link to all the Yale courses, which I think I may have posted before with a list of other free online courses:

http://oyc.yale.edu/ just click on "History" in the left column.

Right now, I'm listening to John Merriman's course on European Civilization, 1648 - 1945. He speaks faster than I do but if you want a great explanation of what capitalism is all about and the damage it can do without government restraints, listen to him.

My website pick this Wednesday is:

http://aggsliterature.wordpress.com/

I must be in the learning mode but i love english literature is worth the view, and then some. I'm not going to spoil the trip so just click around. For example, you can learn The Observer's top 100 novel picks or read letters from WWI soldiers.

It's a current blog; the latest entry was April 2. Don't forget to scroll way down to the bottom for the Archives and Blog Roll.

Got to go now and see if I can squeeze out 50+ minutes for another Merriman lecture.

Enjoy.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Knitting Friday

OK, I wasn't going to post today because I've been nursing the beginnings of a dental implant with some bone grafting so my whole week has been planning three good meals a day so the antibiotic doesn't rip out my GI tract. I like to eat on the run with a minimum of fats or carbohydrates so this is hard.

But less than an hour ago I had to call Knit Picks to tell them that my nickel-plated steel T-pins had rusted. And I mean big time. It was a slow process or else, wherever you were in the world, you would have heard my scream when I discovered rust spots on my Mystery Advent Shawl. But that was my first blocking project so that one was OK. However, today as I'm unpinning a cotton white shawl I see the rust spots big time. For some reasons, I blocked this one upside down and I only have two stains on the right side.

Now looking at the pins, I see major scaly-feeling rust spots. Very discouraging.

Knit Picks has an excellent customer service and they'll send me new pins. (We both agreed that the wet-blocking I do is exactly what they advertise.) However, I''m pretty gun-shy thinking that I may be starting this rusting cycle again. So I've been scouring the Internet for knitting T-pins in pure stainless steel. I wonder if a place like Home Depot would have an equivalent? I really thought my quest was over when I got Knit Picks blocking wires and T-pins. But the hunt continues.

On another note, I'm teaching Russian joining and splicing to my needlework group on Monday. I finished a 20 color shawl to show that by using these methods you can knit with only two yarn ends. I'll post a picture next week.

Happy knitting.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Movie Monday

About a half hour into last night''s installment of the Mildred Pierce saga, I'm thinking: Can I just turn it off now and bitch-blog about this installment? But I didn't and as the poets have said: That made all the difference.

Because at this half hour point, like magic, Mildred Pierce took off. OK, it was still a lackluster tale of a frumpy housewife with a bitchy, selfish daughter but, like, it just jelled and for the rest of show to the final credits I sorta, kinda, cared.

Helping it along was the fact that Evan Rachel Wood arrived to play the grown-up Veda and she can act. She's a match for her mom and the scenes between the two become more emotionally charged. Wood plays a much, more evil Veda almost as a gentler, kinder Veda and I was surprised at my surprise (got that?) at the ending. I really didn't see it coming. I thought I had already looked into the depth of Veda's cunning, but I hadn't.

At the 1/2 hour point, the film editor seemed to have arrived. The pace picked up; not that important things start happening but everything seems to twirl just a bit faster.

Minuses?
1. Still no sexual chemistry between Winslet and Pearce. I realized last night that though Winslet is the Oscar winner and occupies the lead role; Pearce is much the better actor here. I see acting seams with Winslet. With Pearce, I'm watching a dissolute, insouciant Monty but with insights and understanding. I get Monty by fade-out and Pearce brings some redemptive qualities to his persona.
2. This movie does not have the look of the 1930s. From the street scenes to the clothes, it's crying out at least 10 years later. For example, while I'm not an expert on '30s clothes, I do know vintage knitting. Mildred wears an attractive green cardigan in one scene. You can see some of the interesting stitch work but it hangs open and loosely. 30s cardigans had a very fitted look - that's the reason I never make these patterns. Later, I noticed Letty in a Hooverette apron, definitely from the '30s, but that was an anomaly.
4. Veda has a great voice. Did I have to hear more than one song? Small point but it reminded me that I really don't like opera.
5. Winslet played this role in a dowdy fashion. No way can I believe, Monty is describing her when he talks about her great legs. With Joan Crawford as Mildred, you "feel" those legs.

Pluses?
1. As above, much better editing.
2. Also above, Pearce nailed Monty last night.
3. The exposition scene where Veda, Monty, Bert, Mildred, and many others are sitting around and Veda explains how she went from pianist to singer. It was pure talking but you, as unseen audience, are as interested in the story as the assembled cast.
4. Based on last night, with some expert trimming and use of witty dialogue (remember Eve Arden in the original?) to move the story along (so maybe it's dialogue not exactly from the book; how about the spirit of the book?) this might have been a top-notch movie.

And what I really learned but also already knew: With a well-run publicity machine, the Emperor's new clothes can still be found and admired in movie land.

Watch Parts 4 and 5 of Mildred Pierce. You'll get your money's worth.

See you next Monday.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Knitting Friday: On Shawls

No pictures again today (Sorry!) but rather a discussion of shawls. Every once and a while Ravelry has a question on: Do you wear shawls? or Am I too young to wear shawls? I read the answers but don't post. Probably because, except for 2 winter shawls and my summer shawls, I wear all my shawls as big scarfs. In fact, now that I'm getting compliments on my work (Some of it done a few years ago but now blocked. Oh, does blocking make a difference!), no one has ever said: Oh, what a lovely shawl. Everyone thinks they're big scarfs.

I think I mentioned this before but I really would not be comfortable wearing a gorgeous Estonian lace shawl or any of that type. To me, I would feel like I'm looking for compliments: See! Look at my handiwork! But I know this is just I, because gorgeous lace patterns are given free (and I so admire the generosity of these designers) or up for purchase all over the web.

And speaking about patterns; mine are almost always my same 4 row simple lace:

CO a multiple of 2 sts + 2 K sts ES for edging.
Row 1 RS: K
Row 2: K2 *P* K2
Row 3: K2, *YO, K2tog* K2
Row 4: K2 *YO, P2tog* K2

That's it; except, of course, I knit on the diagonal so always staying in pattern, I start with 2 sts and increasing Kfb each side to my width. At width, I Kfb one side and K2tog on the other. At length, I K2tog on each side. What a boring pattern! I can hear your yawns as I type. Oh, she is so unoriginal, you're saying. I get it. However, I would like to have a hundred dollars for each shawl pattern I have printed off the web. I must have a thousand. However, except for two mystery lace shawls (which are wrapped in white linen cloth so you can imagine how much wear they get), I always come back to my ho-hum 4-row lace.

I know that the major reason is that I want a carry-along project and I am just not capable of carrying along complicated lace. Second, I want a diagonal knit project. I know this is not good for yarn conservation since with a straight knit project you can eyeball it and say: I have enough (or not enough) for one more row. While with a diagonal knit, it's very difficult to predict when to stop for the length and being the "filling in" of the rectangle. Best case scenario: you have enough or too much yarn left; worst case: you'll tinking way back to shorten the length. However, the stretch of this bias knitting makes all this worthwhile for me.

Time is also a problem. I would say that I have enough time to knit but obviously, based on projects on Ravelry, time must stretch for other knitters. They can start a big project and finish in a few days. I think I'm doing good with my cut-off of two weeks (Done or almost done by then, or frogged.) With my lace pattern above, I finish fast.

There are lace patterns I do like. For example, the Appalachian Shawl:

http://www.classiceliteyarns.com/pdf/AlpacaSoxAppalachianShawl.pdf

It's got a feather and fan pattern and a star cluster pattern (which adds to the amount of yarn needed) mixed in a shawl that is CO for length and knitted to width. I think I might make it in one color with thin yarn and larger needles. Both the patterns are easy to remember so this would be a carry-along.

The second pattern is Sun (superscript 2):

http://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/sun2

Which is only available through Ravelry so it's another reason for joining. The shawl bills itself as summer wear and it works up looking a lot like roping - very light and open. But a warning: while the pattern row gets easy to remember (there is a counter-intuitive step) it is a bear to unravel. You can't slip stitches over others and off the needle without getting an almost "permanent" design.

And a final tip: the Horai Scarf (no longer free from Ravelry) which is a basic K3tog, YO, K same 3 sts tog again pattern versus the Trinity Stitch which is P3tog, Kfbf. After knitting swatches of both, I wound up with about 9 inches more yarn needed for the Trinity Stitch. So does Trinity take more yarn? Probably not since it stretches much more than the Horai so you could probably cast on fewer stitches with the Trinity and knit fewer rows.

That's it for this week. OTN: A sample shawl with zillions of yarn pieces spliced or Russian joined together for a mini lesson I'm teaching on how to get rid of pesky yarn ends. The pattern? Yes, my Old Faithful lace one. Pictures next week.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Website Wednesday

I'm sitting at my regular computer but with an older monitor, keyboard and mouse, in a new place. Yes, I have been relegated to my own desk; no more sharing. How's that for change? Boy, is the keyboard old! All it's wrinkles are showing in that I feel like I'm pounding the keys. No touch typing on this beauty.

But I do have a neat website:

http://www.activedad.co.uk/

The other night, I saw the sneak peek at Game of Thrones on HBO. I think it was a 15 preview which basically showed the scenes from the trailers they've been running. it looked OK. I won't be watching, except in desperation. Also, I thought Sean Bean looked much more stocky as this character than he did as Boromir but then 10+ years can do that to you.

However, they did have the mandatory feminist slant (and, yes, to repeat, I am a feminist; I just don't think that entitles you to wear a log-sized chip on your shoulder) where the daughter is working on her needlework (and pretty pissed because she is not the one getting praised for her finished product) and her brother is outside clumsily practicing archery. Not to overuse the phrase, but Wait for It!; sure enough the daughter slips away from her lesson, sneaks behind her brother and nails a bulls eye on the target. Isn't that precious?

And that got me thinking: OK, I get that the message is we only value male tasks and some women are just as good at them as men. However, by doing this we also devalue "female" tasks. The clip didn't show the brother sneaking in to work on needlecraft. So, instead of saying to kids: Achieve your potential as human beings to the best of your abilities, once again we're (they're) saying: Only boy stuff is valuable.

So, it keeping with this trend, the above link is to Active Dads. However, this site should be used by parents for all kids. its About says: ActiveDad.co.uk is a different kind of parenting blog. You won't find any advice here about potty training or how to deal with temper tantrums. Written by dads for dads, it's about helping you spend quality time with your kids and to give them an exciting childhood. It's about having FUN.

Now, I have a soft spot for UK stuff (which this is) after spending countless hours with kids on my lap working through BBC educational sites. (Hours, I might add, when questioned about yesterday, both kids had no memory of. How could they forget Digger and the Gang, The Little Animals Activity Centre, or Barnaby Bear?)

Take a look at Active Dads. It looks like it's sponsored by Microsoft so it probably has oodles of money behind it. This is a good resource for moms, teachers, scout leaders..... the list could be very long. I want to make to read the current article on making an animated movie from Microsoft PowerPoint (see 3/1/2011). Now, that's an important piece of knowledge; if it works.

Enjoy.

Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Movie Monday

Today is newsletter printing day and kids-home-all-day-because-of-spring-break day so time is tight. But I wanted to post because I just can't carry the second episode of Mildred Pierce around for another week.

First, I asked a woman who had been a child during the Depression and had grown up in NY and NYC to watch the first part (No, I didn't have to pay her.) Some of her comments were: 1. For what Mildred charged for the birthday cake, she could have bought the bakery. 2. There were not as many cars around at the time. (She remembers she and her step-mom driving into NYC and parking in front of Macy's well after Mildred's time period.) 3. She didn't think that hot dogs came in packages as shown in Mildred's grocery scene and she knows they wouldn't have been wrapped in plastic. 4. Women didn't dress in the morning around the house. They wore Hooverette aprons over house dresses (I guess because they didn't get worn outside) and then "dressed up" in the afternoon." On my own, I noticed the Great Books collection in Mildred's den. I don't think that iconic collection was around that early (early 1930s.) I think it was the also iconic Harvard Classics which occupied that time period and the Great Books "look" shown in the movie was its later face lift.

But while I find such incongruities fascinating, let me get to Mildred Part 2. A summary: Ray, the delightful, younger daughter has died, Mildred new restaurant is a success, Monty really becomes the freeloader, and Veda is still soooo obnoxious.

I'll keep this short: the movie is still way too long and now it's become just silly. First, an example of the length: We don't need the long shot of Mildred driving to the polo club and the pan of the rich people in contrast to Mildred's "sensible Republican" suit as prelude to the "Mildred picks up Veda who is with Monty and his rich friends" scene. Two examples of silly: Why would a mother allow her lover to babysit her pubescent daughter regularly? (One thing even I know: labor was cheap to hire during the Depression. There wasn't another woman like Letty around?) and why didn't Mildred drown in her mad car dash from Monty's house in hurricane-like rain, in the dark, on flooded roads she was unfamiliar with?

Finally, in a "kids get off my lawn" grouch mode, I am getting tired of the naked sex. It's not really advancing any plot or theme. We know she has the hots for Monty. Do we need to see them pinned naked against the wall? Do their contracts state "one horizontal and one vertical naked sex scene?" It's getting to be just another time filler; this one geared to the current movie sex scene climate. (And no, I'm not a prude. Perhaps Mildred is just making me grouchy.)

I know I own the novel, Mildred Pierce, bought during my "Oh, look, there's a book sale, let's stop" days and I'm going to search my zillions of books for it so I can make a comparison. This movie analysis has become a sick obsession I fear.

Bottom line for this week's section: Good acting, dull dialogue. I would say it also needs a cruel editor but I don't think even a top-notch editor can cut through molasses.

Next week: Last section, I think. We get to see Veda played still so obnoxiously but by another actor. See you then.