Rest in peace, beautiful lady.
Week Three Summary
13 years ago
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Christina's World
I first discovered the painting 'Christina's World' by Andrew Wyeth when I was about 13 or 14 years old. It immediately resonated with me. I later found out I had interpreted it quite incorrectly but that's okay because art is open to personal interpretation. Any way we relate to a work of art is acceptable, as long as we CAN relate to it.
I was passionately drawn to this painting from the onset because I saw it as a reflection of myself. I was not like my peers. I was not a silly, giggly adolescent. I was a kid who combed the psychology shelves at the library, checking out college level psychology books, struggling to understand what I was not capable of understanding. (Later in life, as a college student, I did take psychology courses and must defend my intellectual abilities by saying that at that point of maturity, I was perfectly capable of understanding what I was reading. Honest!)
As a youth, I always felt I was on the outside looking in. I was too young to realize that we all feel that way. And we are all, indeed, on the outside looking in. We are born alone and we die alone, and all in between, a gift. But I didn't know that back then.
I saw Christina as a young girl, gazing longingly at a home where she could not belong, tho she desperately wanted to belong. To me, that farm house symbolized the world. My circle of friends. My community. My school. My life outside of my life.
Christina was me and I was Christina.
Of course, that's not what this painting was about. It was really about quite a remarkable woman by the name of Christina Olson. She was middle aged at the time Wyeth painted her, tho we cannot see her face in this painting. However, Wyeth did gift us with a far lesser known painting of Christina, which does show us her face in profile.
As a little 'aside' note, this painting, above, was not used for public awareness of anything affecting Christina; it had to do with Andrew Wyeth, who suffered for many many years with a long time undiagnosed case of tuberculosis.
But we can tell from the painting, that Christina was not a beautiful youth, in fact not a youth at all.
From what I can glean, Christina suffered from some advanced case of a degenerative muscular disease and did not have the use of her legs. She had been a long time friend of Wyeth's wife. With her brother, she owned the farm known as 'Olson's Farm,' in Cushing, Maine.
The Olson house depicted in Christina’s World was built in the 1700’s by the Hathorn family. Captain Samuel Hathorn renovated the house in 1871 and added bedrooms to the third floor. Christina’s mother, Kate Hathorn, met and married John Olson in 1892, who then took over the maintenance of the family farm. In 1929, Christina and her brother Alvaro inherited the property and Christina lived there until two months before she died in 1968. The Olson home is now owned by the Farnsworth Museum and is open for public viewing.
Andrew Wyeth was captivated by the house. He saw it as a unique and honest portrayal of life in rural Maine. He loved it enough that the Olson's 'gave' him his own bedroom, which he turned into his art studio where he painted for over 30 years.
But back to Christina, herself, and this particular painting. Apparently Christina did not lie in fields and dream of being a part of the bigger scene; she did all the chores needed to keep a working farm running. She dragged herself from place to place, using her arms to pull her torso. When Wyeth captured her in Christina's World, she was not resting on her laurels or day dreaming; she was pulling herself back to the farmhouse after visiting her mother's grave.
If I had known all of this as a young girl, would I have been as drawn to the painting as I was under my misconception of the story behind it? You betcha. Even more so.
If that's possible.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
The Life of Books
An author has finally finished his manuscript, found an agent and has sold his novel to a publishing company. The book is run through the press and published. Often, the book is publicized.
Then what? What exactly is the process to get the book from the writer's computer and to you, the reader.
Every Friday, or early, early Saturday morning, depending on how the truck is running and how many books they need to deliver, we get a load of books. There are generally any where between 5,000 and 8,000 books. they are loaded off the truck and taken by palettes into our stockroom. they come in hard plastic totes that are piled almost to the ceiling.
The books are taken out of the totes and sorted by subject on to carts.
You know those little tags on the back of the book, on the top left corner? These little tags give us a lot of info, including the ISBN number (each book is given a number called the ISBN which is like DNA, It identifies each book individually and universally.) The person who sorts the books can tell on which shelf each book is supposed to go.
Release dates, nationwide, generally fall on Tuesday. There are strict release dates and release dates that are fairly open as to when those books can be set out. The books that have strict release dates can only be released on specific dates. Violation of that will result in a hefty fine. (The last Harry Potter book release carried a cool 1 million bucks fine for an early release. The totes containing those books were sealed and could not be unsealed until midnight of the release date.)
A hard cover book will go on the New Arrivals table, set on a table at the front of the store.
If the book is a great seller it ends up on our Bestseller section.
And, as in the case of the Stieg Larsson Millennium trilogy, if the books are a literary sensation, they get the honor of having their own table directly in front of the door.
Eventually, interest in even the best of books begins to wane and at that point the book goes into what is called 'in section' shelves.
They stay there quite a while and then, after they seem to have lost their selling ability, they are often put on sale.
Eventually they are toted back up, dollied on to the truck and sent back to the warehouse. Once there, they are circulated among various stores and set up on carts that begin at $3, then $2 and then $1.
the books are given a decent amount of time to be sold before they are sent back to the warehouse.
But, alas, eventually, they end up like this:
I hate to think of any book being destroyed. It reminds me of Hitler's treatment of various books.
I love working with books. I love the entire process of maintaining a book store, of being in the know about certain authors and books. I love the behind-the-scenes doings of a bookstore.
I had hoped to accomplish three things in my life; to be a mother, to work with children and to work in a bookstore.
I accomplished all three.
Then what? What exactly is the process to get the book from the writer's computer and to you, the reader.
Every Friday, or early, early Saturday morning, depending on how the truck is running and how many books they need to deliver, we get a load of books. There are generally any where between 5,000 and 8,000 books. they are loaded off the truck and taken by palettes into our stockroom. they come in hard plastic totes that are piled almost to the ceiling.
The books are taken out of the totes and sorted by subject on to carts.
You know those little tags on the back of the book, on the top left corner? These little tags give us a lot of info, including the ISBN number (each book is given a number called the ISBN which is like DNA, It identifies each book individually and universally.) The person who sorts the books can tell on which shelf each book is supposed to go.
Release dates, nationwide, generally fall on Tuesday. There are strict release dates and release dates that are fairly open as to when those books can be set out. The books that have strict release dates can only be released on specific dates. Violation of that will result in a hefty fine. (The last Harry Potter book release carried a cool 1 million bucks fine for an early release. The totes containing those books were sealed and could not be unsealed until midnight of the release date.)
A hard cover book will go on the New Arrivals table, set on a table at the front of the store.
If the book is a great seller it ends up on our Bestseller section.
And, as in the case of the Stieg Larsson Millennium trilogy, if the books are a literary sensation, they get the honor of having their own table directly in front of the door.
Eventually, interest in even the best of books begins to wane and at that point the book goes into what is called 'in section' shelves.
They stay there quite a while and then, after they seem to have lost their selling ability, they are often put on sale.
Eventually they are toted back up, dollied on to the truck and sent back to the warehouse. Once there, they are circulated among various stores and set up on carts that begin at $3, then $2 and then $1.
the books are given a decent amount of time to be sold before they are sent back to the warehouse.
But, alas, eventually, they end up like this:
I hate to think of any book being destroyed. It reminds me of Hitler's treatment of various books.
I love working with books. I love the entire process of maintaining a book store, of being in the know about certain authors and books. I love the behind-the-scenes doings of a bookstore.
I had hoped to accomplish three things in my life; to be a mother, to work with children and to work in a bookstore.
I accomplished all three.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Comment Moderation
I've been debating writing about this and decided what the heck..it's my blog and, well, I'll write whatever I feel I should, so here goes..
I have been moderating comments left here for several months now. I hate having to do this. I began this blog because I love to write. I wanted to write stuff that left folks smiling, or at least feeling a tad better than they did prior to stopping by.
Things in my personal life occurred that caused my decision to begin to moderate comments. We all have a personal life above and beyond our blogs, above and beyond the (mostly) wonderful world of the web in general. So my comment moderation here began as a way to keep control of what people in my personal life might choose to do.
However, and without going into any deeper explanation of that, a different problem surfaced; an individual I do not know other than for this blog, began to leave what I deem as extremely inappropriate comments. I've debated as to how much to say, and decided to clean up the language and explain.
One comment had to do with my sex life and, to put it as delicately as I can and still relate the contents of the post, what I would need to wipe off my face after having sex. This has no place on my blog. It was put in the crassest of terminology and I made the decision to delete the comment before it even made its way here.
Another comment from this same person had to do with my religious beliefs and (again) was a sexual comment pertaining to the quality of Christ's sex life.
I think you get my drift.
Make no mistake; I HATE moderating comments. I am one of THOSE people, a (gasp!) liberal. I live in the deep South. Politically I am a little blue dot in a big red world. I voted for Obama. I was threatened and insulted during the last Presidential election and learned to keep my political views to myself just to avoid being harassed.
My point is, with these liberal views of mine, I do not believe in censoring anybody except in the most necessary of circumstances. I believe with all of my heart that folks have the right to not only believe what they choose to believe but also that they have the right to voice their opinion without fear of any sort of hostile verbal retaliation. However, I expect the same treatment back.
A person who visits my blog fairly regularly has taken offense that I denied his posts ..the ones I told you about above.. and, hurling some insults my way, told me he was sick and tired of my comment moderation and my only posting what I approve (hey, this is MY blog!) and would not be back.
That's fine. I really don't care. It's his choice. But what I do care about is that belief of mine that people have the right to express themselves. I take that very seriously. And yet I believe it is my duty to not allow offensive, inappropriate comments on my blog. Express your opinions in a respectful manner, that's all I ask.
Was I wrong to deny posting of, for example, the two comments I told you about a bit earlier? I don't think so.
I want to know how y'all feel about comment moderation.
I have been moderating comments left here for several months now. I hate having to do this. I began this blog because I love to write. I wanted to write stuff that left folks smiling, or at least feeling a tad better than they did prior to stopping by.
Things in my personal life occurred that caused my decision to begin to moderate comments. We all have a personal life above and beyond our blogs, above and beyond the (mostly) wonderful world of the web in general. So my comment moderation here began as a way to keep control of what people in my personal life might choose to do.
However, and without going into any deeper explanation of that, a different problem surfaced; an individual I do not know other than for this blog, began to leave what I deem as extremely inappropriate comments. I've debated as to how much to say, and decided to clean up the language and explain.
One comment had to do with my sex life and, to put it as delicately as I can and still relate the contents of the post, what I would need to wipe off my face after having sex. This has no place on my blog. It was put in the crassest of terminology and I made the decision to delete the comment before it even made its way here.
Another comment from this same person had to do with my religious beliefs and (again) was a sexual comment pertaining to the quality of Christ's sex life.
I think you get my drift.
Make no mistake; I HATE moderating comments. I am one of THOSE people, a (gasp!) liberal. I live in the deep South. Politically I am a little blue dot in a big red world. I voted for Obama. I was threatened and insulted during the last Presidential election and learned to keep my political views to myself just to avoid being harassed.
My point is, with these liberal views of mine, I do not believe in censoring anybody except in the most necessary of circumstances. I believe with all of my heart that folks have the right to not only believe what they choose to believe but also that they have the right to voice their opinion without fear of any sort of hostile verbal retaliation. However, I expect the same treatment back.
A person who visits my blog fairly regularly has taken offense that I denied his posts ..the ones I told you about above.. and, hurling some insults my way, told me he was sick and tired of my comment moderation and my only posting what I approve (hey, this is MY blog!) and would not be back.
That's fine. I really don't care. It's his choice. But what I do care about is that belief of mine that people have the right to express themselves. I take that very seriously. And yet I believe it is my duty to not allow offensive, inappropriate comments on my blog. Express your opinions in a respectful manner, that's all I ask.
Was I wrong to deny posting of, for example, the two comments I told you about a bit earlier? I don't think so.
I want to know how y'all feel about comment moderation.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Muse - Exogenesis Symphony Part 3 (Redemption)
I happened upon this by chance and wanted to share its ethereal beauty with you.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
He, Who Is Without Sin.
This is Sakineh Mohammadie Ashtiani :
And she has occupied much of my thoughts over the last week or so. She is an Iranian woman who is sentenced to death for adultery. That is barbaric enough but apparently it ISN'T enough..because she was sentenced, according to Islamic Law, to death by stoning.
I've been reading a lot about this because I just cannot comprehend it. How can people of God..or Allah..say that this is ok?
The more I read, the more I researched, the more appalled I became. Islamic law reads that if the person escapes during the stoning, they can be allowed to run for freedom and the punishment is over. So this is what they do; they put the person in a cloth sack with their hands bound behind their backs. Then they bury them in a hole up to their necks so only their covered heads appear. then, MEN OF GOD stand there and hurl stones (which must be no smaller than the palm of the hand) at the unfortunate 'criminal's' head until the person is dead, their head a pulpy mess of beaten flesh and blood.
I found a video of this online. It was posted to show the brutality of this practice
and came with a strong disclaimer. I forced myself to watch it because I wanted to witness the pure barbaric behavior. I am not posting the link here because it was too horrid.
The rest of the world has come down hard on Iran over this case. And a few days ago, Iran buckled and suspended the death by stoning sentence, tho not the death sentence itself. Keep in mind,that although it was suspended, it hasn't been retracted. In fact, Sakineh Mohammadie Ashtiani's lawyer is not asking for anything less than the death penalty; he and his client are asking the courts to change the means of death to hanging.
Okay, after reading about this, I found out some very interesting things. Now, Ashtiani has always denied the adultery charge. Lets keep that in mind..And I found out her husband has been dead since 2004. Apparently he was murdered by some man and now that the Iranian courts have been forced to defend this stoning business, they are saying that Ashtiani actually killed her husband but that the judge didn't reprot that, because it was so brutal.
Give me a break.
How can anything this woman do be any more brutal than bashing in a head with a bunch of rocks?
This is an old, old thing, this stoning...even in the time of Jesus, this was a common practice..Remember Mary Magdalene? She was a prostitute who was about to be stoned when Jesus stepped in and said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Surprisingly, the only country that has made a concrete offer for the life of this woman is Brazil, who offered refuge to Ashtiani. Iran will take this as an offense toward their Allah and I'm sure the repercussions will be forthcoming.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
After a bit more reading, what do I come upon?? A report about her husband's death..yes, he was murdered. Yes, his wife was accused..but lo and behold...she was found to be innocent..for shame, the judge was not being completely honest when he stated he was keeping Ashtiani's involvement in the murder under wraps so as to protect the public. shame on you.
Your Honor.
Right.
And she has occupied much of my thoughts over the last week or so. She is an Iranian woman who is sentenced to death for adultery. That is barbaric enough but apparently it ISN'T enough..because she was sentenced, according to Islamic Law, to death by stoning.
I've been reading a lot about this because I just cannot comprehend it. How can people of God..or Allah..say that this is ok?
The more I read, the more I researched, the more appalled I became. Islamic law reads that if the person escapes during the stoning, they can be allowed to run for freedom and the punishment is over. So this is what they do; they put the person in a cloth sack with their hands bound behind their backs. Then they bury them in a hole up to their necks so only their covered heads appear. then, MEN OF GOD stand there and hurl stones (which must be no smaller than the palm of the hand) at the unfortunate 'criminal's' head until the person is dead, their head a pulpy mess of beaten flesh and blood.
I found a video of this online. It was posted to show the brutality of this practice
and came with a strong disclaimer. I forced myself to watch it because I wanted to witness the pure barbaric behavior. I am not posting the link here because it was too horrid.
The rest of the world has come down hard on Iran over this case. And a few days ago, Iran buckled and suspended the death by stoning sentence, tho not the death sentence itself. Keep in mind,that although it was suspended, it hasn't been retracted. In fact, Sakineh Mohammadie Ashtiani's lawyer is not asking for anything less than the death penalty; he and his client are asking the courts to change the means of death to hanging.
Okay, after reading about this, I found out some very interesting things. Now, Ashtiani has always denied the adultery charge. Lets keep that in mind..And I found out her husband has been dead since 2004. Apparently he was murdered by some man and now that the Iranian courts have been forced to defend this stoning business, they are saying that Ashtiani actually killed her husband but that the judge didn't reprot that, because it was so brutal.
Give me a break.
How can anything this woman do be any more brutal than bashing in a head with a bunch of rocks?
This is an old, old thing, this stoning...even in the time of Jesus, this was a common practice..Remember Mary Magdalene? She was a prostitute who was about to be stoned when Jesus stepped in and said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Surprisingly, the only country that has made a concrete offer for the life of this woman is Brazil, who offered refuge to Ashtiani. Iran will take this as an offense toward their Allah and I'm sure the repercussions will be forthcoming.
After a bit more reading, what do I come upon?? A report about her husband's death..yes, he was murdered. Yes, his wife was accused..but lo and behold...she was found to be innocent..for shame, the judge was not being completely honest when he stated he was keeping Ashtiani's involvement in the murder under wraps so as to protect the public. shame on you.
Your Honor.
Right.
Swiss Chicken Supreme
Yesterday I made another recipe from the Taste Of Home Comfort Foods Cookbook. I made Swiss Chicken Supreme. This was a really simple dish to make, smelled heavenly and was very tasty. I served it with side dishes of asparagus with French dressing, a prepared stuffing and fresh watermelon chunks.
SWISS CHICKEN SUPREME
Ingredients
4 boneless skinless chicken breast halves (4 ounces each)
1 tablespoon dried minced onion
1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/8 teaspoon pepper
4 slices (3/4 ounce each) reduced-fat Swiss cheese
1 can (10-3/4 ounces) reduced-fat reduced-sodium condensed cream of chicken soup, undiluted
1/3 cup reduced-fat sour cream
1/2 cup fat-free milk
1/3 cup crushed reduced-fat butter-flavored crackers (about 8 crackers)
1 teaspoon butter, melted
Directions
Place the chicken in a 13-in. x 9-in. baking dish coated with cooking spray. Sprinkle with minced onion, garlic powder, salt and pepper. Top each with a slice of cheese.
In a small bowl, combine the soup, sour cream and milk; pour over chicken. Toss the cracker crumbs and butter; sprinkle over chicken.
Bake, uncovered, at 350° for 30-40 minutes or until a meat thermometer reads 170°. Yield: 4 servings.
I thought this was pretty good but so far my favorite remains the taco pie I made a couple of weeks ago. John's favorite remains the seafood chowder, the first recipe I made from the book.
If I make this again, I'm going to change a few things. I'm going to cut a pocket in each breast and fill it with rolled swiss cheese and ham, sort of like a cordon bleu. Then i'm cutting the milk back to 1/3 cup and adding a whole lot more of the crushed cracker topping.
Ingredients
4 boneless skinless chicken breast halves (4 ounces each)
1 tablespoon dried minced onion
1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/8 teaspoon pepper
4 slices (3/4 ounce each) reduced-fat Swiss cheese
1 can (10-3/4 ounces) reduced-fat reduced-sodium condensed cream of chicken soup, undiluted
1/3 cup reduced-fat sour cream
1/2 cup fat-free milk
1/3 cup crushed reduced-fat butter-flavored crackers (about 8 crackers)
1 teaspoon butter, melted
Directions
Place the chicken in a 13-in. x 9-in. baking dish coated with cooking spray. Sprinkle with minced onion, garlic powder, salt and pepper. Top each with a slice of cheese.
In a small bowl, combine the soup, sour cream and milk; pour over chicken. Toss the cracker crumbs and butter; sprinkle over chicken.
Bake, uncovered, at 350° for 30-40 minutes or until a meat thermometer reads 170°. Yield: 4 servings.
I thought this was pretty good but so far my favorite remains the taco pie I made a couple of weeks ago. John's favorite remains the seafood chowder, the first recipe I made from the book.
If I make this again, I'm going to change a few things. I'm going to cut a pocket in each breast and fill it with rolled swiss cheese and ham, sort of like a cordon bleu. Then i'm cutting the milk back to 1/3 cup and adding a whole lot more of the crushed cracker topping.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
