The link isn't working now. Is the article posted anywhere else?
I grew up in the deep South, where ornate and glorious names were common, and until this thread I had naively assumed that all such children use names that bear no resemblance to the legal paperwork.
I graduated from high school with a boy named Henderson McKenzie Fortescue Bridges IV, for example. He was universally known as Pete.
I read the names as a statement of her parents' love and pride, and am certain that her call name will come about naturally.
If I were naming a child from scratch*, one of the things I would watch is the sequence of vowels. Keeping the same vowel sounds in first and last name makes it more euphonious, I think. (I.e., Kathryn Franzen, Kimberly Miller, Sarah Asplund, Kenneth Henderson, etc.)
*Mine came named, which is both good and bad.
1. Re: being pulled over as positive reinforcement - I have never enjoyed being pulled over, but it hasn't been a big deal, either. (I'm white, female, and generally non-threatening.) I did bring up the idea that being pulled over is, in itself, strongly aversive to many people, which led to a fascinating discussion on Premack, poisoning the cue and other such topics. Most of them were thrilled because the police were trying to use positive reinforcement. The application is flawed, but the theory is good. (Taking the program at face value, not as an excuse to stop and search without a warrant.)
2. Re: banks taking checks in other names - My daughter's surname is the same as my ex-husbands. I never changed my own name, but about a month ago the mother of one of my daughter's schoolmates had occasion to write me a check. She used my first name, and the last name she had. It so happened that ex and I had other business at the bank, so we explained the situation to the teller, and asked him to let me deposit the check into my account. No dice. We went up several layers of management. Everyone was sympathetic, they all understood what had happened and agreed that we were on the up and up. However, they said that if they knowingly took a check made out to an alias, Homeland Security could/would close them down. I had to contact the other mother and get a new check. All this, I may add, for less than $20.
I feel SO much safer.
I read about the Starbucks-for-not-speeding program on another message board I frequent. It's a site for dog trainers who use operant conditioning. Everyone thought it was a great idea and a wonderful program - rewarding good behavior on a variable reinforcement schedule is the strongest method of increasing a desired behavior.
I mention this only because I think it's interesting the way that different worldviews give different responses to the world. (And I will gladly stipulate that OC trainers have a VERY different worldview!)
Margaret @76:
If you were oblivious to it all, why did you shoot him?
I think we're all overlooking the truly inexplicable behavior here. I refer, of course, to Delsey the Dachshund. My warning signals went off when it was mentioned that he was sleeping on the floor of the car, near Mrs. Hill's feet.
As one who has spent a lifetime caring for Dachshunds,* I cry foul. There is no way a Dachshund was on the floor, let alone happily. The proper place of a Dachshund in a moving car is on the driver's lap, front paws on the wheel**. From this position they both help to steer (usually in the direction of food) and keep an eye out for evil attack creatures (usually rodents) about whom all must be warned at top volume.
Now what could cause such unnatural behavior in a Dachshund? Was it fear? Perhaps he was already aware something was up, and was cowering in terror. Perhaps some lesser breeds would be so craven, but the Dachshund Standard states that Dachshunds are "courageous to the point of rashness," so we can dismiss this possibility out of hand.
Consider also that later on, it was Delsey's insistance on stopping that got the Hills out of their car and into position for contact to be made.
Putting these two facts together, we are led to the inescapable conclusion that Delsey was not a Dachshund, he was in fact an impostor. The real Delsey had been surreptitiously replaced by a shape-changing alien, charged with manouvering the Hill's into position for capture. So much now becomes clear! The mind-clouds when in his presence! The inexplicable behavior! The odd turnings of the car! The passive capitulation to their fates!
And what of the real Delsey? Knowing the command powers of the Dachshund, I feel no hesitation in declaring him to be, even now, cruising the galaxy, being hand-fed sweetmeats and morsels by legions of tummy-rubbing acolytes. I have no doubt that his story is one of curious interest, and great adventure, could we but come to know it.
*Not well, as they'll tell you. They're starving.
** Except for my mistreated Dachshunds. I force them to ride in a crate, which is secured to the frame of the car in a location outside the crumple zone. I make noises about safety, but they+ know I just want them to be miserable.
+The plural refers to my lifetime supply of dogs. I'm currently down to one. This is sad, and unnatural, and I'm working to rectify the situation.
Linkmeister @17:
My mother and I have the exact same disagreement! I had the cup as well, but can no longer brandish it as proof. It vanished in some long ago move.
We're driving across the Deep South, and had breakfast this morning at Cracker Barrel. Grits, hash brown casserole, sausage, gravy, and biscuits. Quite different than the usual fare.
About 12 years ago or so, I was on a Modesty Blaise mailing list. Someone had sent a fan letter to O'Donnell, and he sent back a very nice reply, including a reworking of Modesty's origin story to make it fit modern times better. In my memory, she came out of a refugee camp somewhere in southeastern europe, but I could be wrong. It was on the internet, so someone with decent Google-fu might be able to find it.
He seemed to be trying to keep Modesty in the mid-thirties, just moving up when she was born. I believe this was in the comic strips. Newspapers traditionally run Modesty's origin when they start carrying the comic, and he wanted to give them a more modern alternative. I believe he said that the syndicate thought it was unnecessary, but I have a mind like a steel sieve some days.
Who is reprinting the strips, and where can I get these volumes?
In one of the WisCon panels, Lesley Hall recommended this book on fanfiction. She said it is published by a small publisher in Wales, so we would probably never hear about it otherwise, but is the only book she knows that takes fanfiction seriously on its own terms, takes seriously what the writers and readers say they are doing, and realizes that there are lots of reasons people write and read it.
I suspect that some people here might find it interesting.
Fragano @ 620
He's black, and has been masquerading as white, mostly without knowing it. At the end, the truth is revealed, namely, that he's black.
Of course, all this ony works because his black mother is a blue-eyed blond, due to racial mixing, and the entire point of the book is how stupid racial distinctions are.
"True race" was a way to try and say all that quickly, but I admit it sounds bizarre. If I were a more talented writer, I would have come up with better phrasing.
I always thought that the saddest part of the whole sad and sorry book was the fate of the white twin, raised as black. He was thrust into what was now seen as his proper place, but hated it. He wanted to be part of the culture he was raised in, whose language and folkways he understood and enjoyed. But because of the magic of race, he was forced into a culture that openly despised him, and forever cut off from what he saw as his own people. Very, very sad.
Note - I'm fairly sure that I'm using "white" and "black" in ways that don't make sense in 21st century America, but they are the ways that Twain was using them in his novel.
Bruce at 609,
It's PRE-Civil War South. Remember the scene where gur chgngvir juvgr gjva pbasrffrf gb uvf ovbybtvpny zbgure gung ur vf qrrcyl va qrog, naq fur nyybjf uvz gb fryy ure gb pbire vg, ba gur pbaqvgvba gung ur fryy ure hc gur evire naq abg qbja? Naq, ng gur raq, jura uvf gehr enpr vf erirnyrq, uvf perqvgbef fvrmr uvz gb pbire uvf qrogf. Gur ynfg yvar vf "Gurl fbyq uvz qbja gur evire."
I wonder if the creditors were riverboat gamblers?
Is anyone else going to WisCon? If so, send me an e-mail (it's in my profile). I'd like to meet up.
Nuala - When my daughter was small, I had a Sit 'n' Stroll for her. (It's a bit pricey, but I got it in a closeout sale; you could check around.) When she gets too big to hold in your lap on a plane, she can be strapped into her seat in it. (Until then, since you seem to be saying that finances forbid two tickets now, you can get a bag for it that lets you check it through.) Then it turns into a stroller. It buckles into regular seatbelts in cars, as well. (I bought a seat belt extender at an auto supply place, but didn't need it very often.)
I didn't use a stroller for my daughter most of the time, only when travelling, but it was well worth it. The Sit 'n' Stroll was also the only way I felt like I was keeping her safe when travelling. We went around China, through Eastern Europe (different trips, although both are places where seat belts are laughed at), and all over the US with it, and I really recommend it.
On the theory that someone here knows pretty much everything, I'm appealing for assistance.
My mother is looking for a children's book she remembers from at least 40 years ago. All she can remember is that it was poetry, and one of the poems started with the line, "The Ibex is a most unusual beast." I've tried Google, and can't come up with it.
Does this ring a bell with anyone? I'd appreciate any input.
Marilee 529 - I wasn't castigating anyone's religiousness or lack thereof. I was trying to make the point that saying "the right kind of people" are those who don't share your religious preferences is religious prejudice - the opposite of what you seem to have heard.
Run it through again, with the religion taken out. "Our group meets every year in [apartheid era] Johannesburg. Not many people come, but those who do are the right kind of people." That's racial prejudice. Substitute the religous words back in, and you have the original comment. That's the point I was making.
In other words, my concern wasn't the date of the convention, but the idea that "the right kind of people" don't have conflicts on that (religiously defined) date.
1. I'm not surprised to hear that at least some of those who attend Minicon also attend Easter services. Nor am I unaware that many, many people do not attend Easter services. Nor do I think that the Minicon co-ordinating committee sat around thinking up ways to be nasty to Christians. But they have made a longstanding public decision to have Minicon over Easter weekend, during the Good Friday tenebrae, the Saturday Easter vigil, the Easter services, and the Easter feasting. Fine. No problem. One can have a meal based entirely on the interesting things one can make with pigs. It's a fact that no Orthodox Jews or Muslims will choose to attend, but that in itself isn't a problem. When the talk becomes "The right kind of people do attend," it becomes a problem. That means that Orthodox Jews and Muslims are not the "right kind of people." In the case of Minicon, it means that a significant number of Christians won't be "the right kind of people" because of their religious beliefs. That bothers me. I have no problem believing that no individual meant ill of any other individual, but the set up is skewed.
2. My mother, who grew up in a poor/working class/small town setting, tells me she never heard swearing on a regular basis until the 70s. She remembers her father getting very, very angry at another man in town, and publicly calling him a "son of a b---". This was hugely scandalous, and served to indicate the seriousness of the situation to all concerned. She told me she thinks that things were much less violent then, because words could express a level of anger that they don't any more. I have also been told by several different WWII vets that they don't like war movies because of the language. Swearing, meant to indicate realism, was very uncommon, and makes them uncomfortable and makes the movie unrealistic to them. Mom and the vets may be romanticising the past, I don't know, but what they say makes some sense, I think.
Bill Higgins - Beam Jockey @ 332:
Minicon is a very, very nice con they do every Easter in the Minneapolis area...it attracts the right kind of people.
The right kind of people being those who don't celebrate Easter? Is the corollary that people who do celebrate Easter are the wrong kind of people?
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2008 | 3 |
| 2007 | 20 |
| 2006 | 60 |
| 2005 | 37 |
Total: 120 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Juli Thompson:
Show all comments by Juli Thompson.