Two of our granddaughters are getting married this year, so I have been thinking about weddings recently. Much of the world will soon have eyes on Westminster Abbey, where "Wills" Windsor will be marrying Kate Middleton.
With my dual citizenship, I still maintain some interest in the British Royal Family. I sometimes ask myself the same questions that are asked in the UK. It is remote that HM The Queen would ever abdicate, but as time passes, she may appoint her son, Charles, as Regent.
As I am a male, I may well pre-decease the Queen, who is almost one year older than I. It seems likely that her eldest son will succeed her, despite the suggestion that perhaps her grandson should be the next king.
Will the Duchess of Cornwall become Queen? I may never know, but I think that a majority of the British public would be in favor. Camilla seems to have done well in her role as the wife of the heir apparent, and one understands that she and her stepsons have a cordial relationship
Prince William may well be given a courtesy title, perhaps becoming a Royal Duke, on the occasion of his marriage. Presumably, Kate understands that marrying the future Heir Apparent carries with it the expectation that she'll have children. I am interested in this for one main reason: primogeniture.
If their first child is (say) a George, Charles, or Phillip, he will be next in line after his father. But what if it's Elizabeth, Diana, or Ann? And then a brother is born? The precedent in the UK is one of "male primogeniture". A first-born girl would not become next in line to the throne.
In some other European monarchies, the practice has changed.Perhaps the British public, the Royal Family, and the Establishment are not ready for the change at this time. I don't expect a move will be made before the first child of Wills and Kate is born. My guess is that by the time that first child succeeds to the throne, the UK will be ready for a change--but it would be too late then for the happy couple's first child. If she's a daughter, followed by a son, it is the latter who will be raised to reign--and to make a change before he inherits, doesn't sound appropriate or likely
I think that's a pity. Such Queens as the two Elizabeths and Victoria have had very successful reigns. Edward VIII is just the worst of several unsatisfactory male monarchs.
Yes, I'll almost certainly never know how this plays out. But it interests me..
Monday, February 28, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
Don't Change!
I have never considered that celebrating Valentine's Day should be a one-way street. I learned a lesson this year, however.
I can no longer drive, due to limited vision. So I arranged with my amanuensis for her to do some shopping for me. Barbara loves Dark Chocolate, especially Nuts and Chews. Rather than the See's Candy, of which Barbara is now rather tired, I asked my shopper to find a box of Godiva chocolates, together with a nice card without a pre-printed message, other than something simple like "Happy Valentine's Day". I added some loving words to the card, and safely stashed away both card and chocolates.
I'm normally first up in the morning, making coffee and preparing breakfast. So on Feb. 14, I was able to set the table in the dining room, and place the card and the candy. in front of Barbara's chair, before she came down to join me.
All worked perfectly. Barbara was delighted! I didn't necessarily expect her to reciprocate--we've been married for over 40 years--but I was grateful for her offer to me of three chocolates--as long as I didn't touch the only three dark chocolates. (She needn't have worried: she had eaten them all that morning, before I indulged in one milk chocolate after lunch.)
I now accept the reality that Valentine's Day is more a day for men to express their love for women than vice-versa. I enjoyed the loving words, the hugs, and the kisses that acknowledged my efforts.. However, I must admit that I had a few nostalgic pangs of regret that nary a card nor a simple bar of chocolate came my way that day.
Here let me admit that I do have some bad habits, so I am used to hearing "Sit up straight", "Don't slurp", "Keep your elbows off the .table", and similar words of wifely advice. So as we were packing to take a train the next morning, i was pleasantly surprised after breakfast to find a note on my bed, reading "Don't Change!". I felt that my efforts, however unsuccessful, to kick those bad habits, were truly appreciated. A rush of loving happiness came over me.
When Barbara came into the room a little later, I expressed my appreciation for her affectionate words. To my surprise, she laughed, and promptly burst my bubble. She said "That note is for the house cleaners, when they come next Monday. Since you had clean sheets only yesterday, I am telling them not too change your linen this week..."
I can no longer drive, due to limited vision. So I arranged with my amanuensis for her to do some shopping for me. Barbara loves Dark Chocolate, especially Nuts and Chews. Rather than the See's Candy, of which Barbara is now rather tired, I asked my shopper to find a box of Godiva chocolates, together with a nice card without a pre-printed message, other than something simple like "Happy Valentine's Day". I added some loving words to the card, and safely stashed away both card and chocolates.
I'm normally first up in the morning, making coffee and preparing breakfast. So on Feb. 14, I was able to set the table in the dining room, and place the card and the candy. in front of Barbara's chair, before she came down to join me.
All worked perfectly. Barbara was delighted! I didn't necessarily expect her to reciprocate--we've been married for over 40 years--but I was grateful for her offer to me of three chocolates--as long as I didn't touch the only three dark chocolates. (She needn't have worried: she had eaten them all that morning, before I indulged in one milk chocolate after lunch.)
I now accept the reality that Valentine's Day is more a day for men to express their love for women than vice-versa. I enjoyed the loving words, the hugs, and the kisses that acknowledged my efforts.. However, I must admit that I had a few nostalgic pangs of regret that nary a card nor a simple bar of chocolate came my way that day.
Here let me admit that I do have some bad habits, so I am used to hearing "Sit up straight", "Don't slurp", "Keep your elbows off the .table", and similar words of wifely advice. So as we were packing to take a train the next morning, i was pleasantly surprised after breakfast to find a note on my bed, reading "Don't Change!". I felt that my efforts, however unsuccessful, to kick those bad habits, were truly appreciated. A rush of loving happiness came over me.
When Barbara came into the room a little later, I expressed my appreciation for her affectionate words. To my surprise, she laughed, and promptly burst my bubble. She said "That note is for the house cleaners, when they come next Monday. Since you had clean sheets only yesterday, I am telling them not too change your linen this week..."
Monday, February 14, 2011
Sound effects
I love the skill of the sound effects person working in a theater. Before anyone thought of recording sound effects and playing them during the production, the sound effects - creaking doors, howls of wolves or coyotes, horse hooves, etc, had to be made with perfect timing during the production.
Sound effects can add immeasurably to the atmosphere in a radio program or a movie. An important tool is the effective use of music. Barbara and I enjoy watching Sherlock Holmes stories, Poirot episodes, and similar productions. They all depend for their effectiveness on well produced sound effects.
Alas, I have recently noticed inappropriate overuse of loud music, often played at the same time as dialogue is taking place on the screen. It is as if a new generation of sound technicians believe that loud noise is more important than allowing the viewer to hear the words. I deplore this.
Sound effects can add immeasurably to the atmosphere in a radio program or a movie. An important tool is the effective use of music. Barbara and I enjoy watching Sherlock Holmes stories, Poirot episodes, and similar productions. They all depend for their effectiveness on well produced sound effects.
Alas, I have recently noticed inappropriate overuse of loud music, often played at the same time as dialogue is taking place on the screen. It is as if a new generation of sound technicians believe that loud noise is more important than allowing the viewer to hear the words. I deplore this.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Trojan horse in reverse
We have all heard the legend of the Trojan Horse. The Greeks make a gift of a large wooden horse, in which are hidden Greek soldiers. The Trojans bring the horse through the gates of the city. At night, the Greeks climb out, open the gates, and the Greek army pours in, bringing the lengthy Punic War to an end. Thus arose the famous saying "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts!"
A couple of weeks ago, I welcomed the news that KDFC was going non-commercial. Sure, they'd need to give up their long-established frequency (102.1), but KDFC would move to a couple of other frequencies, one in the North Bay, which would also serve the East Bay, and one in San Francisco. Living in the Berkeley Hills, I thought that we would have a choice. This would mean that my listening life--mostly on NPR and KDFC--would be commercial-free. These changes would occur thanks to the generosity of USC. As a Cal supporter, the folks from the "University for Spoiled Children" are not my favorite college football team, but Hey, let's not look a gift horse in the mouth...
I don't think that KDFC is an ideal Classical Music station. I miss KKHI. I enjoy the baroque and other pleasant instrumental music on KDFC, but it's not exactly challenging. No vocal music. Some pop opera tunes, but forget Berg and Bartok. There's plenty of music in our lives, thanks to the Berkeley Symphony, the Berkeley performances of the San Francisco Early Music Society, Philharmonia Baroque, and the New Esterhazy Quartet, and assorted Cal Performances offerings.
So we tried both new frequencies. We can hardly hear the San Francisco station, and the North Bay version sounds like a fading station one hears on a long car trip into the boonies when one is desperate enough to tune into Rush Limbaugh or Country Western. It would be far worse in the South Bay.
Yes, beware of Trojans bearing gifts.
A couple of weeks ago, I welcomed the news that KDFC was going non-commercial. Sure, they'd need to give up their long-established frequency (102.1), but KDFC would move to a couple of other frequencies, one in the North Bay, which would also serve the East Bay, and one in San Francisco. Living in the Berkeley Hills, I thought that we would have a choice. This would mean that my listening life--mostly on NPR and KDFC--would be commercial-free. These changes would occur thanks to the generosity of USC. As a Cal supporter, the folks from the "University for Spoiled Children" are not my favorite college football team, but Hey, let's not look a gift horse in the mouth...
I don't think that KDFC is an ideal Classical Music station. I miss KKHI. I enjoy the baroque and other pleasant instrumental music on KDFC, but it's not exactly challenging. No vocal music. Some pop opera tunes, but forget Berg and Bartok. There's plenty of music in our lives, thanks to the Berkeley Symphony, the Berkeley performances of the San Francisco Early Music Society, Philharmonia Baroque, and the New Esterhazy Quartet, and assorted Cal Performances offerings.
So we tried both new frequencies. We can hardly hear the San Francisco station, and the North Bay version sounds like a fading station one hears on a long car trip into the boonies when one is desperate enough to tune into Rush Limbaugh or Country Western. It would be far worse in the South Bay.
Yes, beware of Trojans bearing gifts.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Trailers
No, this has nothing to do with vehicles, whether pulled by a tractor, or permanently parked somewhere on the wrong side of the tracks. This is about the trailers one sees, willingly or under silent protest.
(The name "trailer" implies that it will follow, not precede, but who would stay to watch this advertising if trailers actually followed the "main feature"?)
In the market town near where I was born, there was originally only one "cinema", the Hippodrome. Despite its name, no horse ever entered the place--let alone a hippopotamus. In the mid-thirties, another movie house was opened, the Majestic (a mundane structure that belied it's name). Each movie program was shown for a week, usually the main feature, a second feature, a "B picture", plus newsreel and a cartoon. Before the main feature, we were shown a "trailer", listing the next week's main feature, the principal actors and actresses (we never called female performers "actors" in those days), and a few clips from the movie itself. I never found these objectionable, despite the somewhat extravagant claims for the "coming attraction".
I seldom go out to movies these days, but when I do I try to arrive shortly before the stated performance time. No longer is there just one trailer, but five or more of films "coming shortly". In some movie theaters, they show trailers of films being shown at other venues under the same management.
However, there is one type of trailer which actually does follow the main feature--that's on TV. I can understand that on commercial television, it make sense to try to encourage the audience to tune in to the next episode, be it a sitcom or a crime series. We seldom watch commercial programs (other than the venerable 60 Minutes), so this doesn't annoy us.
We do watch programs on PBS, in addition to our regular dose of the PBS News Hour. I have two criticisms, one of which has nothing particularly to do with trailers: the tendency to broadcast loud "incidental music" over dialogue. But what really distresses me is when we've watched an episode of some excellent series, such as the just-completed Downton Abbey, we are subjected to "scenes from next week's episode". Yes, one can always switch off the set; also, thanks to our DVR, we can rush through that unwanted material without losing anything that we want to watch.
I suppose even in public broadcasting, there is an incentive to try to hold on to as many viewers as possible. In my case, this just turns me off--especially if a character is shown in a death scene--or making a miraculous recovery.
(The name "trailer" implies that it will follow, not precede, but who would stay to watch this advertising if trailers actually followed the "main feature"?)
In the market town near where I was born, there was originally only one "cinema", the Hippodrome. Despite its name, no horse ever entered the place--let alone a hippopotamus. In the mid-thirties, another movie house was opened, the Majestic (a mundane structure that belied it's name). Each movie program was shown for a week, usually the main feature, a second feature, a "B picture", plus newsreel and a cartoon. Before the main feature, we were shown a "trailer", listing the next week's main feature, the principal actors and actresses (we never called female performers "actors" in those days), and a few clips from the movie itself. I never found these objectionable, despite the somewhat extravagant claims for the "coming attraction".
I seldom go out to movies these days, but when I do I try to arrive shortly before the stated performance time. No longer is there just one trailer, but five or more of films "coming shortly". In some movie theaters, they show trailers of films being shown at other venues under the same management.
However, there is one type of trailer which actually does follow the main feature--that's on TV. I can understand that on commercial television, it make sense to try to encourage the audience to tune in to the next episode, be it a sitcom or a crime series. We seldom watch commercial programs (other than the venerable 60 Minutes), so this doesn't annoy us.
We do watch programs on PBS, in addition to our regular dose of the PBS News Hour. I have two criticisms, one of which has nothing particularly to do with trailers: the tendency to broadcast loud "incidental music" over dialogue. But what really distresses me is when we've watched an episode of some excellent series, such as the just-completed Downton Abbey, we are subjected to "scenes from next week's episode". Yes, one can always switch off the set; also, thanks to our DVR, we can rush through that unwanted material without losing anything that we want to watch.
I suppose even in public broadcasting, there is an incentive to try to hold on to as many viewers as possible. In my case, this just turns me off--especially if a character is shown in a death scene--or making a miraculous recovery.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Gestures
Our driver braked sharply, as the car at a stop sign on a side street made a right turn right in front of us, and drove off at high speed. A fellow-passenger made a disgusted gesture with a middle finger at the retreating vehicle. The miscreant could not have seen it, but it undoubtedly made my fellow-passenger feel better. Another person commented "American Sign Language" and we laughed, intending no disrespect to the wonderful communication system so named, developed for those with speech and/or hearing challenges.
I reflected on the many types of non-verbal communication with one person's hands, which most of us would recognize. Here are some of them:
1. Thumbs up, and thumbs down: universally understood to show approval o dis approval.
2. One or more fingers--usually the whole hand, facing the gesturer, beckoning one or more others to approach.
3. Arm--usually the right, raised, with palm of the hand facing out, meaning "stop!".
4. Shoulder shrug, usually accompanied by facial movement, and often by outstretched hands, indicating indifference.
5. Arms crossed and held up in front of the gesturer: stop there (as when helping someone park.
6. Single hand, facing inward outside an open mouth: a real or pretended yawn, indicating sleepiness or boredom.
7. Hands held, palms together, as if in prayer, leaning forward: making an important
request.
8. Hands held, palms together, facing another, bowing slightly: "peace to you" .
9. Single fist, shaken towards another person, indicating anger.
10. Clenched fists, moved up and down: enthusiastic encouragement, as in "Go, team!"
11. Single hand, palm down, moved slightly down: : "No, thank-you"
12. One hand miming writing on the other hand: "Please bring the bill!"
13. Arm raised, hand high: "Call on me, teacher!"
14. Single fist, thumb extended up and to the rear: "Get outta here!"
15. Both arms extended upward: "Touchdown!" (or other athletic success).
If others occur to you, please comment: remember, no "high fives", and no other body language. These are just examples using arms and hands of a single person. When i began to list them, I certainly didn't expect to think of so many.
I reflected on the many types of non-verbal communication with one person's hands, which most of us would recognize. Here are some of them:
1. Thumbs up, and thumbs down: universally understood to show approval o dis approval.
2. One or more fingers--usually the whole hand, facing the gesturer, beckoning one or more others to approach.
3. Arm--usually the right, raised, with palm of the hand facing out, meaning "stop!".
4. Shoulder shrug, usually accompanied by facial movement, and often by outstretched hands, indicating indifference.
5. Arms crossed and held up in front of the gesturer: stop there (as when helping someone park.
6. Single hand, facing inward outside an open mouth: a real or pretended yawn, indicating sleepiness or boredom.
7. Hands held, palms together, as if in prayer, leaning forward: making an important
request.
8. Hands held, palms together, facing another, bowing slightly: "peace to you" .
9. Single fist, shaken towards another person, indicating anger.
10. Clenched fists, moved up and down: enthusiastic encouragement, as in "Go, team!"
11. Single hand, palm down, moved slightly down: : "No, thank-you"
12. One hand miming writing on the other hand: "Please bring the bill!"
13. Arm raised, hand high: "Call on me, teacher!"
14. Single fist, thumb extended up and to the rear: "Get outta here!"
15. Both arms extended upward: "Touchdown!" (or other athletic success).
If others occur to you, please comment: remember, no "high fives", and no other body language. These are just examples using arms and hands of a single person. When i began to list them, I certainly didn't expect to think of so many.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Walkers
I can't walk safely outside a house these days without support. At home, I do use a cane to walk from the dining-room into the-living room, but I don't use one upstairs, as I migrate from my bedroom to the bathroom, my office, or the stairs. I have two canes, one furnished by Kaiser Permanente, my health insurer; and another one which can be pulled apart into three pieces--useful when it has to be packed.
What I like to do is to use a cane (preferably in my right hand) and be supported by a friendly right arm accepting my left arm.. My dear wife, actually a few months older than I am, is fit and spry, and walks daily for pleasure. For much of the past few years, it has been she who has supplied the "friendly arm". For some time, she has been encouraging me to try to move around without linking arms with her.
I have tried using two poles, one in each hand, and that works reasonably well for short distances on flat land. Since we live on a hill, and Barbara can no longer drive me down to the flatlands, this is not a very satisfactory solution.
We have a four-wheel walker with a basket, and this walker can be set to act as a portable seat for me. I like that, but it also requires flat land and transportation to reach level ground. Again, not a satisfactory solution. There are battery-powered wheelchairs and "scooters", but I'm not ready to cope with either yet. Besides, they really aren't very well fitted for my needs.
When we go to concerts, the theater, a restaurant, or a meeting, we usually go by car, driven by a helper, and then I walk in, with a cane and someone's arm. When I visit a grocery store, a "basket" to transport our purchases doubles very well as a walker. It has the advantage to my vanity that there are other shoppers, not needing the support that I need, also pushing a grocery store's shopping basket.
For weeks, Barbara was telling me that I should buy a lightweight walker. I made a few brownie points when I showed her an ad for a discounted two-wheel lightweight model. The store was in Hayward, calling for a round trip of close to fifty miles. It had occurred to me that the distance might happily cause a further delay--but Barbara was determined, so quickly went to the store with our driver, coming back with the perfect answer to her pleas.
We tried it out for an Early Music concert recently. We had dinner at The Musical Offering (a restaurant which shares the space with the record store), perhaps 200 yards from the church where we were to hear the music. I hated using the walker! It took us perhaps ten minutes to walk that short distance.
There was the annual party afterward--free wine and delicious finger food, an annual event I had enjoyed many times over the years. I told Barbara that i really didn't want to walk back to The Musical Offering. So we arranged to be picked up outside the church, and went home to bed.
I realize that a major part of my resistance is because I am being taken out of my "comfort zone". There is also the psychological factor of appearing weak. It's no fun getting old and immobile! As a contemporary friend of ours puts it: "Growing old is not for sissies".. I prefer to rejoice that, thanks to our driver, we can still attend concerts and plays, eat at restaurants, go shopping, attend meetings in San Francisco--and I can attend church each Sunday.
What I like to do is to use a cane (preferably in my right hand) and be supported by a friendly right arm accepting my left arm.. My dear wife, actually a few months older than I am, is fit and spry, and walks daily for pleasure. For much of the past few years, it has been she who has supplied the "friendly arm". For some time, she has been encouraging me to try to move around without linking arms with her.
I have tried using two poles, one in each hand, and that works reasonably well for short distances on flat land. Since we live on a hill, and Barbara can no longer drive me down to the flatlands, this is not a very satisfactory solution.
We have a four-wheel walker with a basket, and this walker can be set to act as a portable seat for me. I like that, but it also requires flat land and transportation to reach level ground. Again, not a satisfactory solution. There are battery-powered wheelchairs and "scooters", but I'm not ready to cope with either yet. Besides, they really aren't very well fitted for my needs.
When we go to concerts, the theater, a restaurant, or a meeting, we usually go by car, driven by a helper, and then I walk in, with a cane and someone's arm. When I visit a grocery store, a "basket" to transport our purchases doubles very well as a walker. It has the advantage to my vanity that there are other shoppers, not needing the support that I need, also pushing a grocery store's shopping basket.
For weeks, Barbara was telling me that I should buy a lightweight walker. I made a few brownie points when I showed her an ad for a discounted two-wheel lightweight model. The store was in Hayward, calling for a round trip of close to fifty miles. It had occurred to me that the distance might happily cause a further delay--but Barbara was determined, so quickly went to the store with our driver, coming back with the perfect answer to her pleas.
We tried it out for an Early Music concert recently. We had dinner at The Musical Offering (a restaurant which shares the space with the record store), perhaps 200 yards from the church where we were to hear the music. I hated using the walker! It took us perhaps ten minutes to walk that short distance.
There was the annual party afterward--free wine and delicious finger food, an annual event I had enjoyed many times over the years. I told Barbara that i really didn't want to walk back to The Musical Offering. So we arranged to be picked up outside the church, and went home to bed.
I realize that a major part of my resistance is because I am being taken out of my "comfort zone". There is also the psychological factor of appearing weak. It's no fun getting old and immobile! As a contemporary friend of ours puts it: "Growing old is not for sissies".. I prefer to rejoice that, thanks to our driver, we can still attend concerts and plays, eat at restaurants, go shopping, attend meetings in San Francisco--and I can attend church each Sunday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)