Is it over yet?
By "it," I mean the royal wedding over in England. Is it safe to turn on the TV or radio again?
Now, I have nothing against the happy couple. I wish them well, and I especially hope that they escape the predations of the cockroaches of the Fourth Estate that plagued the groom's late mother.
Having said that, I will now state for the record something that I believe I have at least implied in my prior entries. I am an American. I do not have a monarch; I have a president. Admittedly, the current holder of that office is an extremely pathetic one, but he is still a president.
If I remember correctly, America had a slight difference of opinion with Britain back in 1776. As a matter of fact, it was that little disagreement that led to this country having a form of government headed by someone chosen by the governed, and not by someone who holds the post by circumstances of birth.
In other words, while it is entirely possible that a future leader of America is getting married today, that wedding most certainly did not take place in Westminster Abbey. So why is the American media devoting so much coverage to the event?
In all honesty, I have never understood the fascination that the British monarchy has for some of my fellow Americans. I will concede some measure of nostalgia on the part of those who have emigrated from Britain, and possibly the same for those with some British ancestry. But why does a good part of the rest of the country hold such a fascination for something that has little if anything to do with America? It would be nice if some of these people showed the same amount of interest next year during the presidential election campaign.
While I think I have managed to avoid most of the journalistic excess, I have encountered my share of coverage. There was one story that I found particularly amusing. A young member of the Buckingham Palace Guard had made some, shall we say, less than complimentary remarks online about the bride. Cameron Reilly was relieved of all duties connected with the wedding. One of his fellow soldiers called him "incredibly naive," saying that it was a huge honor to serve at the Royal Wedding.
Yes, it does sound like a case of engaging the mouth (or the keyboard) before the brain, but part of me thinks that he just wanted to stay at home and watch the whole thing on TV.
***jn***
Friday, April 29, 2011
Sunday, April 17, 2011
7. All I Know Is What I Read On The Internet
If you are thinking the title of this entry sounds a little familiar, it is an homage to humorist Will Rogers, who opened his performances with the line, "All I know is what I read in the papers." If he were performing today, he might well use the variation in the title -- but I would be willing to bet that he would still be reading the papers.
I began thinking about Will Rogers after a couple of seemingly random incidents. In my mind, they seem to serve as proof of Gabriele Veneziano's theory of quantum physics; that everything is connected. And as I have discovered, sometimes those connections can be quite astounding.
The first incident President Obama's speech on the deficit last week. The relevant point is during the speech, when cameras cut to various shots of the audience. One of these shots caught Vice President Biden as he was apparently nodding off -- completely asleep, it appears. (He was not the only one; a couple of women behind Biden can also be seen apparently visiting the realm of Morpheus.)
The second incident happened last night. I have a book of quotes by Will Rogers, and for some reason, I picked it up and started flipping through it. As it happened, I opened the book to the page that held this quote:
"Why sleep at home when you can sleep in Congress?"
Or as Rogers might say if he were around today, Why sleep at home when you can sleep while listening to the President?
***jn***
I began thinking about Will Rogers after a couple of seemingly random incidents. In my mind, they seem to serve as proof of Gabriele Veneziano's theory of quantum physics; that everything is connected. And as I have discovered, sometimes those connections can be quite astounding.
The first incident President Obama's speech on the deficit last week. The relevant point is during the speech, when cameras cut to various shots of the audience. One of these shots caught Vice President Biden as he was apparently nodding off -- completely asleep, it appears. (He was not the only one; a couple of women behind Biden can also be seen apparently visiting the realm of Morpheus.)
The second incident happened last night. I have a book of quotes by Will Rogers, and for some reason, I picked it up and started flipping through it. As it happened, I opened the book to the page that held this quote:
"Why sleep at home when you can sleep in Congress?"
Or as Rogers might say if he were around today, Why sleep at home when you can sleep while listening to the President?
***jn***
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
6. Simply Declaring
Recently, I have been reading the Declaration Of Independence. I am certain that I have read at least parts of it over the years, but I wanted to get a better feel for it. I wanted to know for certain that I understood what I thought I understood.
I thought that the best way of knowing would be if I could put the Declaration into my own words, much like the explanations of the Pledge Of Allegiance that were the topic of a previous entry. And so, I have written my own description of the Declaration Of Independence.
When I wrote this description, I envisioned it as a presentation to a group of students; probably elementary school students. More than likely, they had heard of the Declaration, but had not yet studied it. Here is how I would describe it to them:
"It is easier to understand the Declaration Of Independence when you realize that it can be broken down into three sections. In the first section, the Continental Congress is explaining why this step is necessary:
"We, the United States Of America, are declaring our separation and independence from Great Britain. In doing so, we feel it only just, right, and proper that we present our reasons and arguments for doing so to the rest of the world. We have the following grievances against the present King of Great Britain:
"The second section is a list of those grievances, which the Continental Congress hoped would demonstrate how King George III had violated the rights of the colonists repeatedly. Those charges and grievances, they felt, were proof that he was no longer fit to rule the colonies.
"The Continental Congress also mentioned that they had made appeals to the people of Great Britain, hoping that they might convince the British Parliament and the King to reverse his stand on the colonies.
"In the third and final section, the Continental Congress stated why they finally concluded that any connections with Great Britain must be broken:
"We have tried to resolve these grievances and differences many times, only to have those overtures rejected at every attempt. We regret that we must do this, but as a last resort, we hereby declare that the United States are now free and independent, and that all ties to and with Great Britain are hereby dissolved."
How well does this stand as an interpretation of the Declaration Of Independence?
***jn***
I thought that the best way of knowing would be if I could put the Declaration into my own words, much like the explanations of the Pledge Of Allegiance that were the topic of a previous entry. And so, I have written my own description of the Declaration Of Independence.
When I wrote this description, I envisioned it as a presentation to a group of students; probably elementary school students. More than likely, they had heard of the Declaration, but had not yet studied it. Here is how I would describe it to them:
"It is easier to understand the Declaration Of Independence when you realize that it can be broken down into three sections. In the first section, the Continental Congress is explaining why this step is necessary:
"We, the United States Of America, are declaring our separation and independence from Great Britain. In doing so, we feel it only just, right, and proper that we present our reasons and arguments for doing so to the rest of the world. We have the following grievances against the present King of Great Britain:
"The second section is a list of those grievances, which the Continental Congress hoped would demonstrate how King George III had violated the rights of the colonists repeatedly. Those charges and grievances, they felt, were proof that he was no longer fit to rule the colonies.
"The Continental Congress also mentioned that they had made appeals to the people of Great Britain, hoping that they might convince the British Parliament and the King to reverse his stand on the colonies.
"In the third and final section, the Continental Congress stated why they finally concluded that any connections with Great Britain must be broken:
"We have tried to resolve these grievances and differences many times, only to have those overtures rejected at every attempt. We regret that we must do this, but as a last resort, we hereby declare that the United States are now free and independent, and that all ties to and with Great Britain are hereby dissolved."
How well does this stand as an interpretation of the Declaration Of Independence?
***jn***
Monday, April 11, 2011
5. The Multiple Learning Curve
This endeavor, as the saying goes, is a learning experience. As in the sense of a button I saw years ago, which said, "Oh, NO! Not another learning experience!"
If I mention one other datum, you might have a better idea comprehending my initial statement. This endeavor is also an exercise in OCD. These entries are crossposted to four different blogging sites -- Xanga, LiveJournal, Blogspot, and WordPress, not to mention that notifications of new entries are posted to my Facebook page. Learning the various quirks of each site, and trying to overcome said quirks, can be just a little . . . well, I would have to say that the feeling is somewhere between "irritating" and "annoying."
Getting things to look the way I want on each site has probably been the first learning curve. As you might well imagine, each of the sites has its own ways for customizing the look of an individual blog. So far, Xanga has been the easiest to nudge, tweak, or otherwise sledgehammer into looking the way I want. I selected its most no-frills approach, and after that, it was merely a matter of adjusting the colors. I may still need to adjust a color or two a little, but I think I have that site looking the way I like it.
With LiveJournal, I believe I may have looked at just about every theme they offer before I selected one -- and looked through them again when I decided that I did not like my first choice after all. I need to adjust the color on the links, but I believe that it should not be too difficult a task.
I am still trying to find a look that I like on both Blogspot and WordPress. I have not yet found anything that I can say that I like; it is more a case of going with something that I do not overly dislike. I may have to spend a few hours looking at all the alternatives on each site, then seeing how I might be able to customize a choice.
(Incidentally, if you are curious enough to wonder how each site looks, that can be easily satisfied. My username on each site is the same -- "jamesnorcross." Simply go to the address bar of your browser, and replace the site where you are currently viewing -- be it Xanga, LiveJournal, Blogspot, or WordPress -- with one of the others.)
While getting the look right for each site has been interesting, I have been more surprised by how the last two entries looked when I posted them. I write the entry first, then copy and paste the text into a "New Entry" page on each site. And I adjust the time so that it is the same for each site. (I did mention that this was an exercise in OCD, did I not?)
When I posted "Sum Qui Sum, Et Qui Omnis Sum," the entry included the code for the results of the online quiz I took. With Xanga and LiveJournal, the images of the results posted just as I thought they would. With Blogspot and WordPress, however, the images did not appear. Instead, what you see are the blocks of code that should have been translated into the images. There must be a simple reason why everything did not post correctly, but I am still trying to determine what that reason might be.
I had a different surprise when I posted "The Pledge, According To Red And The Duke." Each site handles the posting of links a little differently. LiveJournal makes the links automatically; Xanga and Blogspot need a little nudging to change plain text into a link. The big surprise was when the entry posted on WordPress. Instead of the expected links, what actually appeared were the videos from YouTube.
As I said, I am trying to master multiple learning curves at the same time, and hoping that I will not be too surprised by what I might see once I click the "Save" button.
***jn***
If I mention one other datum, you might have a better idea comprehending my initial statement. This endeavor is also an exercise in OCD. These entries are crossposted to four different blogging sites -- Xanga, LiveJournal, Blogspot, and WordPress, not to mention that notifications of new entries are posted to my Facebook page. Learning the various quirks of each site, and trying to overcome said quirks, can be just a little . . . well, I would have to say that the feeling is somewhere between "irritating" and "annoying."
Getting things to look the way I want on each site has probably been the first learning curve. As you might well imagine, each of the sites has its own ways for customizing the look of an individual blog. So far, Xanga has been the easiest to nudge, tweak, or otherwise sledgehammer into looking the way I want. I selected its most no-frills approach, and after that, it was merely a matter of adjusting the colors. I may still need to adjust a color or two a little, but I think I have that site looking the way I like it.
With LiveJournal, I believe I may have looked at just about every theme they offer before I selected one -- and looked through them again when I decided that I did not like my first choice after all. I need to adjust the color on the links, but I believe that it should not be too difficult a task.
I am still trying to find a look that I like on both Blogspot and WordPress. I have not yet found anything that I can say that I like; it is more a case of going with something that I do not overly dislike. I may have to spend a few hours looking at all the alternatives on each site, then seeing how I might be able to customize a choice.
(Incidentally, if you are curious enough to wonder how each site looks, that can be easily satisfied. My username on each site is the same -- "jamesnorcross." Simply go to the address bar of your browser, and replace the site where you are currently viewing -- be it Xanga, LiveJournal, Blogspot, or WordPress -- with one of the others.)
While getting the look right for each site has been interesting, I have been more surprised by how the last two entries looked when I posted them. I write the entry first, then copy and paste the text into a "New Entry" page on each site. And I adjust the time so that it is the same for each site. (I did mention that this was an exercise in OCD, did I not?)
When I posted "Sum Qui Sum, Et Qui Omnis Sum," the entry included the code for the results of the online quiz I took. With Xanga and LiveJournal, the images of the results posted just as I thought they would. With Blogspot and WordPress, however, the images did not appear. Instead, what you see are the blocks of code that should have been translated into the images. There must be a simple reason why everything did not post correctly, but I am still trying to determine what that reason might be.
I had a different surprise when I posted "The Pledge, According To Red And The Duke." Each site handles the posting of links a little differently. LiveJournal makes the links automatically; Xanga and Blogspot need a little nudging to change plain text into a link. The big surprise was when the entry posted on WordPress. Instead of the expected links, what actually appeared were the videos from YouTube.
As I said, I am trying to master multiple learning curves at the same time, and hoping that I will not be too surprised by what I might see once I click the "Save" button.
***jn***
Saturday, April 9, 2011
4. The Pledge, According To Red And The Duke
When you hear the name Red Skelton, the first thing that most likely comes to mind is comedy. And while he was a master of comedy, something that I remember even more about Red Skelton is his explanation of the Pledge Of Allegiance.
A few days ago, I discovered a video clip of this performance on YouTube. I am not particularly surprised that it is on YouTube (in multiple versions, no less); I am perhaps more surprised that I did not think to search for it earlier. According to the introduction on one clip, Skelton first performed the sketch on his CBS variety show on January 14, 1969. That introduction also mentioned that it has been read into the Congressional Record twice.
In the performance, Skelton talked about his grade school principal, a gentleman by the name of Mr. Lasswell, and how one day Mr. Lasswell lectured the students following the recitation of the Pledge Of Allegiance. Mr. Lasswell had the impression that the students were finding the recitation monotonous. "If I may, may I recite it and try to explain to you the meaning of each word."
With that, he began to break down the Pledge phrase by phrase, word by word, explaining the meaning behind each word and phrase. Mr. Lasswell's words certainly had an impact on Skelton, for him to remember them so clearly decades later.
Skelton ended the performance by saying, "Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge Of Allegiance -- 'Under God.' Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer, and that would be eliminated from schools, too?" I would think that this calmly stated line from this gentle man has to be the most stinging rebuke ever delivered to those who feel that freedom of religion means freedom from religion.
As I have said, I found multiple versions of this performance on YouTube. The link below, however, probably has the best audio and video quality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZBTyTWOZCM
I am somewhat uncertain as to how I stumbled across this performance. When I did, though, I found a link to another interpretation of the Pledge Of Allegiance, this one by John Wayne. It starts with the Duke reciting the Pledge. Then, as a chorus begins reciting it again, he asks, "What do those words mean to you?" He then proceeds to give his own phrase-by-phrase breakdown of the Pledge. One line that I particularly like describes America as "A land where . . . the ballot box is the sword, and the people, its wielder." Wayne's description is different from Skelton's, but no less accurate. His interpretation can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jf3MQpffBc&NR=1
There is one other version of the Pledge Of Allegiance that I found while watching the above two interpretations. This one features Don La Fontaine, the narrator of probably thousands of movie trailers. If you have ever heard a trailer that begins, "In a world where . . . ," then you are familiar with La Fontaine and his distinctive voice. This one does not have any interpretation, just La Fontaine reciting the Pledge, and the US Army Band playing in the background:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfjZj4NY7EM
***jn***
A few days ago, I discovered a video clip of this performance on YouTube. I am not particularly surprised that it is on YouTube (in multiple versions, no less); I am perhaps more surprised that I did not think to search for it earlier. According to the introduction on one clip, Skelton first performed the sketch on his CBS variety show on January 14, 1969. That introduction also mentioned that it has been read into the Congressional Record twice.
In the performance, Skelton talked about his grade school principal, a gentleman by the name of Mr. Lasswell, and how one day Mr. Lasswell lectured the students following the recitation of the Pledge Of Allegiance. Mr. Lasswell had the impression that the students were finding the recitation monotonous. "If I may, may I recite it and try to explain to you the meaning of each word."
With that, he began to break down the Pledge phrase by phrase, word by word, explaining the meaning behind each word and phrase. Mr. Lasswell's words certainly had an impact on Skelton, for him to remember them so clearly decades later.
Skelton ended the performance by saying, "Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge Of Allegiance -- 'Under God.' Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer, and that would be eliminated from schools, too?" I would think that this calmly stated line from this gentle man has to be the most stinging rebuke ever delivered to those who feel that freedom of religion means freedom from religion.
As I have said, I found multiple versions of this performance on YouTube. The link below, however, probably has the best audio and video quality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZBTyTWOZCM
I am somewhat uncertain as to how I stumbled across this performance. When I did, though, I found a link to another interpretation of the Pledge Of Allegiance, this one by John Wayne. It starts with the Duke reciting the Pledge. Then, as a chorus begins reciting it again, he asks, "What do those words mean to you?" He then proceeds to give his own phrase-by-phrase breakdown of the Pledge. One line that I particularly like describes America as "A land where . . . the ballot box is the sword, and the people, its wielder." Wayne's description is different from Skelton's, but no less accurate. His interpretation can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jf3MQpffBc&NR=1
There is one other version of the Pledge Of Allegiance that I found while watching the above two interpretations. This one features Don La Fontaine, the narrator of probably thousands of movie trailers. If you have ever heard a trailer that begins, "In a world where . . . ," then you are familiar with La Fontaine and his distinctive voice. This one does not have any interpretation, just La Fontaine reciting the Pledge, and the US Army Band playing in the background:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfjZj4NY7EM
***jn***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)