Another year has come and gone (almost). It's time for me, once again, to ponder the meaning of Christmas.
I know I'm repeating myself, but I'm not sure what to make of Christmas. I was raised a mainstream Christian, and was raised to believe that we were celebrating Jesus' birthday, God's only son sent to earth to redeem us sinners. I believed that for many years, and never questioned it.
All that changed in a flash when I read a book that pointed out the list of demi-gods born to human mothers and divine fathers on December 25th. All the myths about these demigods predated Jesus. I was stunned. I'd never heard anything like that before. The list included: Mithra, Attis, Adonis to name a few. From that moment on, there was no way that I could justify that the Bible stories of the birth of Jesus were literally historically true and dismiss the rest of the stories as myths. There were too many similarities, and all of the stories were centuries older than the stories of Jesus. In that instant, my beliefs were destroyed, and I could never look at the world in the same way again. It was pretty scary.
Ever since then, I've really struggled with Christmas. I don't know what I'm celebrating. I'm not celebrating the religious side, so does that mean I'm not celebrating Christmas? Yet, I do put out a manger scene most years. I know I'm not alone in not celebrating the religious side. I'm happy to celebrate anything that tries to promote peace in the world and tries to make the world a nicer place - even if only for a day.
I'm also happy to celebrate the birth of the heir to King David's throne, if indeed, Jesus was of the house and lineage of David. We even sing of that, when we sing the Christmas carol, "The First Noel". The last line of the chorus says, "...born is the King of Israel."
Of course, presents are fun, and I look forward to the good feast. That's the fun side of Christmas. I don't like the fake sentimentality; it gets on my nerves after awhile. As much as I love the movie, "It's a Wonderful Life", as I've gotten older, I found "Bad(der) Santa" a bit more appealing. I know it can be rude and offensive, but if you get sick of the schmaltz, you might find it funny
Happy Holy Days, whatever the holy days of the season mean to you.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
Lessons from the Housewives
I have a confession: I LOVE Desperate Housewives.
When the show debuted in 2004 on ABC and garnered good reviews, I knew that I'd watch it when it arrived on dvd. Sure enough, when season one was released a year later, I gobbled it up; I was hooked.
For those of you that don't know, it centres on four main characters: Lynette Scavo, (Felicity Huffman)a stressed out mom of four; Gabrielle Solis, (Eva Longoria Parker) a pampered and spoiled former model; Susan Meyer (Terri Hatcher), a children's book illustrator; and, Bree Van de Kamp, the ultimate domestic goddess. They are neighbours living on "Wisteria Lane" in "Fairview." Their stories intertwine as their live their lives.
Each fall, I get excited with anticipation waiting for the next season to be released. I've been known to get up very early on a Saturday morning and put on the fire and sit and watch it while drinking my coffee.
I think there's a little of each main character in every woman. Every working mom relates to Lynette's stress and guilt. A lot of people put up the fronts that Bree does, and put on a public face, always desperate to "keep up appearances". That's probably one big reason why the show is such a success. That's one of the reasons I love it, but that's not the main reason.
There's a lot of grace in the show. Friends get angry at each other; spouses struggle with the demands and stresses of marriage and raising children. Yet, there's something even deeper. There are a lot of valuable lessons to be learned.
In season four, a tornado rips through Wisteria Lane. Lynette screams in hysterics as she emerges from the destruction to see the home where her family had been hiding is now in rubble. The other women stand by her side and try to comfort her as the rescuers dig through the wreckage. Even though I was fairly convinced her family would be safe, I was momentarily panicking thinking Lynette's husband, Tom, might be dead. I cried when he was the last to be pulled out safe. Of all the couples on Wisteria Lane, they are the ones I root for most.
Sadly, one person didn't make it, Ida, a minor character. As Lynette is helping another neighbour, Mrs. McClusky, pack up Ida's stuff, she (Lynette) comes across some baseball memorabilia. She asks, "What's all this?" and is told that it was Ida's momentoes from her pro-baseball days during World War II. Lynette was shocked to hear this news. She had no idea that this lady whom she had lived nearby to had been a huge baseball star in her youth. In fact, Ida had loved the game so much, she asked that her ashes be scattered in the local baseball field. Lynette was told (words to the effect) that, "You didn't know, because you didn't ask." Lynette, feeling guilty on more than one level, decides to grant Ida her last request (which in itself is an amusing story). After they are done, Lynette remarks how it was so sad that she really didn't take the opportuntiy to know Ida while she was alive. Mrs. McClusky tells her that, "It's a lesson we need to learn every day". And it's true. So often, we take the people around us for granted, never knowing what may happen tomorrow. Life is fragile.
There's a character that is pure evil (in my opinion) and I was ecstatic when she got her just desserts. You should have heard me yelling at the tv, screaming, "SHE's EVIL INCARNATE!!" She's been upsetting me for a very long time. She's caused a lot of trouble for a lot of people. Justice, in this show, is never dealt out by the police or the legal system. It's dealt with within the family, or the participants and, somehow, it just seems fitting. There's a lot of "libertarianism" spoken.
Gabby, Susan, Bree, and Lynette have become my virtual friends.
When the show debuted in 2004 on ABC and garnered good reviews, I knew that I'd watch it when it arrived on dvd. Sure enough, when season one was released a year later, I gobbled it up; I was hooked.
For those of you that don't know, it centres on four main characters: Lynette Scavo, (Felicity Huffman)a stressed out mom of four; Gabrielle Solis, (Eva Longoria Parker) a pampered and spoiled former model; Susan Meyer (Terri Hatcher), a children's book illustrator; and, Bree Van de Kamp, the ultimate domestic goddess. They are neighbours living on "Wisteria Lane" in "Fairview." Their stories intertwine as their live their lives.
Each fall, I get excited with anticipation waiting for the next season to be released. I've been known to get up very early on a Saturday morning and put on the fire and sit and watch it while drinking my coffee.
I think there's a little of each main character in every woman. Every working mom relates to Lynette's stress and guilt. A lot of people put up the fronts that Bree does, and put on a public face, always desperate to "keep up appearances". That's probably one big reason why the show is such a success. That's one of the reasons I love it, but that's not the main reason.
There's a lot of grace in the show. Friends get angry at each other; spouses struggle with the demands and stresses of marriage and raising children. Yet, there's something even deeper. There are a lot of valuable lessons to be learned.
In season four, a tornado rips through Wisteria Lane. Lynette screams in hysterics as she emerges from the destruction to see the home where her family had been hiding is now in rubble. The other women stand by her side and try to comfort her as the rescuers dig through the wreckage. Even though I was fairly convinced her family would be safe, I was momentarily panicking thinking Lynette's husband, Tom, might be dead. I cried when he was the last to be pulled out safe. Of all the couples on Wisteria Lane, they are the ones I root for most.
Sadly, one person didn't make it, Ida, a minor character. As Lynette is helping another neighbour, Mrs. McClusky, pack up Ida's stuff, she (Lynette) comes across some baseball memorabilia. She asks, "What's all this?" and is told that it was Ida's momentoes from her pro-baseball days during World War II. Lynette was shocked to hear this news. She had no idea that this lady whom she had lived nearby to had been a huge baseball star in her youth. In fact, Ida had loved the game so much, she asked that her ashes be scattered in the local baseball field. Lynette was told (words to the effect) that, "You didn't know, because you didn't ask." Lynette, feeling guilty on more than one level, decides to grant Ida her last request (which in itself is an amusing story). After they are done, Lynette remarks how it was so sad that she really didn't take the opportuntiy to know Ida while she was alive. Mrs. McClusky tells her that, "It's a lesson we need to learn every day". And it's true. So often, we take the people around us for granted, never knowing what may happen tomorrow. Life is fragile.
There's a character that is pure evil (in my opinion) and I was ecstatic when she got her just desserts. You should have heard me yelling at the tv, screaming, "SHE's EVIL INCARNATE!!" She's been upsetting me for a very long time. She's caused a lot of trouble for a lot of people. Justice, in this show, is never dealt out by the police or the legal system. It's dealt with within the family, or the participants and, somehow, it just seems fitting. There's a lot of "libertarianism" spoken.
Gabby, Susan, Bree, and Lynette have become my virtual friends.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Remembering September 11th
Seven years ago today, the world changed. No one that is old enough to remember will ever forget that day, or where they were or what they were doing.
Being three hours behind the East Coast, it was 6:30 a.m. when our alarm went off and we heard something about a "plane hitting the World Trade Centre". I thought it was a "puddle jumper" that had gone astray and immediately rolled over and went back to sleep for another hour. The alarm went off again, and this time we sat up and took notice: there had been a second plane and one had also hit the Pentagon. We flipped on the tv to see the second Tower Fall. I remember Peter Mansbridge saying, "That was 15 minutes ago." You could hear the shock and disbelief in his voice.
All of a sudden the world was a less safe place. As DH said, "Car bombs are passe." Like most Westerners, I had never heard of Al Queda or Osama Bin Laden before that day. It didn't matter that it wasn't my country that was attacked, or that I didn't know anyone that was personally affected. Somehow, you felt that it was personal and that you were violated.
I can't imagine the hate that would cause someone to do such an act; it's unfathomable. I had heard that terorists were actually "sensitive" people, but didn't understand how that could be. It wasn't until I saw the movie "Munich" that I understood a little bit about it. If you haven't seen it, it's excellent. The clincher is the final scene were Eric Bana's character, who had been doling out retribution on behalf of the Israeli athletes that were slaughtered at the 1972 Olympics, is fed up of the violence, and says to Geoffrey Rush's characher, "When does it end? When does it end?" Bana's character had been involved in bombings and killings, all in the name of vengeance. Yet, he was a good husband and adored his baby daughter. The scene is set in 1970's New York; the camera pulls back to show the World Trade Centre. The obvious answer is: it doesn't end.
Being three hours behind the East Coast, it was 6:30 a.m. when our alarm went off and we heard something about a "plane hitting the World Trade Centre". I thought it was a "puddle jumper" that had gone astray and immediately rolled over and went back to sleep for another hour. The alarm went off again, and this time we sat up and took notice: there had been a second plane and one had also hit the Pentagon. We flipped on the tv to see the second Tower Fall. I remember Peter Mansbridge saying, "That was 15 minutes ago." You could hear the shock and disbelief in his voice.
All of a sudden the world was a less safe place. As DH said, "Car bombs are passe." Like most Westerners, I had never heard of Al Queda or Osama Bin Laden before that day. It didn't matter that it wasn't my country that was attacked, or that I didn't know anyone that was personally affected. Somehow, you felt that it was personal and that you were violated.
I can't imagine the hate that would cause someone to do such an act; it's unfathomable. I had heard that terorists were actually "sensitive" people, but didn't understand how that could be. It wasn't until I saw the movie "Munich" that I understood a little bit about it. If you haven't seen it, it's excellent. The clincher is the final scene were Eric Bana's character, who had been doling out retribution on behalf of the Israeli athletes that were slaughtered at the 1972 Olympics, is fed up of the violence, and says to Geoffrey Rush's characher, "When does it end? When does it end?" Bana's character had been involved in bombings and killings, all in the name of vengeance. Yet, he was a good husband and adored his baby daughter. The scene is set in 1970's New York; the camera pulls back to show the World Trade Centre. The obvious answer is: it doesn't end.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Spamalot II
It's time for another edition of "Spamalot" a commentary on those annoying spam emails we receive. Here's some more that I've received since I posted my original post back in April.
"Paris Hilton abducted by Aliens"
We can only wish.
"Paris Hilton has Sex with Aliens"
Was that before or after the abduction?
"Set your Wife on Fire"
Um, isn't that illegal? Suttee was outlawed a long time ago.
"SAD because of Low EDUCATION? Cheap price Degree/Bacheelor/MasteerMBA/PhDD Certificate"
The insult to my education isn't have so upsetting as the credit you are giving to my intelligence at thinking I wouldn't notice the glaring spelling mistakes in your email. If that's the kind of standards your institution has, I think I'll pass.
"Paris Hilton abducted by Aliens"
We can only wish.
"Paris Hilton has Sex with Aliens"
Was that before or after the abduction?
"Set your Wife on Fire"
Um, isn't that illegal? Suttee was outlawed a long time ago.
"SAD because of Low EDUCATION? Cheap price Degree/Bacheelor/MasteerMBA/PhDD Certificate"
The insult to my education isn't have so upsetting as the credit you are giving to my intelligence at thinking I wouldn't notice the glaring spelling mistakes in your email. If that's the kind of standards your institution has, I think I'll pass.
Monday, August 25, 2008
A Rare Gem
It was an ordinary Friday night. No doubt we'd had pizza, as was our routine on Friday evenings. For whatever reason, we decided to do something a little different (for us) afterwards. Instead of visiting one of our regular bookstores, we decided to visit a different one. Little did we know what an effect that would have.
We had done our browsing and were ready to leave. I took a quick look around the bargain section, when a book leapt off the shelf as it were and said, "BUY ME!" I showed it to DH, and he agreed that it was a must buy. Neither of us had heard of the author before, but the title caught our attention. If my memory serves me right, it was the only book we bought that night. It was only $6.99, but to us, it was priceless.
We took it home, and we both read it within the next week or two. It was one of those rare gems of books; one of those books that once you've read it, your world is rocked and you never see the world the same way again. Our mouths dropped open while reading it. The man's arguments made sense. In fact, they were so obvious, we couldn't believe we hadn't seen it ourselves, that we'd been blinded for so many years.
Since then, we've acquired two more of the author's books. I've read them both. In fact, DH got me one for my birthday last year.
Sadly, the author died a few years ago (before we discovered him) and his books are a little hard to come by. One book we want to get our hands on goes for over $135.00 on amazon.com or ebay.
The author was quite a respected scholar. Now whenever I look at books by other authors on the topics he wrote on, I always see if the authors reference him. It turns out that more and more are. I'm excited to see this. In fact, I wish everyone could read the book that rocked our world, as so many people need to hear what he has to say.
Who is this man, and what did he write about? His name was Hyam Maccoby, and the book that rocked our world was, "The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Chrisianity". It's a pity he isn't more well known than he is. He should be. As you may guess from his name, he was Jewish.
If you have any interest in the origins of Christianity, you MUST read this book. You can get it relatively cheap on ebay. The other two books we have are, "Jesus the Pharisee" and "Judas Iscariot and the Myth of Jewish Evil."
Read them. Read them all. You won't be sorry you did.
We had done our browsing and were ready to leave. I took a quick look around the bargain section, when a book leapt off the shelf as it were and said, "BUY ME!" I showed it to DH, and he agreed that it was a must buy. Neither of us had heard of the author before, but the title caught our attention. If my memory serves me right, it was the only book we bought that night. It was only $6.99, but to us, it was priceless.
We took it home, and we both read it within the next week or two. It was one of those rare gems of books; one of those books that once you've read it, your world is rocked and you never see the world the same way again. Our mouths dropped open while reading it. The man's arguments made sense. In fact, they were so obvious, we couldn't believe we hadn't seen it ourselves, that we'd been blinded for so many years.
Since then, we've acquired two more of the author's books. I've read them both. In fact, DH got me one for my birthday last year.
Sadly, the author died a few years ago (before we discovered him) and his books are a little hard to come by. One book we want to get our hands on goes for over $135.00 on amazon.com or ebay.
The author was quite a respected scholar. Now whenever I look at books by other authors on the topics he wrote on, I always see if the authors reference him. It turns out that more and more are. I'm excited to see this. In fact, I wish everyone could read the book that rocked our world, as so many people need to hear what he has to say.
Who is this man, and what did he write about? His name was Hyam Maccoby, and the book that rocked our world was, "The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Chrisianity". It's a pity he isn't more well known than he is. He should be. As you may guess from his name, he was Jewish.
If you have any interest in the origins of Christianity, you MUST read this book. You can get it relatively cheap on ebay. The other two books we have are, "Jesus the Pharisee" and "Judas Iscariot and the Myth of Jewish Evil."
Read them. Read them all. You won't be sorry you did.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Happy Birthday
It's hard to believe that my little blog is a year old today; it's passed fast. I haven't posted as much as I originally envisioned I would, but I blog when I can or when I come up with something to talk about.
Here's to the first year and hopefully to lots more blog posts to come.
Here's to the first year and hopefully to lots more blog posts to come.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Musings on Ken Burns
I'm a huge fan of Ken Burns. I love his documentaries and I rate his "The Civil War" and "The West" as two of my favourites. If you haven't seen them, get thee to a video store or an online dvd rental subscription and watch them.
I love history. I always have and I always will. The interesting thing is that I haven't been overly interested in 20th Century history. To me, the older the better. I love the Classical World (ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome), Church, British and American history.
I know about World War I and II. I studied them in high school. I remember reading Barbara Tuchman's excellent book, "The Guns of August" in Grade eleven. My Dad was a huge fan of war movies and I grew up watching lots of bits and pieces of war movies. I know the circumstances that led to World War II. I know when it started (September 1st, 1939) and that it ended in May 1945 (V.E.) and August 1945 (V.J.) respectively. My parents, growing up in Britain during the War, told stories of some of the hardships they faced. I love the fashions of the 30's and 40's and the music. I adore big band, especially Glen Miller. "The Glen Miller Story" with James Stewart and June Allyson is one of my all-time favourite movies and I have Glen Miller playing in the background as I type this.
So, when I finally got a hold of a copy of Ken Burns' "The War" I pounced on it and we watched all the episodes that we had on hand. Watching it, I found hard to get my mind around a time when, basically, the whole world had gone insane. I just can't imagine the whole world at war. I knew about the Battle of Midway, knew of General Douglas MacArthur, General Patton, etc. I knew about the Nazi attrocities; I knew about DDay and I've seen what veterans consider the most authentic depiction of DDay in "Saving Private Ryan". I've seen "Schindler's List" and cried my eyes out. Some of the images from those movies will haunt me forever. I knew my "Uncle Ben" fought in India. But, seeing the stories told by veterans did something to me. Hearing the letters read aloud that were sent home was emotional. Some of the recipients were crying as they read them. Some of the photos and video were graphic. You saw people being shot and I often winced, knowing this was not a Hollywood movie; that was someone's son/brother/husband/sweetheart, etc. that was killed. I'm sure I've seen it/heard it all before, but this did something to me. Perhaps because Ken Burns has put a human face on it. It's easy to dismiss a lot of war movies as "just Hollywood". I mean, we all know it's Tom Hanks ("Saving Private Ryan") or Henry Fonda ("Midway") or John Wayne ("Sands of Iwo Jima" and "Back to Bataan")up there on the screen.
Ken Burns tells the story from the American perspective; that's all right, That's what he does best - Americana. He doesn't do it obnoxiously. He shows America's involvement, warts and all. He shows that some white Americans weren't too happy working side-by-side with Blacks in the shipyards and in their military units; that some Blacks were turned down for military service; that Japanese-Americans weren't allowed to join the army after Pearl Harbor (Japanese-Americans were eventually granted their own military unit). Kids in high school should watch his documentaries as part of history curriculum.
It's not that I was blind to what transpired sixty plus years ago. I observe Remembrance Day every year and proudly wear my poppy. Yet somehow that just doesn't seem enough. To all those that served: British, Canadian, Australian, American - everyone - a heart felt "thank you". Those of us that came after you can never repay the debt we owe you.
I love history. I always have and I always will. The interesting thing is that I haven't been overly interested in 20th Century history. To me, the older the better. I love the Classical World (ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome), Church, British and American history.
I know about World War I and II. I studied them in high school. I remember reading Barbara Tuchman's excellent book, "The Guns of August" in Grade eleven. My Dad was a huge fan of war movies and I grew up watching lots of bits and pieces of war movies. I know the circumstances that led to World War II. I know when it started (September 1st, 1939) and that it ended in May 1945 (V.E.) and August 1945 (V.J.) respectively. My parents, growing up in Britain during the War, told stories of some of the hardships they faced. I love the fashions of the 30's and 40's and the music. I adore big band, especially Glen Miller. "The Glen Miller Story" with James Stewart and June Allyson is one of my all-time favourite movies and I have Glen Miller playing in the background as I type this.
So, when I finally got a hold of a copy of Ken Burns' "The War" I pounced on it and we watched all the episodes that we had on hand. Watching it, I found hard to get my mind around a time when, basically, the whole world had gone insane. I just can't imagine the whole world at war. I knew about the Battle of Midway, knew of General Douglas MacArthur, General Patton, etc. I knew about the Nazi attrocities; I knew about DDay and I've seen what veterans consider the most authentic depiction of DDay in "Saving Private Ryan". I've seen "Schindler's List" and cried my eyes out. Some of the images from those movies will haunt me forever. I knew my "Uncle Ben" fought in India. But, seeing the stories told by veterans did something to me. Hearing the letters read aloud that were sent home was emotional. Some of the recipients were crying as they read them. Some of the photos and video were graphic. You saw people being shot and I often winced, knowing this was not a Hollywood movie; that was someone's son/brother/husband/sweetheart, etc. that was killed. I'm sure I've seen it/heard it all before, but this did something to me. Perhaps because Ken Burns has put a human face on it. It's easy to dismiss a lot of war movies as "just Hollywood". I mean, we all know it's Tom Hanks ("Saving Private Ryan") or Henry Fonda ("Midway") or John Wayne ("Sands of Iwo Jima" and "Back to Bataan")up there on the screen.
Ken Burns tells the story from the American perspective; that's all right, That's what he does best - Americana. He doesn't do it obnoxiously. He shows America's involvement, warts and all. He shows that some white Americans weren't too happy working side-by-side with Blacks in the shipyards and in their military units; that some Blacks were turned down for military service; that Japanese-Americans weren't allowed to join the army after Pearl Harbor (Japanese-Americans were eventually granted their own military unit). Kids in high school should watch his documentaries as part of history curriculum.
It's not that I was blind to what transpired sixty plus years ago. I observe Remembrance Day every year and proudly wear my poppy. Yet somehow that just doesn't seem enough. To all those that served: British, Canadian, Australian, American - everyone - a heart felt "thank you". Those of us that came after you can never repay the debt we owe you.
Friday, July 18, 2008
A Tale of Two Stories of Customer Service
If I get good customer service, I stick with a company. If I get crappy customer service, I dump them if I can or try to avoid shopping there. I sometimes even stick with a company that really tries to give good service, even if they fall short every now and then.
I live not too far from a pet food store. It's a major chain store, but I generally don't shop there as their prices are high and it's not a pleasant shopping atmosphere. It's dark and dingy and they don't have a good selection of the stuff I usually buy. I generally patronize a small store which has a few outlets and is considerablly further away. Their prices are quite a bit cheaper and if I have any questions, the staff are very helpful with their recommendations. The place isn't dark and crowded; it's bright and airy.
So, last night, I need to get some pet food. I normally do this chore on the weekends, but the cats ran out of dry food. I went to the store that was close by, thinking I could pick up a small bag for a couple of dollars to tide them over until the weekend. I was disgusted to find that the major chain store wanted to charge me $6.00 for a small one pound bag. Then I changed my mind and decided to buy a large bag and use a coupon I have for 20% off my purchase. So, I lug the large bag up the counter and I'm told that I can't use the coupon for food. Sure enough, if I'd turned the coupon over, I would have seen that. In disgust, I walk out and drive to the other store. Immediately, the girl behind the counter greets me saying, "Is there anything I can help you with?" I stocked up on what I needed and handed her the coupon that I had for her store. I got my discount and recounted my episode at the other store.
That pretty much sealed the deal. That main chain store has pretty much guaranteed that I will NEVER shop there again. (I can't say for sure, because I can foresee that there may be a time where I need to get something from them in an emergency).
Here's to good customer service and the lengths we go to get it.
I live not too far from a pet food store. It's a major chain store, but I generally don't shop there as their prices are high and it's not a pleasant shopping atmosphere. It's dark and dingy and they don't have a good selection of the stuff I usually buy. I generally patronize a small store which has a few outlets and is considerablly further away. Their prices are quite a bit cheaper and if I have any questions, the staff are very helpful with their recommendations. The place isn't dark and crowded; it's bright and airy.
So, last night, I need to get some pet food. I normally do this chore on the weekends, but the cats ran out of dry food. I went to the store that was close by, thinking I could pick up a small bag for a couple of dollars to tide them over until the weekend. I was disgusted to find that the major chain store wanted to charge me $6.00 for a small one pound bag. Then I changed my mind and decided to buy a large bag and use a coupon I have for 20% off my purchase. So, I lug the large bag up the counter and I'm told that I can't use the coupon for food. Sure enough, if I'd turned the coupon over, I would have seen that. In disgust, I walk out and drive to the other store. Immediately, the girl behind the counter greets me saying, "Is there anything I can help you with?" I stocked up on what I needed and handed her the coupon that I had for her store. I got my discount and recounted my episode at the other store.
That pretty much sealed the deal. That main chain store has pretty much guaranteed that I will NEVER shop there again. (I can't say for sure, because I can foresee that there may be a time where I need to get something from them in an emergency).
Here's to good customer service and the lengths we go to get it.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
The End of An Era
Last Friday, June 27th, marked the end of an era. What era, you ask? Then obviously your homepage isn't set to msn.com or msnbc.com, as it was splashed all all over there late last week.
I'm referring to the retirement of Microsoft's Bill Gates. I wouldn't really consider myself a geek, even if I am one of the 10 types of people in the world that understand binary. (You techies will get the joke). I like Bill Gates. I'll admit I'm biased, because he put bread on my table and kept a roof over my head for several years when we lived down in Seattle. He was Microsoft's front-man and epitomized "geekdom". (Is that a real word?) Bill Gates and Microsoft: it's hard to imagine one without the other. He showed that "The Geeks will inherit the earth." I remember a very funny sketch from "The Royal Canadian Air Farce" where the Air Farce's character of Bill Gates claimed he was going to rename the US the "United Gates of America" and rename Mexico, "El Microsofto". He concluded his speech by yelling, "Geek Power!! Geek Power!!" It was priceless; I almost fell out of my chair laughing.
If you are interested at all in things "geeky" and "techy", I recommend you watch, "The Pirates of Silicon Valley" - a made-for-tv movie starring Anthony Michael Hall ("Sixteen Candles")as Bill Gates and Noah Wylie ("E.R.") as Apple's Steve Jobs. I also recommend "The Triumph of the Nerds," a documentary that tells a similar story.
Two years ago, Gates announced that he would eventually be leaving the company he founded in 1977 with friends Paul Allen and Steve Balmer. Bill, having conquered the technology world, now had his sights set on finding a cure for AIDS. Bill and his wife, Melinda, founded the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, which has been donating money for years to worthy causes: immunization, education, etc.
I admire anyone that makes it to the top and then gives back to the world. If Bill is as successful in finding a cure for AIDS and malaria as he has been with revolutionizing the way we use computers (they're not just for geeks anymore) he'll do very well. I wish him all the best. Good luck, Bill.
I'm referring to the retirement of Microsoft's Bill Gates. I wouldn't really consider myself a geek, even if I am one of the 10 types of people in the world that understand binary. (You techies will get the joke). I like Bill Gates. I'll admit I'm biased, because he put bread on my table and kept a roof over my head for several years when we lived down in Seattle. He was Microsoft's front-man and epitomized "geekdom". (Is that a real word?) Bill Gates and Microsoft: it's hard to imagine one without the other. He showed that "The Geeks will inherit the earth." I remember a very funny sketch from "The Royal Canadian Air Farce" where the Air Farce's character of Bill Gates claimed he was going to rename the US the "United Gates of America" and rename Mexico, "El Microsofto". He concluded his speech by yelling, "Geek Power!! Geek Power!!" It was priceless; I almost fell out of my chair laughing.
If you are interested at all in things "geeky" and "techy", I recommend you watch, "The Pirates of Silicon Valley" - a made-for-tv movie starring Anthony Michael Hall ("Sixteen Candles")as Bill Gates and Noah Wylie ("E.R.") as Apple's Steve Jobs. I also recommend "The Triumph of the Nerds," a documentary that tells a similar story.
Two years ago, Gates announced that he would eventually be leaving the company he founded in 1977 with friends Paul Allen and Steve Balmer. Bill, having conquered the technology world, now had his sights set on finding a cure for AIDS. Bill and his wife, Melinda, founded the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, which has been donating money for years to worthy causes: immunization, education, etc.
I admire anyone that makes it to the top and then gives back to the world. If Bill is as successful in finding a cure for AIDS and malaria as he has been with revolutionizing the way we use computers (they're not just for geeks anymore) he'll do very well. I wish him all the best. Good luck, Bill.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
A Novel Idea....
I picked up a book last evening which I was considering reading. I'm not going to mention the title, but it's historical fiction. Two of the three main characters are Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn.
To my surprise, I found the following disclaimer inside the book:
Am I the only person that sees that as funny??? I cracked up laughing.
What are we saying here? Is the disclaimer saying that Henry VIII, Catherine of Aragon, and Anne Boleyn were merely figments of the author's imagination? That Anne Boleyn was not mother to the future Queen Elizabeth I and never lost her head to an executioner's sword? Sorry if that's a spoiler. But if that comes as a surprise, then you really must not have been paying attention in school. I was approximately four to five years old when I "met" Anne at the Royal London Wax Museum in Victoria and was told that she had her head cut off. Always the master of wise-cracks, Dad asked, "Why is she wearing a pearl necklace?" When I said I didn't know, he replied, "So they could cut on the dotted line."
Is it suggesting that England and the Tower of London are make believe? If that's so, that's pretty wild. You see, I've been both to England and the Tower of London. I've seen armour that belonged to Henry and I've stood on Tower Green where Anne was executed. This was in 1981 - long before this book was written. I even have photographic evidence.
I know the intent of the disclaimer: no one knows exactly what words passed between these people, and, obviously there probably are some characters that the author created. That being said, the far-reaching scope of the disclaimer just struck me as pretty funny.
To my surprise, I found the following disclaimer inside the book:
"This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents either are products of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental."
Am I the only person that sees that as funny??? I cracked up laughing.
What are we saying here? Is the disclaimer saying that Henry VIII, Catherine of Aragon, and Anne Boleyn were merely figments of the author's imagination? That Anne Boleyn was not mother to the future Queen Elizabeth I and never lost her head to an executioner's sword? Sorry if that's a spoiler. But if that comes as a surprise, then you really must not have been paying attention in school. I was approximately four to five years old when I "met" Anne at the Royal London Wax Museum in Victoria and was told that she had her head cut off. Always the master of wise-cracks, Dad asked, "Why is she wearing a pearl necklace?" When I said I didn't know, he replied, "So they could cut on the dotted line."
Is it suggesting that England and the Tower of London are make believe? If that's so, that's pretty wild. You see, I've been both to England and the Tower of London. I've seen armour that belonged to Henry and I've stood on Tower Green where Anne was executed. This was in 1981 - long before this book was written. I even have photographic evidence.
I know the intent of the disclaimer: no one knows exactly what words passed between these people, and, obviously there probably are some characters that the author created. That being said, the far-reaching scope of the disclaimer just struck me as pretty funny.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
The Man in the Hat is Back!
After 19 years of waiting, the fourth Indiana Jones movie has finally been released. Being huge "Indy" fans, (well, that's mostly me) we went to see it opening weekend. Warning: there will be spoilers on the new movie towards the last few paragraphs.
I fell in love in with Indiana Jones with the first movie, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in 1981. It wasn't hard; I had a major crush on Harrison Ford at the time (even if he is old enough to be my Dad). I'd also always had a sneaking interest in archaelogy. That summer, I became good friends with the neighbour boy next door. We'd bonded over our mutual love of Star Wars and he told me that he preferred Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones over Han Solo. From that point on, I started nagging my Dad to take me.
After weeks of pestering my Dad, we went to the local theatre and saw it. Dad was expecting some "Star Wars" science fiction type movie, so he was surprised when he saw horses in the jungle. Then, of course, we were told it was "South America - 1936" and things began to make sense. In describing the movie to someone a few days later, Dad said it was basically "James Bond for kids." That's exactly what George Lucas intended when he and director Steven Spielberg envisioned it. Indiana Jones: mild-mannered professor by day, but leads a double-life as a treasure-seeking adventurer (or "expert on the occult and obtainer of rare antiquities" as they call it in the movie) who beats up bad guys (mostly Nazis). He's a handsome smooth-talking hero with a devilish twinkle in his eyes, wears a fedora hat and carries a bull whip. In the first movie, he goes after the lost Ark of the Covenant. It was part of the idea when Lucas and Spielberg were envisioning Indiana Jones that he would always go after religious artifacts.
It took my breath away; there are so many memorable scenes. No matter how many times I've seen it, I always crack up when Indy shoots the swordsman and when the monkey takes the Nazi salute. Along for the thrill ride was Jones' former flame, the feisty Marion Ravenwood, played to perfection by Karen Allen. Marion was no damsel in distress, she gave as good as she got. In fact, her body count may be almost as high as his. The chemistry between Allen and Ford was fantastic; you could almost see the sparks fly. "I see you haven't forgotten how to show a lady a good time!" she yells at him after her bar is burnt to the ground. Marion set a very high standard for Indy's girlfriends who followed in the next two movies - and no one came even close - but more on that later.
Raiders is a classic and - in many ways - the perfect action adventure movie. I just don't care for the weak ending. It's like they ran out of ideas from the point where they get on the ship. Other than that, it's perfect. It won a few Oscars, and was even nominated for Best Picture that year.
A sequel followed three years later, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom". By that time, I'd outgrown my crush and wasn't interested in seeing it. I finally saw it years later; it's still the weakest of the movies. It's dark. And to make things worse, they replaced Karen Allen with the awful Kate Capshaw (Steven Spielberg's future wife) and set the movie one year before Raiders in 1935. Every time I see it, I want to bash Capshaw's character, nightclub singer Willie Scott. Heck, even Steven Spielberg doesn't like it.
Then in 1989, they released the third movie, "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". The reviews were good, and I dragged my Dad to see Indy once again. It was everything the second movie wasn't. It returned to the formula which made the first one so successful. From the opening sequence you learned a little of Indy's background: how he acquired his fear of snakes and how he learned to use a bullwhip, for example. This time they brought in Sean Connery - the original James Bond - to be Indy's father. It was a stroke of casting genius (even though Harrison Ford thought that it wasn't a good idea since Sean Connery was only thirteen years older than him). The chemistry between them was great. I remember walking out of the theatre thinking I'd been on a rollercoaster ride and I immediately wanted more of the same adrenaline rush. Becuase there is no weak ending, in some ways the third one is my favourite. The dialogue between father and son was razor sharp: "I'm as human as the next man." "I was the next man." The "girlfriend" in this movie, Dr. Elsa Schneider, though an improvement Wille Scott, turned out to be a Nazi turncout. Her greed got the better of her and she got her just desserts in the end.
Speaking of rollercoaster rides, the Indiana Jones ride at Disneyland is a blast. Dad and I went on it three times when we were there in 1996. They even had the rolling stone chase you, which was the climax of the opening sequence in the original Raiders.
So, when it was announced that finally there would be a new movie and that they were bringing back Karen Allen, I was thrilled. I loved her character, Marion Ravenwood. Rumours circulated that Natalie Portman would play Indy and Marion's daughter. My immediate reaction was 'EW!" Not because I don't like Natalie Portman; I do like her. It's the fact that she plays Queen Amidala in Star Wars - the mother of Princess Leia. In other words, she's Han Solo's (Harrison Ford's character) mother-in-law. I was disappointed to hear that Sean Connery wasn't returning. It would have been nice to have a full family reunion. But, in his own words, he was enjoying retirement "too damned much". Selfish Swine :) Eventually, it was announced that Indy and Marion had a son ("Henry") not a daughter.
So, now it comes time to critique the new film (which, of course, we took my Dad to). Set in 1957, nineteen years after the last movie, it starts off in Nevada. It was good to see Indy make some wise-cracks about his age. It was also good to see Marion back. True, she'd lost a *little* of her spunk, but she was still feisty, and she's aged gracefully. Once again, there was good banter between her and Indy. That being said, I would have liked to have seen more. It's part of what made the first movie so great.
There was action; there was adventure; there were wise-cracks; there were creepy-crawlies (this time, ants). In short, there was everything you come to expect from an Indiana Jones movie. It was very good and I really liked it but I can't honestly say that I loved it - and I just can't put my finger on why. I was waiting for that adrenaline rush that I had while watching the third one - and it just didn't happen. There were too many special effects, which the first movies didn't have. Mind you, the sword fight between the young Henry and the villianess, Irina Spalko, (played by Cate Blanchett) was pretty cool. I would also have liked to have seen a catfight between Marion and Irina. Speaking of Cate Blanchett, it was good to see her playing a bad girl. She's best known for playing royalty - real (Queen Elizabeth I) and Hollywood (she won an Oscar for playing Katherine Hepburn in 'The Aviator'). DH didn't even recognize her.
It was good to see Indy and Marion finally reunited. If you knew the characters, you know that Marion is Indy's one true love. I just hope they don't plan to carry on the series with the son. I hope Indy picking up his hat at the end is a sign he's not ready to pass the torch just yet.
Long live Indiana Jones!
I fell in love in with Indiana Jones with the first movie, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in 1981. It wasn't hard; I had a major crush on Harrison Ford at the time (even if he is old enough to be my Dad). I'd also always had a sneaking interest in archaelogy. That summer, I became good friends with the neighbour boy next door. We'd bonded over our mutual love of Star Wars and he told me that he preferred Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones over Han Solo. From that point on, I started nagging my Dad to take me.
After weeks of pestering my Dad, we went to the local theatre and saw it. Dad was expecting some "Star Wars" science fiction type movie, so he was surprised when he saw horses in the jungle. Then, of course, we were told it was "South America - 1936" and things began to make sense. In describing the movie to someone a few days later, Dad said it was basically "James Bond for kids." That's exactly what George Lucas intended when he and director Steven Spielberg envisioned it. Indiana Jones: mild-mannered professor by day, but leads a double-life as a treasure-seeking adventurer (or "expert on the occult and obtainer of rare antiquities" as they call it in the movie) who beats up bad guys (mostly Nazis). He's a handsome smooth-talking hero with a devilish twinkle in his eyes, wears a fedora hat and carries a bull whip. In the first movie, he goes after the lost Ark of the Covenant. It was part of the idea when Lucas and Spielberg were envisioning Indiana Jones that he would always go after religious artifacts.
It took my breath away; there are so many memorable scenes. No matter how many times I've seen it, I always crack up when Indy shoots the swordsman and when the monkey takes the Nazi salute. Along for the thrill ride was Jones' former flame, the feisty Marion Ravenwood, played to perfection by Karen Allen. Marion was no damsel in distress, she gave as good as she got. In fact, her body count may be almost as high as his. The chemistry between Allen and Ford was fantastic; you could almost see the sparks fly. "I see you haven't forgotten how to show a lady a good time!" she yells at him after her bar is burnt to the ground. Marion set a very high standard for Indy's girlfriends who followed in the next two movies - and no one came even close - but more on that later.
Raiders is a classic and - in many ways - the perfect action adventure movie. I just don't care for the weak ending. It's like they ran out of ideas from the point where they get on the ship. Other than that, it's perfect. It won a few Oscars, and was even nominated for Best Picture that year.
A sequel followed three years later, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom". By that time, I'd outgrown my crush and wasn't interested in seeing it. I finally saw it years later; it's still the weakest of the movies. It's dark. And to make things worse, they replaced Karen Allen with the awful Kate Capshaw (Steven Spielberg's future wife) and set the movie one year before Raiders in 1935. Every time I see it, I want to bash Capshaw's character, nightclub singer Willie Scott. Heck, even Steven Spielberg doesn't like it.
Then in 1989, they released the third movie, "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". The reviews were good, and I dragged my Dad to see Indy once again. It was everything the second movie wasn't. It returned to the formula which made the first one so successful. From the opening sequence you learned a little of Indy's background: how he acquired his fear of snakes and how he learned to use a bullwhip, for example. This time they brought in Sean Connery - the original James Bond - to be Indy's father. It was a stroke of casting genius (even though Harrison Ford thought that it wasn't a good idea since Sean Connery was only thirteen years older than him). The chemistry between them was great. I remember walking out of the theatre thinking I'd been on a rollercoaster ride and I immediately wanted more of the same adrenaline rush. Becuase there is no weak ending, in some ways the third one is my favourite. The dialogue between father and son was razor sharp: "I'm as human as the next man." "I was the next man." The "girlfriend" in this movie, Dr. Elsa Schneider, though an improvement Wille Scott, turned out to be a Nazi turncout. Her greed got the better of her and she got her just desserts in the end.
Speaking of rollercoaster rides, the Indiana Jones ride at Disneyland is a blast. Dad and I went on it three times when we were there in 1996. They even had the rolling stone chase you, which was the climax of the opening sequence in the original Raiders.
So, when it was announced that finally there would be a new movie and that they were bringing back Karen Allen, I was thrilled. I loved her character, Marion Ravenwood. Rumours circulated that Natalie Portman would play Indy and Marion's daughter. My immediate reaction was 'EW!" Not because I don't like Natalie Portman; I do like her. It's the fact that she plays Queen Amidala in Star Wars - the mother of Princess Leia. In other words, she's Han Solo's (Harrison Ford's character) mother-in-law. I was disappointed to hear that Sean Connery wasn't returning. It would have been nice to have a full family reunion. But, in his own words, he was enjoying retirement "too damned much". Selfish Swine :) Eventually, it was announced that Indy and Marion had a son ("Henry") not a daughter.
So, now it comes time to critique the new film (which, of course, we took my Dad to). Set in 1957, nineteen years after the last movie, it starts off in Nevada. It was good to see Indy make some wise-cracks about his age. It was also good to see Marion back. True, she'd lost a *little* of her spunk, but she was still feisty, and she's aged gracefully. Once again, there was good banter between her and Indy. That being said, I would have liked to have seen more. It's part of what made the first movie so great.
There was action; there was adventure; there were wise-cracks; there were creepy-crawlies (this time, ants). In short, there was everything you come to expect from an Indiana Jones movie. It was very good and I really liked it but I can't honestly say that I loved it - and I just can't put my finger on why. I was waiting for that adrenaline rush that I had while watching the third one - and it just didn't happen. There were too many special effects, which the first movies didn't have. Mind you, the sword fight between the young Henry and the villianess, Irina Spalko, (played by Cate Blanchett) was pretty cool. I would also have liked to have seen a catfight between Marion and Irina. Speaking of Cate Blanchett, it was good to see her playing a bad girl. She's best known for playing royalty - real (Queen Elizabeth I) and Hollywood (she won an Oscar for playing Katherine Hepburn in 'The Aviator'). DH didn't even recognize her.
It was good to see Indy and Marion finally reunited. If you knew the characters, you know that Marion is Indy's one true love. I just hope they don't plan to carry on the series with the son. I hope Indy picking up his hat at the end is a sign he's not ready to pass the torch just yet.
Long live Indiana Jones!
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Spamalot
We all get them. Spam emails. They drive us crazy, yet some of the titles amuse me. Here are some samples of headlines in actual spam emails I have received lately.
"Am I satisfied with the size of my member?"
Hm. Sorry. Can't help you with that one. Why are you asking me? *scratches head*
"Help me Get out of Debt"
Yeah. Right. I'm in enough hot water in that area myself. Like I'm going to help you.
"You must be the Real Man with Huge Dignity"
Why thank you very much. Mind you, when was the last time you met a man named Heather?
"You Feel up my Senses"
I guess that's a compliment. *shrug*
"We let you be more a man"
Thanks but no thanks. I'm quite happy the way I am - thank you very much
"It is good, when there are experts in what that"
Well, I guess it's obvious there's one thing you're not an expert in: English grammar.
"Be the Most People in Town"
Looks like you and the above spammer need to take the same grammar class.
"They do not want to buy their shops unknown them in stores?"
See above comment.
"Make yourself look really spiny"
And why exactly would I want to do that?
"What is the Church?"
Well, it comes from the Latin eccliesia which simply " a gathering of citizens" or "called out assembly". In other words, no religious context at all. The French word for church is "eglise". Bet you're sorry you asked, aren't you?
"You look stupid in this video heather new. See Yourself."
Damn. How did that video from the office Christmas party get out?
"Am I satisfied with the size of my member?"
Hm. Sorry. Can't help you with that one. Why are you asking me? *scratches head*
"Help me Get out of Debt"
Yeah. Right. I'm in enough hot water in that area myself. Like I'm going to help you.
"You must be the Real Man with Huge Dignity"
Why thank you very much. Mind you, when was the last time you met a man named Heather?
"You Feel up my Senses"
I guess that's a compliment. *shrug*
"We let you be more a man"
Thanks but no thanks. I'm quite happy the way I am - thank you very much
"It is good, when there are experts in what that"
Well, I guess it's obvious there's one thing you're not an expert in: English grammar.
"Be the Most People in Town"
Looks like you and the above spammer need to take the same grammar class.
"They do not want to buy their shops unknown them in stores?"
See above comment.
"Make yourself look really spiny"
And why exactly would I want to do that?
"What is the Church?"
Well, it comes from the Latin eccliesia which simply " a gathering of citizens" or "called out assembly". In other words, no religious context at all. The French word for church is "eglise". Bet you're sorry you asked, aren't you?
"You look stupid in this video heather new. See Yourself."
Damn. How did that video from the office Christmas party get out?
Friday, April 4, 2008
RIP Vancouver Canucks
For the second time in three years, the Vancouver Canucks have failed to make the NHL Playoffs. Now the post-mortem ritual of fingerpointing begins. Who gets the blame?
Now, before I begin my rant, I'm going to give you a little background. I grew up on hockey. I grew up watching the Montreal Canadiens during their glory years in the 1970's. To this day, they are my second favourite team. I became a Canucks' fan in approximately 1977; this was during the years that it seemed the only teams they could beat were the Colorado Rockies (now New Jersey Devils) and the Chicago Blackhawks.
For me, the problem seems to lie with management/ownership. After years of mediocrity, the Canucks had coach and GM Pat Quinn in the late 80's/early 90's. He pulled some amazing deals as General Manager. He brought Greg Adams and goalie Kirk McLean in. He gambled on Pavel Bure's draft eligibilty and drafted him. It was a gamble that paid off; after months of legal wranglings, it was determined that Bure was indeed eligible for the NHL draft and Vancouver landed its first legitimate superstar. He was nicknamed the "Russian Rocket". That was just one of Quinn's magic deals.
Then there was the Cliff Ronning/Geoff Courtnall deal that was one of the biggest deals in NHL at the time. It was a ten player deal that brought local boys, Cliff Ronning(Burnaby)and Geoff Courtnall(Victoria), home from St. Louis. They became cornerstones of the team. It was one of Pat Quinn's best ever deals.
Team owner Arthur Griffiths was a "hands off" owner. He gave Quinn free reign to work his magic - and it worked. The Canucks went from a joke to a legitimate contender. In 1992, they won their first playoff round in ten years. In 1993, they repeated that feat, but went out too early in the second round to the Los Angeles Kings.
Then came 1994...
Quinn pulled another amazing trading deadline deal, bringing Jeff Brown and Brett Hedican from the St. Louis Blues. Then came the playoffs: the Canucks were down three games to one in the first round vs. Calgary. They fought back and won games five and six. Game seven was in Calgary. The Canucks were down by a goal with minutes remaining in the game. It looked like their season was over until Greg Adams (another BC boy) tied the game and sent it into overtime. Then, captain Trevor Linden fed the puck to Pavel Bure, who sped down the ice and scored. It was heady.
Next round was Dallas, whom the Canucks dispatched in five games. For the first time in twelve years, the Canucks were in the final four. Next up was the Toronto Maple Leafs. Greg Adams scored the series winner in double overtime in game five, eliminating the Leafs. The city went wild.
Now came the big boys: the New York Rangers. Kirk McLean was amazing in game one, stopping 54 shots. Greg Adams, once again, scored the game winner. The Rangers roared back in games three, four and five. The dream seemed dead - but not yet. The Canucks clawed back to force game seven. Sadly, the only forward that showed up that game was Trevor Linden, who scored the Canucks two goals. The Canucks lost. The Canucks maintained that it was fixed; that Rangers coach, Mike Keenan, phoned NHL Gary Bettman after the Rangers lost game six in Vancouver and screamed about the reffing. It's no coincidence to me that the first two penalties in game seven went against Vancouver, giving the Rangers the advantage, but I'm not going to delve too much into conspiracy theories here.
It was an amazing run, but after that, things went downhill. The first was the lockout. After such an amazing season, it was a slap in the fact to fans. In the abreviated season, the Canucks managed to make the playoffs and win the first round against St. Louis. They were swept the next round by Chicago.
From here on, things got worse. Team onwership changed. Arthur Griffiths brought in family friend, John McCaw, of Seattle. Hindsight says it was a huge mistake. McCaw, who made his billions in the cell phone industry, started interfering; eventually Arthur Griffiths was out completely. Pat Quinn was no longer able to make his amazing deals. For whatever reason, they brought in Mark Messier. I remember thinking at the time that this was a very bad move. As a Canucks fan, I couldn't possibly cheer for this person who robbed us of something from us only three years earlier. (To this day, I've never been able to watch Mark Messier hoist the cup after defeating the Canucks in game seven; it's too painful). The money would have been better spent on Joe Sakic, another local boy, who was a free agent at the time, and would have come a lot cheaper and would have put people in the stands.
Two years later, in the fall of 1997, Pat Quinn was fired. To add insult to injury, ownership brought in Mike Keenan as general manager. That was the day I gave up on the team. I couldn't possibly cheer for them now. The very idea was repulsive. He dismantled the team. Eventually, Keenan was fired (thank goodness) and Messier was gone. Hurrah.
By early 1999, the Canucks replaced Keenan with coach Marc Crawford. I was very happy. Crawford was a former Canuck himself, and had won a Stanley Cup with Colorado in 1996. They brought in a new gm in Brian Burke, who had been assistant gm under Pat Quinn. Burke was a worthy successor and pulled a couple of decent deals. He brought back Trevor Linden, who had been traded away under Keenan, and pulled a deal to land the Sedin twins. Then, ownership decided not to renew Burke's contract as gm. There was another lockout, but this time there was no NHL season.
Last year, the Canucks beat Dallas in the first round of the playoffs, but were bounced by the Anaheim Ducks, who eventually won the cup. This year, the Canucks have stumbled all season. It was only in the last two weeks that things collapsed. With the season on the line, they kept shooting themselves in the skates. They would blow leads of 2-0 to division rivals, ensuring the rapid fall out of the standings. Frankly, if you can't hold a two goal lead this late in the season when you are supposed to be fighing for your playoff lives, you don't deserve to make the playoffs. This happened against Calgary (losing 3-2) and Colorado (losing 4-2). All they had to do was hold those leads, and they would still be in contention. Sadly, something was lacking. Call it leadership, talent, dedication, passion, but something is sorely lacking in this team - and changes have to be made.
Rumours persist that Trevor Linden will announce his retirement after this season. That's a real shame. He deserved to go out better than this; he deserved to end his career with pride. He may not have worn the "C" for years, but he was in all but name, their captain.
I guess I'm off to cheer for Les Habs now. Go, Habs, Go.
Now, before I begin my rant, I'm going to give you a little background. I grew up on hockey. I grew up watching the Montreal Canadiens during their glory years in the 1970's. To this day, they are my second favourite team. I became a Canucks' fan in approximately 1977; this was during the years that it seemed the only teams they could beat were the Colorado Rockies (now New Jersey Devils) and the Chicago Blackhawks.
For me, the problem seems to lie with management/ownership. After years of mediocrity, the Canucks had coach and GM Pat Quinn in the late 80's/early 90's. He pulled some amazing deals as General Manager. He brought Greg Adams and goalie Kirk McLean in. He gambled on Pavel Bure's draft eligibilty and drafted him. It was a gamble that paid off; after months of legal wranglings, it was determined that Bure was indeed eligible for the NHL draft and Vancouver landed its first legitimate superstar. He was nicknamed the "Russian Rocket". That was just one of Quinn's magic deals.
Then there was the Cliff Ronning/Geoff Courtnall deal that was one of the biggest deals in NHL at the time. It was a ten player deal that brought local boys, Cliff Ronning(Burnaby)and Geoff Courtnall(Victoria), home from St. Louis. They became cornerstones of the team. It was one of Pat Quinn's best ever deals.
Team owner Arthur Griffiths was a "hands off" owner. He gave Quinn free reign to work his magic - and it worked. The Canucks went from a joke to a legitimate contender. In 1992, they won their first playoff round in ten years. In 1993, they repeated that feat, but went out too early in the second round to the Los Angeles Kings.
Then came 1994...
Quinn pulled another amazing trading deadline deal, bringing Jeff Brown and Brett Hedican from the St. Louis Blues. Then came the playoffs: the Canucks were down three games to one in the first round vs. Calgary. They fought back and won games five and six. Game seven was in Calgary. The Canucks were down by a goal with minutes remaining in the game. It looked like their season was over until Greg Adams (another BC boy) tied the game and sent it into overtime. Then, captain Trevor Linden fed the puck to Pavel Bure, who sped down the ice and scored. It was heady.
Next round was Dallas, whom the Canucks dispatched in five games. For the first time in twelve years, the Canucks were in the final four. Next up was the Toronto Maple Leafs. Greg Adams scored the series winner in double overtime in game five, eliminating the Leafs. The city went wild.
Now came the big boys: the New York Rangers. Kirk McLean was amazing in game one, stopping 54 shots. Greg Adams, once again, scored the game winner. The Rangers roared back in games three, four and five. The dream seemed dead - but not yet. The Canucks clawed back to force game seven. Sadly, the only forward that showed up that game was Trevor Linden, who scored the Canucks two goals. The Canucks lost. The Canucks maintained that it was fixed; that Rangers coach, Mike Keenan, phoned NHL Gary Bettman after the Rangers lost game six in Vancouver and screamed about the reffing. It's no coincidence to me that the first two penalties in game seven went against Vancouver, giving the Rangers the advantage, but I'm not going to delve too much into conspiracy theories here.
It was an amazing run, but after that, things went downhill. The first was the lockout. After such an amazing season, it was a slap in the fact to fans. In the abreviated season, the Canucks managed to make the playoffs and win the first round against St. Louis. They were swept the next round by Chicago.
From here on, things got worse. Team onwership changed. Arthur Griffiths brought in family friend, John McCaw, of Seattle. Hindsight says it was a huge mistake. McCaw, who made his billions in the cell phone industry, started interfering; eventually Arthur Griffiths was out completely. Pat Quinn was no longer able to make his amazing deals. For whatever reason, they brought in Mark Messier. I remember thinking at the time that this was a very bad move. As a Canucks fan, I couldn't possibly cheer for this person who robbed us of something from us only three years earlier. (To this day, I've never been able to watch Mark Messier hoist the cup after defeating the Canucks in game seven; it's too painful). The money would have been better spent on Joe Sakic, another local boy, who was a free agent at the time, and would have come a lot cheaper and would have put people in the stands.
Two years later, in the fall of 1997, Pat Quinn was fired. To add insult to injury, ownership brought in Mike Keenan as general manager. That was the day I gave up on the team. I couldn't possibly cheer for them now. The very idea was repulsive. He dismantled the team. Eventually, Keenan was fired (thank goodness) and Messier was gone. Hurrah.
By early 1999, the Canucks replaced Keenan with coach Marc Crawford. I was very happy. Crawford was a former Canuck himself, and had won a Stanley Cup with Colorado in 1996. They brought in a new gm in Brian Burke, who had been assistant gm under Pat Quinn. Burke was a worthy successor and pulled a couple of decent deals. He brought back Trevor Linden, who had been traded away under Keenan, and pulled a deal to land the Sedin twins. Then, ownership decided not to renew Burke's contract as gm. There was another lockout, but this time there was no NHL season.
Last year, the Canucks beat Dallas in the first round of the playoffs, but were bounced by the Anaheim Ducks, who eventually won the cup. This year, the Canucks have stumbled all season. It was only in the last two weeks that things collapsed. With the season on the line, they kept shooting themselves in the skates. They would blow leads of 2-0 to division rivals, ensuring the rapid fall out of the standings. Frankly, if you can't hold a two goal lead this late in the season when you are supposed to be fighing for your playoff lives, you don't deserve to make the playoffs. This happened against Calgary (losing 3-2) and Colorado (losing 4-2). All they had to do was hold those leads, and they would still be in contention. Sadly, something was lacking. Call it leadership, talent, dedication, passion, but something is sorely lacking in this team - and changes have to be made.
Rumours persist that Trevor Linden will announce his retirement after this season. That's a real shame. He deserved to go out better than this; he deserved to end his career with pride. He may not have worn the "C" for years, but he was in all but name, their captain.
I guess I'm off to cheer for Les Habs now. Go, Habs, Go.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Auntie Peggy
Fifteen years ago today, my world was rocked. Fifteen years ago today, the only grandmother figure I ever really knew passed away. I called her "Auntie" Peggy. Her parents were neighbours of my (maternal) grandparents in my ancestral home town in Scotland.
When my parents immigrated to Canada, it was Auntie Peggy and Uncle Ben they stayed with until they found a place of their own. We lived only a five minute walk from them and we were constantly in each other's homes. They were at our house for Christmas dinner every year and they seemed to see it as their duty to spoil me - as they didn't grandchildren yet and their kids were grown. In 1977, I was flowergirl in their son's wedding. When my Mom took sick in 1978 and was in hospital for weeks, it was Uncle Ben who was always there to pick me up from school every day and take me back to their place where they would have dinner for Dad and me. Uncle Ben lost his battle with cancer in 1989.
Everyone needs an Auntie Peggy in their lives. I remember once going to visit her one evening after a breakup with a beau and she said, "What's wrong wi' ya, lass? I dinna lak to see ya lak that." Sometimes I wonder what I would give to hear her say those words again. She had a great sense of humour. It was priceless to watch hockey with her. She literally nagged the Canucks on. She would say things like, "Ach, you're useless. Get off the ice." and wave her hand dismissively at the t.v. Just a few months before she died, some pianists came to visit our church. She leaned over to me and whispered, "What's wrong wi' us? Why can't we play lak that? We have ten fingers, don't we?" I had to stifle the giggles.
She went quickly and unexpectedly. She had a heart attack on April 1st and was gone by the next morning. She didn't even give us a chance to say good-bye. Perhaps that's best, as I will always remember her the way she would have wanted: vibrant, warm, funny and full of life.
The next night, a Saturday, I was at a Michael W. Smith concert with a friend. If you know him, his signature song is "Friends" a song that became an anthem to a generation of Christian young people. As he sang it, tears streamed down my face. To this day, I always associate the song with her - even though she probably never, ever heard it.
I've got it softly playing in the background as I type this post, and I can feel tears trickle down. I give you "Friends" words and music by Michael W. Smith and Deborah D. Smith.
Rest in peace, Auntie Peggy. I still miss you
When my parents immigrated to Canada, it was Auntie Peggy and Uncle Ben they stayed with until they found a place of their own. We lived only a five minute walk from them and we were constantly in each other's homes. They were at our house for Christmas dinner every year and they seemed to see it as their duty to spoil me - as they didn't grandchildren yet and their kids were grown. In 1977, I was flowergirl in their son's wedding. When my Mom took sick in 1978 and was in hospital for weeks, it was Uncle Ben who was always there to pick me up from school every day and take me back to their place where they would have dinner for Dad and me. Uncle Ben lost his battle with cancer in 1989.
Everyone needs an Auntie Peggy in their lives. I remember once going to visit her one evening after a breakup with a beau and she said, "What's wrong wi' ya, lass? I dinna lak to see ya lak that." Sometimes I wonder what I would give to hear her say those words again. She had a great sense of humour. It was priceless to watch hockey with her. She literally nagged the Canucks on. She would say things like, "Ach, you're useless. Get off the ice." and wave her hand dismissively at the t.v. Just a few months before she died, some pianists came to visit our church. She leaned over to me and whispered, "What's wrong wi' us? Why can't we play lak that? We have ten fingers, don't we?" I had to stifle the giggles.
She went quickly and unexpectedly. She had a heart attack on April 1st and was gone by the next morning. She didn't even give us a chance to say good-bye. Perhaps that's best, as I will always remember her the way she would have wanted: vibrant, warm, funny and full of life.
The next night, a Saturday, I was at a Michael W. Smith concert with a friend. If you know him, his signature song is "Friends" a song that became an anthem to a generation of Christian young people. As he sang it, tears streamed down my face. To this day, I always associate the song with her - even though she probably never, ever heard it.
I've got it softly playing in the background as I type this post, and I can feel tears trickle down. I give you "Friends" words and music by Michael W. Smith and Deborah D. Smith.
Packing up the dreams God planted in the fertile soil of you
Can't believe the hopes He's grantedmeans a chapter in your life is through
But we'll keep you close as always;it won't even seem you've gone
'cause our hearts in big and small wayswill keep the love that keeps us strong.
Chorus:
And friends are friends foreverif the Lord's the lord of them
And a friend will not say never'cause the welcome will not end
Though it's hard to let you go,in the Father's hands we know
That a lifetime's not too long to live as friends.
With the faith and love God's givenspringing from the hope we know
We will pray the joy you live in is the strength that now you show
But we'll keep you close as always;it won't even seem you've gone
'cause our hearts in big and small ways will keep the love that keeps us strong
Chorus:
(twice)
And friends are friends foreverif the Lord's the lord of them
And a friend will not say never'cause the welcome will not end
Though it's hard to let you goin the Father's hands we know
That a lifetime's not too long to live as friends
And friends are friends foreverif the Lord's the lord of them
And a friend will not say never'cause the welcome will not endin the Father's hands we know
Though it's hard to let you go
That a lifetime's not too long to live as friends
No, a lifetime's not too long to live as friends.
Rest in peace, Auntie Peggy. I still miss you
Sunday, March 16, 2008
41
Today is my birthday. I'm 41 today. Somehow, it doesn't seem possible. That seems like a fair amount of time to have been alive on this planet. Sadly, the older one gets, the faster time seems to fly. Can it really be 20 years since I turned 21?! Can it really be 11 years since I turned 30? No. It can't be. Yet the calendar doesn't lie.
I don't mind birthdays, but I don't like getting older. True, people are living longer, but at 41, I am forced to admit that I've left my youth behind me forever and have to accept the fact that I'm middle-aged. Ick. I don't like that idea.
It's weird knowing that the "kids" in their 20's weren't even born when Star Wars came out in 1977 - almost 31 years ago. It's funny knowing that there's a generation that never didn't know that Darth Vader was Luke's father until the sequel, "The Empire Strikes Back" came out in 1980. It's weird knowing there's a generation that doesn't know a life before MTV and how big Michael Jackson's "Thriller" was in 1983.
It's weird looking back at tv footage of the 70's and 80's and saying, "Hey! I remember that!" I guess our parents felt the same when we were growing up. For example, they remember the Kennedy assasination in 1963; they remember the Queen's coronation in 1953. Those were events that happened before I was born. They must have shaken their heads and smile the same way I do today. I think that's why I like watching "That 70's Show" a retro look back at life in the '70's. Though, I would be younger than the teenage characters in that show (it would be perfect if one of them had a younger sibling) I do remember the fashions and the attitudes and the gadgets around the house of that time.
So, there you have it. The musings of a middle-aged (ouch, that hurts) woman on her birthday. I'm off to enjoy the rest of the day.
I don't mind birthdays, but I don't like getting older. True, people are living longer, but at 41, I am forced to admit that I've left my youth behind me forever and have to accept the fact that I'm middle-aged. Ick. I don't like that idea.
It's weird knowing that the "kids" in their 20's weren't even born when Star Wars came out in 1977 - almost 31 years ago. It's funny knowing that there's a generation that never didn't know that Darth Vader was Luke's father until the sequel, "The Empire Strikes Back" came out in 1980. It's weird knowing there's a generation that doesn't know a life before MTV and how big Michael Jackson's "Thriller" was in 1983.
It's weird looking back at tv footage of the 70's and 80's and saying, "Hey! I remember that!" I guess our parents felt the same when we were growing up. For example, they remember the Kennedy assasination in 1963; they remember the Queen's coronation in 1953. Those were events that happened before I was born. They must have shaken their heads and smile the same way I do today. I think that's why I like watching "That 70's Show" a retro look back at life in the '70's. Though, I would be younger than the teenage characters in that show (it would be perfect if one of them had a younger sibling) I do remember the fashions and the attitudes and the gadgets around the house of that time.
So, there you have it. The musings of a middle-aged (ouch, that hurts) woman on her birthday. I'm off to enjoy the rest of the day.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
It's Oscar Night in Hollywood
I'll admit it: I love movies. DH and I watch at least one movie a week. We routinely watch the Oscars every year. We don't make a big deal of it, but we do watch. (I can only think of one year where we missed them).
Why do we watch? Because we love film. It's nice to see the gowns that ladies wear. It also can be hilarious to hear the acceptance speeches. It's also a good way to find out what Hollywood considers to be "the best" and to add it to the list for movies to see. We've seen a few of the nominated movies. That being said, we haven't seen any of the best picture nominees yet. They're on the list for when they are released on dvd.
Here are my predictions for the major categories:
Best Picture: - "No Country for Old Men";
Best Actress: Julie Christie -"Away from Her";
Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis- "There will be Blood";
Best Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett - "I'm Not There";
Best Supporting Actor: Casey Affleck - "The Assassination of Jesse James";
Best Director: The Coen brothers - "No Country for Old Men".
I'll check in later with a report on the ceremony and to see how close I was in my predictions.
Edited later to add:
Well, if you watched the Oscars, you will see that I went 3/6 in my predictions. Overall, I was 10/24. I *should* have gone with Javier Bardem for Best Supporting Actor, as that's what those in the know in Hollywood were saying. Mind you, those same people were saying that Julie Christie was a sure thing for best actress. That, to me, was the biggest surprise of the evening. I was also suprised at Tilda Swinton's win in the Best Supporting Actress category. I'm not a fan of hers. She was miscast as the White Witch in "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe." Swinton has my vote for the worst dressed at the ceremony.
As for best dressed, the ones that stood out to me were: Katherine Heigl, Helen Mirren, Nicole Kidman, Amy Adams, and Julie Christie (who would have been absolutely perfect if she had accessorized with different gloves and shoes).
Overall, I enjoyed the show. I liked Jon Stewart. He was obviously more comfortable hosting this time around than he was two years ago.
Why do we watch? Because we love film. It's nice to see the gowns that ladies wear. It also can be hilarious to hear the acceptance speeches. It's also a good way to find out what Hollywood considers to be "the best" and to add it to the list for movies to see. We've seen a few of the nominated movies. That being said, we haven't seen any of the best picture nominees yet. They're on the list for when they are released on dvd.
Here are my predictions for the major categories:
Best Picture: - "No Country for Old Men";
Best Actress: Julie Christie -"Away from Her";
Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis- "There will be Blood";
Best Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett - "I'm Not There";
Best Supporting Actor: Casey Affleck - "The Assassination of Jesse James";
Best Director: The Coen brothers - "No Country for Old Men".
I'll check in later with a report on the ceremony and to see how close I was in my predictions.
Edited later to add:
Well, if you watched the Oscars, you will see that I went 3/6 in my predictions. Overall, I was 10/24. I *should* have gone with Javier Bardem for Best Supporting Actor, as that's what those in the know in Hollywood were saying. Mind you, those same people were saying that Julie Christie was a sure thing for best actress. That, to me, was the biggest surprise of the evening. I was also suprised at Tilda Swinton's win in the Best Supporting Actress category. I'm not a fan of hers. She was miscast as the White Witch in "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe." Swinton has my vote for the worst dressed at the ceremony.
As for best dressed, the ones that stood out to me were: Katherine Heigl, Helen Mirren, Nicole Kidman, Amy Adams, and Julie Christie (who would have been absolutely perfect if she had accessorized with different gloves and shoes).
Overall, I enjoyed the show. I liked Jon Stewart. He was obviously more comfortable hosting this time around than he was two years ago.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Heath Ledger 1979 - 2008
I came back to the office after lunch the other day and was shocked when my co-worker showed me headlines showing that actor Heath Ledger was dead at 28. It appears that it may have been an accidental overdose of prescription sleeping pills.
Let me start off by saying that I wouldn't consider myself a fan of his. I know some of his movies. I liked "The Brothers Grimm" and "A Knight's Tale." I have yet to see "Brokeback Mountain", for which he received his only Oscar nomination. (I'll get around to it one of these days). My immediate thoughts were for his little daughter, Matilda, who will grow up without her father, (and probably will never remember him) and her mom, Michelle Williams, who is apparently "devasted". (The couple split up a few months ago).
I was disgusted to read the following article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22813570/. Some Church plans to protest his funeral, due to his involvement in "Brokeback Mountain". (If you don't know the premise it's about two cowboys who have a long lasting relationship. In other words, it's a gay love story).
To the people who would do such things, I say, "Shame on you!" Are you so blind to see that this young man who died far too young left behind parents, a (former) fiancée and a little girl? Why are you adding to their grief and stress? Leave them alone. If you consider yourself Christians, ask yourself, "What would Jesus do?" Would he be protesting a funeral, or would he be reaching out to heal this grieving family's wounds? I seriously do not understand how anyone could be that uncaring and unfeeling, especially people who claim to be following Jesus's example of healing and compassion. I really dislike people who kick other people when they are already hurting and I don't think Jesus would approve, either.
Would these same people have protested Marlon Brando's funeral? After all, Marlon Brando played Don Corleone, the Godfather, a man who was a career murderer. Will they protest at Ang Lee's funeral, the director? He also made "Sense and Sensibility" with Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet (two of Britain's finest actresses). Will they be tainted by association, two ladies that are destined for Damehood? Will they protest Philip Seymour Hoffman's funeral who won an Oscar for his portayal of Truman Capote, who was gay? (Ironically, he won the year Heath was nominated). Where does it end? It's just ridiculous. Such publicity-seeking self-aggrandizement at a funeral is disgusting and reprehensible, according to ANY moral code.
Wake up, people. It was a role, a job. Nothing more, nothing less. That's what art is supposed to do. Make people think, and challenge them. Perhaps, in protest, I'm going to watch this movie this weekend and I'm looking forward to it.
Rest in Peace, Heath.
Let me start off by saying that I wouldn't consider myself a fan of his. I know some of his movies. I liked "The Brothers Grimm" and "A Knight's Tale." I have yet to see "Brokeback Mountain", for which he received his only Oscar nomination. (I'll get around to it one of these days). My immediate thoughts were for his little daughter, Matilda, who will grow up without her father, (and probably will never remember him) and her mom, Michelle Williams, who is apparently "devasted". (The couple split up a few months ago).
I was disgusted to read the following article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22813570/. Some Church plans to protest his funeral, due to his involvement in "Brokeback Mountain". (If you don't know the premise it's about two cowboys who have a long lasting relationship. In other words, it's a gay love story).
To the people who would do such things, I say, "Shame on you!" Are you so blind to see that this young man who died far too young left behind parents, a (former) fiancée and a little girl? Why are you adding to their grief and stress? Leave them alone. If you consider yourself Christians, ask yourself, "What would Jesus do?" Would he be protesting a funeral, or would he be reaching out to heal this grieving family's wounds? I seriously do not understand how anyone could be that uncaring and unfeeling, especially people who claim to be following Jesus's example of healing and compassion. I really dislike people who kick other people when they are already hurting and I don't think Jesus would approve, either.
Would these same people have protested Marlon Brando's funeral? After all, Marlon Brando played Don Corleone, the Godfather, a man who was a career murderer. Will they protest at Ang Lee's funeral, the director? He also made "Sense and Sensibility" with Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet (two of Britain's finest actresses). Will they be tainted by association, two ladies that are destined for Damehood? Will they protest Philip Seymour Hoffman's funeral who won an Oscar for his portayal of Truman Capote, who was gay? (Ironically, he won the year Heath was nominated). Where does it end? It's just ridiculous. Such publicity-seeking self-aggrandizement at a funeral is disgusting and reprehensible, according to ANY moral code.
Wake up, people. It was a role, a job. Nothing more, nothing less. That's what art is supposed to do. Make people think, and challenge them. Perhaps, in protest, I'm going to watch this movie this weekend and I'm looking forward to it.
Rest in Peace, Heath.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Happy New Year
Okay, okay. We're almost two weeks into 2008, but since it's my first blog post of the year, I thought I would start off by saying "Happy New Year". I generally don't make New Year's Resolutions. I find they get broken all too quickly. One thing I did tell myself was that I would try to take more time to post in my blog.
Here's wishing everyone a good 2008.
Here's wishing everyone a good 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)