Ol’ Blue Eyes, Indeed!!!!

Fact:  87.5% of all statistics are made up (just so you know).

Fact:  Most people in the world (95%) have brown eyes.

Fact:  Most of the actors you see close-ups of in movies (95%) have blue eyes, even if they are supposed to be Arab, African, or Asian.

Question:  What’s up with this??

Answer:  Hollywood (and everyone else) seems to have an unspoken but obvious standard of beauty.

LOL:  "With a curvaceous figure that Venus would have envied, a tanned, unblemished oval face framed with lustrous thick light brown hair, deep-blue eyes fringed with long black lashes, perfect teeth, and a small straight nose, she had a beauty that defied description."   Hunh?

So I guess blue eyes are part of an unspoken standard of beauty??  Is beauty an idealized form of the characteristics of the general population… something everyone can relate to?  I don’t think so…  Do blue eyes show something other eyes don’t?  Or is it that unusual eyes are interesting and beautiful?  And what happens when the usual becomes unusual?  Or vice-versa…?????

Beauty

 

Is beauty culturally determined??  To some extent, for sure.  For example, Leslie Caron was considered a great beauty, but to me she looked exactly like a Frog, especially when she smiled.  (Oh, boy!  I can’t believe I said that out loud…  Me is gonna hafta get some Freedom Fries to compensate…)   But cultural relativism means that impressions of beauty are solely acquired over many years of socialization.

In reality, there is a growing body of evidence that infants are happier with more attractive caregivers than they are with those who have unattractive qualities.  This is true with infants as young as one or two months.  And it’s not attributable to scent, or whatever.  In one study of one-year-olds, caregivers wearing attractive/unattractive masks produced the same result:  the more attractive masks elicited a favorable response; the less attractive ones, crying.   These findings are consistent with the personal experiences and observations of many parents of small children, who find that their children are much better behaved when their babysitters are physically attractive than when they are not.   So, babies are born with an eye for beauty. Infants only hours old will choose to stare at an attractive face rather than an unattractive one - and they also prefer to listen to Vivaldi straight, rather than Vivaldi backwards.

So there is some innate cross-cultural biologically ingrained preference for  beauty.  Or maybe it comes from prenatal exposure.

But what is attractive?  Features that seem to represent physically attractive faces are symmetry, average appearance, and secondary sexual characteristics. So, a stereotypical human face?  Also, attractive people seem healthier with greater physical fitness, and prove to live longer.  Good news for millions:  average is pretty.  The downer: you must be physically fit.

I will stick with facial features…  I refuse to get into waist-hip ratios, and all that.

Wait…  What about blue eyes?

The ideal of female beauty seems to be blonde hair and blue eyes. Women have been dying their  fair hair blonde as far back as the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. This means that women were dying their hair blonde long before peroxide was even discovered. Why is blonde hair seen as attractive?  It seems then that men have innate psychological mechanisms that predispose them to prefer women with blonde hair. Ideas seem to be shaped and then hard-wired, making it no coincidence that men (gentle or not) prefer blondes.

The ideal image of beauty whether socialized or innately acquired does impact how society reacts to us as humans, and how we perceive these reactions as well.  For most people, concepts of the body and beauty come to the fore in early adolescence. By the end of teenage years, these notions have developed into a self-image, right along with all of the stereotypes.

Apart from innate influences, preference for blue eyes seems to be accepted as an ideal in the west. Blue eyes are not just considered to be attractive for women but for men as well.  Going by Hollywood movies, that is totally the case.  Or is it??

As I said, 95% of movie stars seem to be blue-eyed…  and if you look closely, this was also true before color filming became preponderant.

However, brown eyes are considered dominant.  So perhaps relatively colorless eyes lend themselves more to character development by other means.  And certainly excitement in those eyes (as evidenced in pupil dilation) is easier to observe…  assuming actors are able to produce the appropriate physiological effects on call.

Whence Blue Eyes?

 

A Danish researcher theorizes that all blue-eyed people have a common ancestor (prolly a Dane :=P) who, about 10,000 years ago, began to spread a mutant gene throughout Europe and the Middle East.  This resulted in what I like to call the European “Blue-Belt.” 

Why Blue Eyes? 

The Czechs did a study, and the Czech Republic is “sort of” in the Blue Belt…  maybe the second string Blue Belt…  not that they aren’t as pretty as anyone else :=P

Brown-eyed men were ranked as more dominant than blue eyed men by both men and women. And the same men were rated as most dominant even when they got blue eyes courtesy of Photoshop.  The blue-eyed guys, however, were still ranked lower in dominance, even after receiving their brown eye makeovers. So there was more than eye-color involved in the male rankings.  The female rankings, on the other hand, showed no difference on the basis of eye color.

One theory is that something in the facial structure of brown-eyed men makes them appear more dominant.  In general, the brown-eyed men in the above study had wider jaws and bigger noses than the blue-eyed men.

Another possible explanation is that brown-eyed men may actually have higher testosterone levels. This is gene-related, as of course, is appearance itself, but social factors could also impact appearance.  Blue-eyed boys are more inhibited as preschoolers, although they quickly overcome this social deficit.  Conceivably, early social standing could alter hormonal balance, which could alter face shape.

Several studies have shown that women prefer to mate with high-dominance males, but they prefer low-dominance males as life partners.  Hmmm….  Maybe Czech ladies just like Turks as lovers…

No, not just Czechs.    Men often seek women with blue eyes, but women often do not (seek  blue-eyed men that is, or women vs. men, or whatever).  Not only do women have different selection criteria (social status, wealth, and, of course, testosterone), blue-eyed men also tend to look more feminine.   This means that men will often select for blue eyes and women will often select against them, not because they find blue eyes unattractive, but because blue-eyed men tend to look boyish and gender-ambiguous.  Or because the brown eyed guy is richer.

So why the Hollywood propensity for blue eyes in males as well as females?  Bright, colorful, unusual, and exotic eye colors are always considered intriguing (or scary, LOL). Once common in the boy and girl next door, blue eyes have become increasingly rare among Americans. Immigration patterns, intermarriage, and genetics have all played a part in the steady reduction of their numbers. While the drop-off has been a century in the making, the decline in the past few decades has taken place at a remarkable rate.

About half of Americans born circa 1900 had blue eyes.   By the 1950s that proportion had dropped to a third.  Today only about one 1 of every 6 Americans has blue eyes.  Much of this change has to do with changes in marriage patterns.

One hundred years ago - because of language, ethnocentricity, religion - 80 percent of people married within their ethnic groups. Blue eyes -- a genetically recessive trait -- were nevertheless consistently inherited, especially among people of English, Irish, and Northern European ancestry.

By mid-century, one’s education and prospects became the primary factors in obtaining a spouse.  We all know how many 1950s coeds went to college seeking their MRS.  As intermarriage among ethnic groups became the norm, blue eyes began to disappear, replaced by the more prevalent brown.

The influx of nonwhites into the United States, especially from Latin America and Asia, accelerated the disappearance of blue. Between 1900 and 1950, only about 1 in 10 Americans was nonwhite. Today that ratio is more like 1 in 3.

However, the preferences for fair skin and blue eyes stretch back in Europe to at least the Middle Ages.  For women in particular, especially those of European descent, fair skin and light eyes have long been seen as a measure of fertility and beauty.  We need only check out Renaissance, and earlier, paintings to verify this assertion.  (Or check out Jesus’ mom at your nearest Catholic Church.)

America adopted these European biases as immigrants poured in, and Hollywood reinforced them by providing endless blue-eyed blondes as national (and international) sex symbols.

Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to an ideal.  In the 1930s, eugenicists used the apparent disappearance of blue eyes as a rallying cry to support immigration restrictions in the United States.  But oddly the eugenicists themselves rarely conformed to the ideal.    On the world stage, Hitler himself didn’t have blue eyes.  Nor did Mussolini.  Or Tojo.  :=P

Nevertheless, Americans were consumed with the blue-eyed, fair-haired ideal.  In the '70s and '80s most fashion models were typically Scandinavian. But in the past decade those standards have begun to change.  People now, as then, want a look they can relate to, and trend-makers  have noticed. The look today favors honey-colored skin, brown hair, and green or brown eyes, and the most successful models seem to be coming from Brazil.  (I heard Angelina Jolie used brown contacts in a recent film.)

But even as blue eyes give way to brown, lighter eyes will maintain a certain allure. When people see something pleasurable, their eyes dilate. Dilated pupils signal happiness and are, in turn, considered attractive.  Since they are easier to see in lighter eyes, especially on film, they have a natural appeal.  Once again, this all goes back to acting ability.  (I’m talking to YOU, Frank.)

Second Life Eyes

Of course things are somewhat different in SL. Not only can SL residents alter their physical traits at will, we also have a lot more eye colors to choose from. "Exotic and unusual" takes on a whole new meaning in this environment.  The most important thing is to look different than any other woman in the room. 

But how different can you be and still be desirable in a normal sense.  This takes skill.

Anyway, blue is less common than brown.  What are the Real Life eye possibilities????

Black - Intuitive, sensual, and secretive.

Blue -  Direct and vital with a gift for insight (possibly psychic), and observation.

Brown -  Earth-energized, creative, simple, humble, with strength, endurance, and fertility.

Gray -  Connotations of water, weather, changeability, mysticism, and wisdom.

Green  -.  Connotations of life-force, vegetation, rejuvenation, youthfulness, and health.
 Hazel -  Hazel is an exciting combination of the inner strength and independence of brown, the compassion and healing qualities of green, the fluidity and sensitivity of gray, and the intense vitality of blue. 

Violet - An exquisite and sophisticated color that has connotations of spirituality, nobility, psychic energy, and purity.

Colors available in Second Life?  Duhhh… You can do any color you want.  You can make your eyes as luminous or as weird as you want.  You can be the one alluring Asian or African in a room full of blue eyes.  But I’m betting the most used color is still blue.  And your Second life popularity will be directly related to your fashion and color sense, and, most of all, your conscious or subliminal acting ability.

But wait…  When will SL incorporate Blue Eyes technology????  This means computers with sensory abilities like those of human beings.  Imagine a computer that can listen to you, feel your emotions, and evaluate your moods through special technologies.  That’s what Blue Eyes is supposed to be.  (“Blue” is for Bluetooth wireless; “eyes” is for eye movement providing the most important information.)  Okay…  I guess that’s the next release…

(This article also appears in the June edition of Rez magazine.)

Sources:

Belkin, Douglas.  2006, October 19.  “Blue Eyes Are Increasingly Rare in America” - International Herald Tribune - Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/18/world/americas/18iht-web.1018eyes.3199975.html

Blakeslee, Sandra and Blakeslee, Matthew. 2007. The Body Has a Mind of its Own. New York: Random House, Inc.

Bloch, Konrad. 1994. Blondes in Venetian Paintings, the Nine-Banded Armadillo, and Other Essays in Biochemistry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Feinman, Saul and Gill, George W. 1978. “Sex Differences in Physical Attractiveness Preferences.” Journal of Social Psychology 105:43-52.

Kleisner, K.; Kocnar, T.; Rubesova,  A. & Fleger, J. (2010). “Eye color predicts but does not directly influence perceived dominance in men.” Personality and Individual Differences, 49: 59-64.

Knight, Meredith. 2008. “All in Favour: The Gentleman’s Friends Prefer Blondes.” Psychology Today. April 15, 26.

Krazytech (2011, April 24)  – “Blue Eyes Technology” Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.krazytech.com/technical-papers/blue-eyes-technology

Little, Anthony C., Penton-Voak, Ian S., Burt, Michael D., and Perrett, David I. 2002. Evolution and Individual Differences in the Perception of Attractiveness: How Cyclic Hormonal Changes and Self-Perceived Attractiveness Influence Female Preferences for Male Faces. Wesport, ON: Ablex.

Miller, Alan S., and Kanazawa, Satoshi. 2007. Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters. New York: Peguin Group.

Somes, Liz. 2008. “A Lock on Love: The Lustre of Long Hair.” Psychology Today 22: 30.

Urban Dictionary – “ Blue Eyes”  Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blue+eyes

University of Copenhagen (2008, January 30). “Blue-eyed Humans Have A Single, Common Ancestor.”  ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/01/080130170343.htm

Wikipedia - “Eye Color” Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_color

Chicken Vesuvio - The Real Deal

“Chicken Vesuvio, a specialty of Chicago, is an Italian-American dish made from chicken on the bone and wedges of potato, sauteed with garlic, oregano, white wine and olive oil, then baked until the chicken's skin becomes crisp. The dish is often garnished with a few green peas for color.  In Chicago, one also often finds the technique applied to other foods, like ‘steak Vesuvio,’ ‘pork chops Vesuvio,’ or even just ‘Vesuvio potatoes.’  The origins of the dish are unknown, but some suggest it might have been popularized by the Vesuvio Restaurant, which operated… in Chicago in the 1930s.” - Wikipedia

Sadly, most Vesuvio recipes you now come across only vaguely resemble a true Vesuvio.  But I know where the real recipe came from…

Before Julia Child, long before, Francois and Antoinette Pope taught us to cook on their daily television show, which ran from 1951 to 1963 on both network and local stations.  (Daily?  Obviously people, including TV cooks, had far more of a work ethic in those days.)  And, as a kid, I used to watch it, learning to cook at a young age, and nicely rounding out my TV day of Uncle Johnny Coons, Kukla, Fran, & Ollie, and Garfield Goose.

The Popes began their schools in 1930.  Francois was French, and Antoinette was Italian.  (And as far as I can see, Antoinette did the heavy lifting.)  A 1938 Chicago Tribune advertisement for “Antoinette Pope’s School of Fancy Cookery” offered lessons for $1.  The Antoinette Pope School of Fancy Cookery ran for over 40 years, graduating over 100,000 students.  Antoinette’s cookbook (which I have two copies of, one dog-eared, grease and batter spattered, and notated, and one in mint condition) first appeared in 1948.  (My aunt has one bearing Antoinette's autograph.)

The Popes have long since passed.  And the The New Antoinette Pope School Cookbook has been out of print since its 3rd edition in 1977.  But here is the nearly verbatim (and in strict violation of copyright laws) recipe for Chicken Vesuvio…

Chicken Vesuvio (serves 4)

3-pound frying chicken, cut up

½ cup sifted all-purpose flour combined with 2 teaspoons paprika, 1/2 teaspoon crushed oregano, 1/2 teaspoon garlic salt, 1 teaspoon salt, 1 tablespoon grated Italian cheese

1/4 cup hot olive oil

1/4 cup butter

1/4 cup stock or water

1/4 cup dry white wine (optional)

Wash the chicken under cold, running water, drain it thoroughly, but have it slightly damp so the coating will cling better.  Roll each piece in the seasoned flour, pressing coating on with both hands.  Saute the chicken in the hot oil combined with butter over medium heat until brown on both sides, but not too dark as it will darken more in the oven.  Place it in an attractive piece of ovenware.  Add the stock or water to the drippings in the skillet, and pour this over the chicken.  Place browned potatoes in and around the open spaces on the platter.  Bake in a preheated 350 degree oven for about an hour, or until tender, removing the breasts after 40 minutes.  (I myself often don't take the breasts out.)   Baste chicken with drippings in pan or with additional butter the last 10 minutes.  If drippings appear scant, add stock or wine.

Remember to put your breasts back in for the last few minutes if you took them out.  At this point, little heaps of peas or green beans can be placed in open spaces, or may be served separately.

Browned Potatoes

2 pounds red boiling potatoes, peeled and quartered

1/4 cup hot olive oil

1/2 teaspoon salt

1/4 teaspoon pepper

2 tablespoons grated Italian cheese

Brown the potatoes in the hot oil, remove them, and season them with the salt, pepper, and cheese.

Peas or string beans

1/4 cup sliced or chopped onion

1/4 cup hot olive oil or butter (or combination)

1 package defrosted frozen peas or beans

1 teaspoon salt

1/4 teaspoon pepper

1 tablespoon grated Parmesan

1/4 teaspoon crushed oregano

Saute the onion in the hot oil for several minutes.  Add the defrosted vegetables and cook until tender - seven or eight minutes for beans, three for peas.  (I always do peas and serve them separately.)

Additional Source:  Chicago Tribune

There Are No Atheists on Icebergs...

“Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan” is an 1898 novel by Morgan Robertson.  It tells of the ocean liner Titan, which sank in the North Atlantic after striking an iceberg. Fourteen years later, the Titanic sunk, and similarities to the wreck of the Titan have been frequently noted.  I myself find the name usage more than coincidental, especially since Titanic’s identical sister ship Olympic had no problems.  The use of fictional ships in boat naming did not stop there, however, and probably culminated with the first nuclear sub, the U.S.S. Nautilus (thanks, Jules).

The hero of the story, John Rowland, is a cashiered U.S. Navy officer working as a seaman on the R.M.S. Titan. Speed is all-important to the steamship company's bottom-line, and there is skullduggery among the officers aboard the Titan: they have no problem slicing in half poor fishing boats that get in their way.  Efforts are made to discredit Rowland, who has been a witness to this barratry.

The speeding Titan subsequently hits an iceberg.  Rowland proceeds to save the young daughter of a former (and wealthy) lover by jumping with the child onto the iceberg, camping in a wrecked lifeboat, and fighting a polar bear.  Although the bear bites off Rowland's arm, he manages to kill the bear, thus providing food, and then makes good the rescue by finally hailing a passing ship.  He makes his way back to America where the daughter is reunited with her mom amid some confusion.  In spite of a series of MAJOR misunderstandings, he endures and regains his place in society.

Although the novel was written before Titanic had even been designed, there were some remarkable similarities between the fictional Titan and real-life Titanic. This might be attributed to the fact that Roberston was a naval innovator (who claimed to have invented the periscope, though the U.S. Navy’s version had already been invented).

Like the Titanic, the fictional ship sank in April in the North Atlantic, and there were not enough lifeboats for the passengers. There are also similarities between the designs, sizes, speed, and lack of life-saving equipment.
 

Each ship was described as "unsinkable" because of watertight compartments; each was the largest moving object ever made by man; each had far too few lifeboats (the Titanic - 16 plus 4 folding lifeboats, less than half the number required for her passenger capacity of 3000, and the Titan - "as few as the law allowed," 24 lifeboats, also less than half needed for her 3000 capacity); each struck an iceberg on the starboard side while speeding (the Titanic at 22½ knots, the Titan at 25);each was within a few hundred miles of Newfoundland.  Each lost more than half its passengers, but the the Titan lost practically everyone except the hero and heroine’s daughter (who jumped on the iceberg and camped out), and small number of passengers (including the heroine) and evil crew members, including the captain and first mate.  But this furnished the grist for the rest of the story.

However, the Titanic went down bow first, and the Titan capsized.  

Capsized??  Speaking of capsizing - It would be a few more years before the S.S. Eastland turned over while at dock in the Chicago River with a loss of 844. On the morning of July 24, 1915, the Eastland, known as the "speed queen of the Great Lakes," was part of a fleet of five excursion boats to be used to take 7,000 Western Electric employees, their families and friends, across Lake Michigan  for a company picnic.  The ship had loaded its capacity of 2,500 passengers and was attempting to trim in preparation to cast off.  Then it rolled over.

A total of 844 passengers and crew were killed.   An incredibly detailed timeline of the disaster can be found here:

 http://www.eastlanddisaster.org/timea3a1.htm
 

Ironically, the addition of lifeboats because of the Titanic disaster probably contributed to her top-heaviness and instability. Even more amazing, she was later acquired by the Navy, rechristened the U.S.S. Wilmette, and used a training vessel at Great Lakes Naval Training Center.  I guess they figured if the swabbies could keep her upright, they were good-to-go.  I don’t think anyone has yet made a movie...:=P

You’ve seen enough of the Titanic…  These are pictures of the Eastland...

Will whiskey make you frisky????

Mark Twain: "Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whiskey is barely enough."

Bourbon is from Kentucky.

And bourbon is a distinctive product of the United States.  But bourbon does not necessarily refer to the modern Bourbon County in Kentucky; it refers to an entire region of that name which now includes 34 Kentucky counties, and probably once included hundreds if not thousands of backyard distilleries.

Starting in the late 18th century, this region was known for several decades as "Old Bourbon." During this period, whiskey became the region's most important export. Because most people living there still called the whole region "Old Bourbon," any whiskey shipped from the area was labeled "Old Bourbon Whiskey."

Though, technically, bourbon can be made anywhere is the U.S., 97% of all bourbon is distilled and aged somewhere near Bardstown, Kentucky. One reason is said to be the iron-free water filtered through the high concentrations of limestone, unique to the area.  But the biggest reason is tradition.  Anything called bourbon that is not from Kentucky (unless it's Jack Daniels, a faithful bourbon style), is suspect.

Bourbon must be at least 51% corn, aged in new charred-oak barrels, distilled to no more than 160 proof (80% alcohol), barreled at no more than 125 proof (62.5%), and bottled at 80 proof (40%) or more.  Most bourbon is 70% corn.

These are my favorites (prices are in USD, of course):


Premium

Woodford Reserve  (??)  90.4  Labriol & Graham  Versailles, KY  37.99

Basil Hayden's (8 yrs)  80  Jim Beam  Clermont, KY  36.99

Maker's 46 (??)  94   Maker's Mark Loretto, KY  34.99

Four Roses Small Batch (??)  90   Four Roses  Lawrenceburg, KY  29.99

Maker's Mark (6 yrs)  90   Maker's Mark Loretto, KY  22.99

Wild Turkey  (8 yrs)  101    Wild Turkey Distillery  Lawrenceburg, KY  21.99

Wild Turkey   (6-7-8 yr blend)  81   Wild Turkey Distillery  Lawrenceburg, Kentucky 19.99



Moderate

Jim Beam Black (8 yrs)  86  Jim Beam Clermont, KY  19.99

Old Forester (6 yrs)  86  Brown Forman  Louisville, KY  18.99


Cheap* 

Jim Beam White (4 yrs)  80  Jim Beam Clermont, KY  14.99


*I include this category because, on a routine basis, I prefer 80 proof.  Also, I drink Manhattans.  In a 2/1 mix with vermouth, subtlety and nuance are lost.  Beam is mediocre but consistent.  (I also own Beam stock, LOL.  And Beam produces something like 112,000 gallons per day, so it's easy to find. :=P)

All of these prices are from Binny's, except for the Forester, which is from Foremost.  In Chicago sales tax is around 9.5%  plus a Cook County liquor tax of $1.03 on a fifth. :-(


Best uses of bourbon:

1- The Manhattan Cocktail

This drink was reputedly invented for or by Jenny Jerome (aka, Lady Randolph Churchill, Winston's mom) in connection with a New York political campaign.  This more or less guarantees that it is a ladylike, though strong, drink.  The story may be apocryphal.  Regardless, I prefer that the drink be made with bourbon, though some Philistines, usually Canadian, insist that it be made with rye.

1 jigger bourbon
1/2 jigger sweet vermouth (M&R or Noilly Prat)
1 dash Angostura bitters
1 Collins maraschino cherry, with perhaps a little juice (Collins maraschinos are bigger and firmer than supermarket brands...  also more expensive.)

Shake the ingredients with ice in a cocktail shaker (instead of stirring them), creating a froth on the surface of the drink.  (There's no evidence that whiskey bruises, LOL.)  Serve in a stemmed cocktail glass.


2- The Mint Julep

Michele insists the best use of bourbon is the mint julep, regardless of whether or not it's Derby Day.

These are direct quotes:

"I think that the best mint juleps want 100 proof bourbons, because they frost the cup better, and interact with the bruised mint better.

"You should never, never, never use simple syrup.

"A mint julep should be lots of bruised mint, about a teaspoon of spring water, a little bit of bar sugar, 100 proof bourbon, crushed ice, and a mint sprig in a silver or pewter Jefferson cup.  It should never be a sweet drink, but rather a refreshing one.

"BRUISE the mint, do not crush it.  Use the back of a spoon, or a pestle."

(NOTE:  Forester makes an excellent and inexpensive 100 proof.  So does Wild Turkey.  Be careful of the silver when brusing the mint.  Michele, me is hoping for silver Jefferson cups for Valentine's Day...)

Hors d'oeuvres 

To go with your bourbon, you may want some hors d'oeuvres, and then maybe some breakfast the next day...

1 - Poor Man's Pate de Fois Gras

1/2 lb liverwurst
3 oz ceam cheese
4 tbsp mayonnaise
1/3 cup cream
1 tbsp melted butter
1/2 tsp curry powder
1 tbsp Worcestershire
1 tbsp dry sherry
1/4 tsp each S&P
tiny pinch cayenne
tiny pinch nutmeg

Fork mash and blend the liverwurst, cream cheese, mayonnaise, and cream, then add everything else and thoroughly blend.  As curries differ, you may wish to add yours gradually to ensure that it remains only a subtle undertone.

Place in a buttered pate mold, or in individual pots, and cover with clear plastic wrap

Refrigerate before serving.  It may seem runny, but refrigeration firms it up.


2 - Gudrun's Special Grilled Pate

Use the above recipe, but omit the curry, cayenne, and nutmeg.  Add 2 tbsp finely chopped onion, and  add horeeradish to taste.  Spread on small cocktail rye slices or quartered rye slices.  Place on broiler pan and grill under a broiler flame until they begin to brown.


3 - Onion Canapes

English Muffins
Butter
Lemon Juice
Sharp Cheddar
Sweet Onion (such as Italian Red Torpedo or Vidalia)
Paprika

Get some miniature silver dollar English muffins (available from Wolferman's), or cut them out of full size muffins with a cookie cutter.*  Or just cut up some muffins, lazy.

Cut each circle in half, spread with butter, and sprinkle a little lemon juice.
Add a suitably sized piece of sweet onion, cover with sharp cheddar, sprinkle on a little paprika, and broil until it bubbles.

*Waste not, want not: The crusts from the cutouts can be saved and used for Gudrun's famous "nest eggs."  Put butter in a nonstick pan, add the gutted muffin, and crack an egg into the hole.  Add S&P.  Cook to desired done-ness, turning if you wish.  Add some sauteed Canadian bacon, Hollandaise, and a black olive for a reasonable and not too heavy facsimile of Eggs Benedict.  (I use bottled Hollandaise :=P)

We Don't Need no Steenkin' Rules

...especially when they are fallacious. 

There are plenty of things people do with language that are irksome, actually break language rules, and bring out the vigilante spirit in almost any thinking person:

An actor being interviewed says, "Between he and I."  Give me a break...  It's good that his lines are written for him.  But failure to correctly use the objective is catching on, I guess because it's regarded as cool, or maybe because they heard that idiot. 

"Where are you at?" is ridiculous. But "Where you at?" which might be disparaged by many, sounds fine to me. Call me ghetto bitch. LOL.

Repeated parts of acronyms: example: A(utomatic) T(eller) M(achine) machine, ATM machine :=P.

Less (an amount), when it should be fewer (individuals): example, less people.

"Anyways": horrible sounding, but an actual word.  Once again, I think people just think it sounds cool.  Anyways, I don't know why people can't just say "anyway."

"Irregardless":  also a word.  But, irregardless of the consequences, why not just say "regardless"?

       

"Ax" for "ask" (same as "liberry" for "library"): not even grammar...  enunciation.

BUT (and I am now violating a supposed rule of grammar), there are many "rules" of grammar that are not rules of grammar at all.  They are myths that developed from over simplifications by school teachers, medieval monks struggling to translate Latin to English, or simply people trying to impose their stylistic preferences.  You yourself have doubtless heard these rules and perhaps even ascribe to some.  But, thinking about them, you'll have to agree that all they really do is undermine the confidence of would be writers.  Good writers, on the other hand, generally discard them because the result of applying them would be stilted and unreadable verbiage.

You can't start a sentence with the word “however.” Wrong! It's fine to start a sentence with “however” so long as you use a comma after it when it means "nevertheless."

You can't start a sentence with a coordinating conjunction like "and," "yet,” or "but."  This "rule" has no historical or grammatical basis and, if applied, would inhibit rhetorical effectiveness.

You can't start a sentence with the word "because."  Because you can, LOL.  Stylistically, fragments can be useful.

You can’t end a sentence with a preposition.  “This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I shall not put.”  (Winston Churchill)  Feel free to end your sentences with prepositions.  Break the non-rule.  What are you waiting for?

You can't split an infinitive, and (its corollary) you can't split a verb phrase.  I want to boldly tell you that it's okay to split infinitives.  Splitting an infinitive is often an improvement in terms of elegance.  The rule against splitting may or may not relate back to 19th century concepts of a "prestige" form of English, or to the fact that in Latin (once the scholarly language of the world in which most treatises were written), and also in Greek, the infinitive is one word with no equivalent of the "to" marker.  The rule against splitting a verb phrase is probably an outgrowth of the rule against splitting infinitives.

A run-on sentence is a really long sentence.  Nope.  A run-on sentence can be short.  A run-on sentence simply lacks proper punctuation or conjunction.  This is a run-on sentence: "I am right he is wrong."

Tired of the Same Old You???

Shape shifting as a mythological, fantastical, illustrative or literary device is as old as dirt.  It exists in ancient legend, poetry, children's literature, all forms of performance art, and modern diversions such as movies and computer games.  Though there are a variety of ways in which shifts occur, shifts are clearly divided into (1) voluntary, and (2) involuntary.  They can be shifts into human, nonhuman, or inanimate forms, and can include out-of-body experiences.  The one critical issue is, "How physically real can they be?"  Answer:  Shape shifting can't be real, except in the case of a few color changing animals, and then it's coloration, not shape.  EXCEPT, of course, in a virtual reality such as Second Life, or alternatively (or complementarily) in a controllable dream.

Voluntary shape shifting is just that: a voluntary transformation based upon some selfish motive.  This may be profit, revenge, or, most importantly here, amusement - not necessarily in the form of a practical joke, but in the sense of obtaining experiences otherwise unavailable.  (Prolly never done in SL.)

Involuntary transformation, on the other hand, is often the result of action by a deity, a curse, some evil being, an "infection," or use of a potion.  The drama of dealing with this transformation - overcoming the curse, defeating evil, or receiving just deserts for irresponsible or malevolent behavior, makes for good storytelling.  Iz why the stories, LOL.

MULTIPLE MYTHOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATIONS (or How complicated can it get?)

Transgender humans are a simple form of shape shifting in that they involve only a few "appendages" and represent only a matter of degree in other areas.  Disguising one's gender may present one with opportunities otherwise unavailable. 

Such shifting is common in mythology. For example, Zeus disguised himself as Artemis to get close enough to Callisto to take advantage of her. 

The beautiful Callisto was a companion nymph of Artemis (aka the Roman Diana), all of whose nymphs took a vow of chastity.  Zeus (aka the Roman Jupiter) was determined to have her, and, to evade the scrutiny of his wife Juno and get close enough to Callisto to seduce her, disguised himself as Artemis. He was successful, and of course Callisto got pregnant.  The REAL Artemis, enraged by all of this, expelled Callisto from her group.  Then either Zeus, trying to cover things up, or Juno, out of anger, turned Callisto into a bear, even though it wasn't in any way her fault.  (*sigh... Typical.) 

Callisto was a bear, but her son Arcas was of course human.  He grew up, and became a fine hunter of bears.  This was an obvious recipe for disaster, but tragedy was averted by Zeus, who turned them both into heavenly formations, Callisto into the constellation Arctos (the Great Bear - Ursa Major), and Arcas into the nearby constellation Arctophylax (the Little Bear - Ursa Minor).

In Second Life, so many follow the example of Zeus that it's hardly worth mentioning.  Unfortunately, they don't have his abilities to remedy any unfortunate situations thus created.

Ancient myth shape shifting score: Deity -> Tranny -> Furry -> Human -> Celestial Body   Hmmmmmmm...

LITERATURE

Puck or Robin Goodfellow, being a faerie, is a ubiquitous character in English and Celtic folklore. In Shakespeare's Midsummer Night's Dream, Puck is a minion of Oberon, the Fairy King, who sends him to obtain juice from the flower love-in-idleness as part of a plot to punish Titania.    Puck makes mistakes, creates chaos, and his humorous mischief drives the play.

Shape shifting?  Puck transforms Nick Bottom’s head into that of a donkey, so that Titania, the fairy queen, will fall in love with the beast and will forget about her little changeling boy, whom Oberon has other plans for.  As for Puck himself...

  

“Through bog, through bush, through brake, through brier:        

Sometime a horse I’ll be, sometime a hound,
A hog, a headless bear, sometime a fire;
And neigh, and bark, and grunt, and roar, and burn
Like horse, hound, hog, bear, fire, at every turn.”

Puck busily uses "love juice" to create chaos, and then restores order among lovers.  The quote “Lord, what fools these mortals be!” describes the exaggerated silliness of their behavior  Well...  It wuz all a dream anyway.

Shakespearian shape shifting score:  Devil -> Horse -> Hound -> Hog -> Bear -> Fire
Man -> Donkey

Changeling Boy (Human taken and raised by faeries)

SUPERHERO AND OTHER ENTERTAINMENT-BASED SHIFTING

Insert your favorite superhero here: ________________.  Superman and Hulk stand out, but almost all have transformational powers. I am not going into superhero abilities, simply because they are totally made up for the purpose of producing dramatic storylines, and there are far too many of them.  I'm also not going into non-heroic transformations.  There are literally dozens of tropes common in literature, television and movies.  You know all of them...  Hulking out, biological mashup (for example, The Fly), bitten by a whatever, "I just woke up that way," the 50-foot marshmallow, etc.  So, ignoring the effect of changing clothes in a phone booth, let's examine the most common shift, therianthropy (from human to animal): wolf, dog, cat, etc.

THERIANTHROPY

Lycanthropy, or changing into a werewolf, is the best known form of therianthropy. The werewolf seems rooted in European folklore and myth, and in anthropology. But a human->wolf metamorphosis is common in Turkish and Asian legend, and all over the rest of world as well.

Cynanthropy, sometimes spelled kynanthropy, is chagrining oneself into a dog (weredog).  This is the most common therianthropy after lycanthropy.  Obviously one can't alternate between dog an human form, but the term also applies to ppl suffering from the delusion that they possess both human and dog anatomical features.  Legends relating to dog-men seem to emanate from China and other areas of Asia, and focus on humans turning into dogs, dogs into people, and attendant bestiality. :=P

Ailuranthropes (werecats) are common in European and African folklore.  A werecat may become a super-sized housecat. (I have one of these, inherited from my daughter, though I was told initially that it was merely a Bengal.)  On continents where larger felines exist, legend also has them as lions or leopards, tigers, jaguars, cheetahs or panthers.  (I refuse to digress into the neko experience: do it yourself :=P.)

Native American legend contributes skin-walkers, persons with the ability to transform into any animal they wish.  A requirement of this transformation, however, is that they be wearing the pelt of the chosen animal.  (I have seen some really nice rabbit pelts in SL, but I don't know much about bunneh transformation in legend.  And I further refuse to digress into Furry Fandom :=P.)

LUCID DREAMING

So actual physical shifting is PROBABLY impossible (without drastic surgery or a virtual existence).  But what about spiritual shape shifting?  What about lucid dreaming?

A lucid dream is a dream in which one knows that one is dreaming. Furthermore, it's a dream that the dreamer can actively participate in and manipulate.  Lucidity occurs when, in the midst of the dream, because of some clue or realization, the dreamer realizes that it's a dream.  Though lucidity and dream control are not exactly the same thing, achieving lucidity will lead the dreamer to do things not possible in reality.  The potential for adventure, fantasy, and transcendence is exciting and amazing.

You can even try this at home!!!  (But don't hold me responsible for your health or happiness... :=P)

Good dream recall is the first step toward lucid dreaming.  Without good recall, any lucid dream one has may be forgotten entirely.   Some people keep notes on their dreams, though to me this seems a bit extreme.  I'm not that scientific...  Girls just want to have fun!

Many have noted that lucid dreams are common during morning naps, when you wake after about 1 or 1.5 hours.  This is because we tend to remember dreams when we awake directly from REM sleep.  (LOL, I knew I wasn't just lazy.)

Mnemonically Induced Lucid Dreams (MILD) occur immediately after waking up and before falling back asleep. Induction requires setting your alarm at intervals of 4.5, 6, or 7.5 hours.

Wake Initiation of Lucid Dreams (WILD) uses relaxation and meditation to induce a dream while maintaining consciousness.  This is a great technique if you can master it.  I found that it works especially well while at one's place of employment...  Uh, nm.

Wake Back To Bed (WBTB) is ideal for beginners:  Sleep 5-6 hours, get up for an hour, and then go back to bed.

And what are the benefits of learning lucid-dreaming??

Explore Alternate Realities.

Improve Your Problem Solving Skills - Solve problems on demand unhampered by conscious                 logic (LOL).  Really, lotsa inventions were dreamt up this way.

Face Your Fears - Ask your boss what his problem is.

Create Confidence - Practice and rehearse your actions, and experiment with different outcomes.

Be More Creative - You might be the new Salvador Dali.  Or you might write a werewolf story with a first person point of view.

WHAT I DID THIS SUMMER...

             

I read lots of books!!!!!  The best 17 are here:

America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It - Mark Steyn

Humorous confirmation of what you  already know about the Muslim agenda.  The EU's birth rates are so low that native European populations are halved with each successive generation.  Europe's Muslims are multiplying -- but they are not integrating culturally.  But as Europe slips into a long Eurabian night, America 's population still climbs at a healthy rate, and is still able to politically and culturally integrate immigrants.

The Big Short:  Inside the Doomsday Machine - Michael Lewis

The housing and credit bubble:  In the old days, people put 20% down (of their own money) and the lender financed 80%.  The loan was paid off, in its entirety, over a long haul (30 years), to the original lender, often a Savings & Loan.  In the mortgage crisis days, the loans were "originate and sell," the mortgage makers/lenders getting their fee up-front, and  immediately selling the mortgage to another entity to collect the loan payments.  The mortgages were then bundled into bonds and sold as real estate investments, all of which, using smoke and mirrors were made to look like “good investments,” which the ratings agencies went along with.  And, of course, some found a way to make money on all of this, by betting on default.  (One reason all of this collapsed was the belief that home prices could only go up, and therefore defaults wouldn't matter, and therefore many loans could be to ppl who couldn't really afford them,  ARMs with teaser starting rates but with eventual rates that ppl would find impossible to pay.)
 
In the Garden of the Beasts:  Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin - Erik Larson

The true story of William Dodd, the impecunious and thrifty new American ambassador to Germany, and his family, who witness the rise of Hitler in an atmosphere of mounting oppression and terror.  Though his son and daughter are initially entranced by the New Germany and the infectious enthusiasm  of young Nazis, they watch with alarm as Jews are attacked, the press is censored, and drafts of horrific new laws are circulated.

Faithful Place - Tana French

A Dublin Murder Squad detective must deal with tragedy and investigate his own likeable but horribly dysfunctional family.

Six (6) Jacquelyn "Jack" Daniels thrillers (Whiskey Sour, Bloody Mary, Rusty Nail, Dirty Martini, Fuzzy Navel, Cherry Bomb) - J.A. Konrath

Chicago homicide detective Jacquelyn "Jack" Daniels pursues a succession of monstrous killers.  Jack is a mature woman with an estranged ex-husband, an outspoken elderly mom, an annoying private eye ex-partner, and a crazy cat acquired from a serial killer.  She can't sleep and her love life is hopeless, mostly due to the demands of her job.   Despite all this, Jack's attitude is positive and even light-hearted.  Jack balances the horror of her cases with a quietly self-deprecating sense of humor.

Four (4) Harry Hole thrillers (The Redbreast, The Devil's Star, The Snowman, Nemesis) - Jo Nesbo

Harry Hole is a loose cannon on the Oslo Police Force Homicide Squad.  He's a heavy drinker, continuously in trouble because of it, but he's also a brilliant detective.  This, of course, is the only reason he survives.

Three (3) Michael Kelly thrillers (The Fifth Floor, The Chicago Way, We All Fall Down) - Michael Harvey

Cynical, wisecracking Chicago Private Investigator Michael Kelly gets involved in political corruption, bio-terror, murder, etc.


Now, back to my reading...