1. My internet was down for a week. I couldn't get anything on my computer or my two Kindles (Don't ask.) I could get Internet on my phone, but I don't like doing it on such a small screen. Therefore I was incommunicado. Not a place I like to be.
I signed up for personal training in August and paid $320 that month. For some reason, the credit card company thought this was a recurring item, and took out $320 in September and October. If they hadn't written me a stiff note about the November payment, I might have been paying it still.
I went to the emergency treatment center Tuesday and they found several things wrong with me which I hadn't even thought of. That's good, I guess. I hope this does not mean that I'm dying of some mysterious disease.
My family was here for a week, during which time they misplaced the downstairs broom and the downstairs mop. (I keep duplicates of these things as I don't like to carry them up (or down) stairs. My daughter is famous for putting things where she believes they should logically be placed. Therefore I can't find them. Anyway, I brought the upstairs mop downstairs and mopped the kitchen floor.
Someone commented that I read so many books I should have a book blog. I don't seriously want to do that. I don't like reading most books, particularly those highly esteemed by the critics. For instance, if you put lighted matches under my fingernails I would read the work or Margaret Atwood. And if I could get to a sink or other source of water, I would put out the flames posthaste so i could stop reading her work as soon as possible.
I actually ponied up $24--a record for me-- for this new book by Ron Chernow and temporarily sidelined John Quincy Adams. Grant is even heavier than JQ was, but he's always been a favorite of mine. The book leaves a lot to be desired, physically. The typeface is small and fiddly, and has a grey texture, not quite black but off-black. The margins are too small, and so is the type.
Whatever happened to books being published in two volumes?
Let me give a shout out for the Library of America editions. They are printed on thin but very good paper, with legible type, and are a pleasure to read. I read Grant's autobiography in a Llbrary of America edition and did not get a hernia from lifting it.
About that $24: every once in a while I buy something at the local Barnes and Noble, in the desperate hope that they will not go out of business. Perhaps if they tried publishing books in two or three volumes? On nice preservation paper, with legible type?
I'm getting all my reading material from Good Will. So far this year I've gotten "Reinventing Japan" by Ian Buruma, deTocqueville's "Democracy in America", "Benjamin Disraeli" by Adam Kirsch, "The Sea Wolf" by Jack London, a collection of Moliere's comedies, and a lot of books so forgettable I've already forgotten them. The usual sludge.
I love our library. It's hard to find a library that isn't better than nothing, and mine definitely is. But the downstairs near the entrance is given over to DVDs and children's books. The computer software which searches the holdings of all Delaware libraries is clumsy and hard to use. The adult books are upstairs in the back of the building, involving a bit of a hike. Also, nobody reads the shelves to see if any books are out of order, and plenty are.
But the Good Will is a win/win situation. I pay a dollar, sometimes two, per book, and when done pass them on to my daughter if she is interested. She ultimately sells them at her library's book sale.
The ones she doesn't want are donated to the AAUW annual book sale. I get an itemized receipt--usually a dollar per book-- to take off my income tax. Then somebody takes them home and reads them.
The method is perfect for a dabbler like me. I'm not necessarily looking for anything specific but am interested in anything not involving math or economics. I like history and there's a lot of history out there.
The first Friday of every month in Wilmington the Art Loop takes place. Vans are laid on by the city to take interested viewers from one studio or museum to another, so artists can get recognition and validation for their work. There are wine and snacks, and a festive air prevails. I usually go, and it's a lot of fun.
The work varies greatly in quality. Some of the works are for sale. Some are purchased that very night, and for not inconsiderable sums. Would I, could I, buy any of these paintings? Not at those prices. I couldn't because I'd rather spend the money on a new car, or buy more paints and a new easel. You see, the art that interests me most is my own. I like to see how others do things, but I am more interested in learning how to paint myself.
I think writers are like that, too. I've known published poets who never read a line of any other poet's, none of whose works would be published if government and foundations did not subsidize their publication. I'm okay with that.
Most people who enjoy literature have a hidden or not so hidden desire to write themselves. Almost everyone has a novel in a drawer somewhere or in the attic. Not me. I sincerely do not want to write anything, unless you count this blog. What I want to do is read. And what I want to read is books.
I've already mentioned that I don't want a Kindle. I like books. If it looks good to me, I will read any book with joy. Unless it is moldy, which sets off my asthma. Nice-looking books on good paper with beautiful bindings interest me, but so do paperbacks from the 1940s found in dusty book stores or at the Good Will. Library books. I know I like certain authors, but I love discovering new ones. I like reading about things I am ignorant about and learning new stuff, if well presented..
I don't really know what I want to read until I see it. So I will continue to prowl through Barnes & Noble and look through piles of yesterday's best sellers at garage sales. Some of my finds will be duds, of course, but I've discovered a lot of good reading and have hopes of finding more.
I see Cate Blanchett will be playing Elizabeth I again in the upcoming Elizabeth, The Golden Age. This comes on the heels of Helen Mirren's HBO series and Showtime's series, "The Tudors," which is actually about Henry VIII, Elizabeth's father.
I haven't seen either of those shows, but will probably do so eventually--though I've got to say that the guy playing Henry VIII looks a little too lean and dark for the part. (This review says the actor is better suited to play "a scheming courtier or pining poet than an extroverted royal peacock.") But I do like me some Tudors, especially Elizabeth.
I saw Blanchett's first Elizabeth film and liked it very much. It wasn't exactly historically accurate, but that doesn't bother me overmuch. Elizabeth was such a fascinating character that I always find it interesting to see how others view her. Though I hold no truck with those who sympathize with Mary, Queen of Scotts. Mary Stuart was a royal pain in the ass and Elizabeth allowed her to stick around for far too long. The new movie, I see, will touch on that. Here's the trailer:
And here, just for kicks, is a rundown of movies about Elizabeth with pictures.
As it happens, I'm enjoying an Elizabethan renaissance myself. I've been watching "Elizabeth R," the BBC series starring Glenda Jackson, who really embodies Elizabeth--in my humble opinion. I first watched the series a gazillion years ago when it first aired on "Masterpiece Theater." I loved it then and kind of wondered how it held up. It did. Jackson is superb, as is the supporting cast, the costumes are terrific and the makeup is great. Here are some photos of Jackson being made up as Elizabeth.
I'm also reading Paul Johnson's book, Elizabeth I: A Study in Power and Intellect, which was published in 1974 before, I think, Johnson became famous over here. It's not really an authoritative biography-Johnson skips around a lot, which can get kind of confusing--but I'm enjoying it. I like Johnson's brisk style. And I like that he quotes a lot from primary sources. He portrays Elizabeth as a conservative who, though desperate for cash, was reluctant to raise money through taxes.
It was not a method of raising money she exploited but rather, to her mind, a monarchical privilege which was to be used sparingly. Direct taxation cost her popularity, and employing it had therefore to be balanced against the necessity to furnish the Exchequer. She was as reluctant to raise money as to spend it. Whenever possible, she turned to other methods. ... In 1591 there was a more bizarre effort: negotiations with Edward Kelly, a medium ... [who] had been experimenting in the transmutation of base metal into gold ... ELizabeth was skepical of Kelly's powers, but determined, if they existed, that they should be used in the service of England ...
If sometimes, as Ralegh complained, she underfinanced her war policies, she maintained political solidarity and economic expansion by keeping the English the lowest-taxed nation in Europe, a fact to which Bacon paid tribute: 'He that shall look into other countries and consider the taxes, and tallages, and impositions, and assizes and the like that are everywhere in use, will find that the Englishman is most master of his own valuation and the least bitten in purse of any nation in Europe.'
But Elizabeth was no neocon; she didn't seek out war, but was forced into it by circumstances, as when she--after much prodding by her advisors--sent then-favorite Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester to the low countries to defend Protestant interests. War could be very expensive.
Even by the somewhat bizarre standards of sixteenth-century warfare, Leicester's personal entourage gave his army a top-heavy appearance. We possess a list of over 1,100 persons forming what was called his 'train'. ... Moreover, Leicester himself was surrounded by a household a monarch might have envied: his personal suite comprised 99 gentlemen-officers, yeomen and their servants and over 70 lords, knights and gentlemen; he had a steward, 4 secretaries, 2 engineers, pages, grooms, trumpeters, footmen, chaplains, physicians and a whole company of actors. The vast quantities of baggage included no less than 44 beds for the kitchen staff alone.
Posts
