Category: Current Affairs

I finally finished the lazy days tunic and shawl kits from Artyarns.  I've named them Raspberry Glitter on Ravelry, which I suppose works since I didn't actually produce the same sweater as written.

Basic info:

Lazy Days Tunic and Lazy Days Shawl, both sold as kits from Artyarns.  I purchased my kits from L'Atelier in Redondo Beach, CA.

Yarns:  Artyarns Beaded Silk & Sequins Light and Merino Cloud.

Needle:  size 7 Addi Click.   Surprisingly this was actually the recommended needle size, which is odd for me as I historically have been a loose knitter.  In fact my gauge did not quite match the pattern gauge, and after trying several needle sizes from size 4 to size 8, I decided I was not going to get gauge and that the size 7 needles produced the fabric which pleased me the most.  I simply then recalculated the pattern from there.  This proved a little tricky at first as the sweater is knit on the bias, but I eventually got the hang of it, both the knitting and the calculating.

The biggest problem for me was with the sleeves.  The first time I knit them I apparently lost my head and knit one sleeve too small and the other too large, so I re-knit both, carefully checking gauge and dimensions as I progressed.  These were the sleeves that were on he blocking board in my previous post.  Alas, I did not like the way they felt when I donned the finished sweater.  They felt snug and itchy, and it occurred to me that I had miscalculated.  The sleeves would have fit had I been knitting in the standard fashion from bottom up (or top down), but bias requires different ease than-on grain fabrications and even though I am sure that bias knitted fabric reacts differently than bias woven fabric it was evident that I had knit the sleeves too small.  So I ripped them out and reknit them.

But I still hated them when I actually wore the garment.  The fabric itched my arms, especially the parts made from the beaded silk and sequins.  This could be partially because the wider sleeves were shorter, ending at a more delicate patch of skin than in the original nearly elbow-length sleeves.  But I wasn't sure I could make the sleeves longer, primarily because I ran out of beaded silk and sequins, and, being in the middle of knitting the shawl, was not sure how much merino cloud would remain to be used for sleeve-lengthening.  The sleeves also felt like the twisted oddly, but this could be more due to my own irregularly sloping shoulders and the way I carry my arms than to anything in the knitted fabric.  It ended up that I did have enough merino cloud to make the sleeves longer, but by the time I finished the shawl I was simply done with this project.  There would be no 4th re-knit.  I hope the sweater itself would work as a shell to be work with the shawl and that the sleeves could simply be forgotten.

Success!

I love the finished project and will wear it.  I had been a little nervous, afraid that the bias of the fabric would emphasize my own asymmetricalities, the way Issey Miyake's pleated garments always seemed to cling in the wrong way, emphasizing everything that I wanted minimized, but such is not the case.  The drape is nice and the sweater attractive.

Iris Schreier calls for the neckline to be finished with a knitted-on I-cord binding, which was slow, but beautiful.  After trying on the sweater numerous times, I decided that the same I-cord finishing would work at the arm openings as well and so proceeded accordingly.  The I-cord adds a layer of stability to the edge, balancing the pull of the bias fabric and laying pleasingly against the body.

I didn't really think I would get all wrapped up in watching the inauguration and the events in Washington today, and in fact I almost missed it.  Not because I wasn't interested or happy but just because, well, sometimes I don't think things through.  

Have you seen the new New Yorker cover?

courtesy of The New Yorker

Thank God it is Election Day. My votes have been cast, and I am thankful
for the privilege, but I am also glad it is over. Never in my life do I recall being so ready
to be past election day, never do I recall being harassed to this extent by
phone calls, by people extolling me to vote, to vote for their candidate, over
10 calls in the last two days from one party alone, not counting the other
side.

Whatever happened to civilized conversation? What happened to the idea that two people
could sit down and discuss their different views rationally, considering and
respecting the other person’s arguments if they were rationally thought out and
well presented? Whatever happened to the
idea that people did not judge their friends or acquaintances solely by what
political dogma they believed, or what religious beliefs they held?

Yesterday, I was so angry I considered changing my vote for
the wrong reasons, simply because I was so frustrated at being harangued by
some narrow-minded individual, an individual who was trying to muster
votes for his candidate, a candidate for
whom I had planned on voting before our encounter (and whom I did in fact vote
for). But if I changed my vote out of
anger and prejudice, I would be guilty of the same thing that I find so frustrating.

Yesterday we were met by a representative of one of the
parties. He asked if we would vote for
one of the candidates. We have both been
undecided in this particular race, both waffling, but at that point G honestly
responded that he was leaning toward the other side, although he had not yet
fully decided. Instead of offering
arguments and discussion attempting to sway G, this party representative became abusive and harangued
both of us, telling G he should “stay home and not vote”. I suppose he thinks you are only allowed to
vote if you hold the “right” beliefs.

In
an obviously misguided attempt to help the situation, (this person was
attempting to block access to our car) I truthfully informed the same person
that I was going to vote for his candidate, even though that meant I might only
cancel out G’s vote. After another
tirade, I was told that I should stay home and not vote as well. When I asked why, I was told that I shouldn’t
vote because I was married to “him” (G, the one voting for the other
candidate).  I didn’t realize that choice of spouse
determined one’s right to vote in this country. Nor did I realize that we had given up the freedom of speech or
independent thought.

If this person wanted to increase votes for his candidate,
who was up against a popular incumbent, alienating the very voters who were
going to support his candidate in the poles seems very short-sighted. To tell the truth I was more offended by his
comment that I shouldn’t vote because of my choice of spouse than by the
insults tossed at that very same “wrong-voting” spouse.  I suppose I have just become inured to
political bigotry, but I cannot accept the idea that the rights our ancestors
fought so hard to gain can be so flippantly cast aside.

I once thought that intelligent people could discuss issues
and agree to disagree, I thought intelligent people could respect each other’s
opinions even if they did not always agree on specifics. G and I have discussed aspects of this
election extensively, and although we usually vote alike we do not always. We do however, always listen to each other’s
arguments. I can fully understand G’s
reservations about both candidates, I have many of the same reservations, but
my conclusions are different. We both
tend to be independent thinkers and neither one of us has ever been a straight
party-line voter. I suppose that puts us
in the group everyone loves to hate. The
thing we both accept is that if we wish the right to form our own opinions, and
respect the intelligence of the other, we must also accept that they will
sometimes form opinions different from our own. Respect allows for this.

But I suppose some people don’t feel that we have the right
to disagree. And that makes me very
nervous, no matter which “side” they are on. I am tired of the left demonizing
the right and the right demonizing the left. I am tired of everyone toeing the party line, of no one daring to
express a contrary opinion.

I’m glad this election is over. Whatever the outcome, I remain optimistic about
the future.

Usually I read the morning papers with no particular emotional investment in the news.  I read.  Some articles are interesting.  Occasionally I am led to pursue further research on a subject.  Facts, figures and a few interesting tidbits are stored in the mental data banks, but usually it is a quiet process.

This morning however I was ready to spit, over a very minor issue granted, but still, it ticked me off.  Our local paper The Poughkeepsie Journal, reported, like everyone else, on the release of the US News and World Reports college rankings.  No problem there.  Then I came to this paragraph:

    "Locally, Marist College
ranked 15th out of 165 colleges and universities in the northern United
States that offer a full range of undergraduate and master’s level
programs. This is the highest ranking Marist has achieved in the U.S.
News rankings, up one spot from last year. Other results for local
colleges were not available."

Emphasis on the last sentence is mine.  Now within a minute. I had looked up the US News rankings online and determined the rankings of all other  local colleges.  If I, a reader can easily find that information, I would think someone at the Poughkeepsie Journal could do so as well.  If they are going to bother looking up one college they should look up the rest, or if they are only going to look up colleges in Poughkeepsie, the home of The Journal, they could look up both Marist and Vassar College which are both located in Poughkeepsie.  I can even understand skipping Bard as it is, let’s say, 30 miles away.

Once again the Poughkeepsie Journal displays shoddy journalism, there are more examples than I care to enumerate, and the general local tendency to praise Marist and decry Vassar annoys me to no end.  Granted Marist draws from a primarily regional population and Vassar does not.  But both put money, education, and added value back into this community.  And despite common myths, Vassar does accept students from local schools, and many Vassar graduates work and live in this community.  My bias is not completely based on my status as a Vassar graduate.  I grew up in a "town and gown" community and I think the whole phenomenon is narrow minded and stupid, even though I can see how it arose.  I can certainly say that the situation must have been worse when students drawn to elite colleges, or any colleges were more affluent than the local residents, but in an age where most college students receive financial aid, a much larger percentage of the population goes to college, and colleges themselves are taking a greater look at their roll in their communities, this kind of narrow-minded bias should be decreasing.  Even if resentment exists, it should not be exploited by local institutions that should know better.

End of rant for today.

In today’s Wall Street Journal there is an article about how several colleges are beginning to offer courses in Intelligent Design.  I think this is appalling.  But then, my beloved reminded me that our local community college offers courses in Astrology. 

What I don’t understand about the current wave of religious sentiment is how closed-minded and narrow it makes the world.  Why can’t one believe in a supreme being or God or religiion or whatever you want to call it, and still believe in science? 

I watched an interview with Jimmy Carter last week, prompted by his new book I believe, and what most impressed me is that he is one of the few (only??) well known public figures who is obviously a Christian and proud of it, but is also rational, and objective.  He is a Christian and a realist and proud to say he believes in God AND Science.

The Mann Booker Prize was announced: John Banville won for The Sea , which I have not read.  In fact I have not read any Banville although I have heard good things.  Interesting.. I will have to seek his works out.  I was hoping for Julian Barnes because I think he writes beautifully even though I haven’t read his newest novel yet, although he has won before and so I suppose this is only fair.  Of course Ishiguro has won before also. 

I am terribly behind.  There was a time when I would read all the proposed novels before the prize was announced.  I was more devoted and far less scatter-brained then.    This year I have read nothing on the list, although several novels are on my list.  I did read Ian McEwan’s Saturday, which as you know, I liked very much.  I was somewhat disappointed that it was not nominated, almost as disappointed as I was surprised by Zadie Smith.  I haven’t read her new novel either although it too is on my list.  In the past I have thought that her prose can be beautiful but her story lines weak.  Beautiful prose can be a joy but it is not enough.

Meanwhile, I continue way behind on my reading as well as my blog-reading and internet forums: 

This article  via Rebecca’s Pocket caught my attention yesterday and is well worth reading.  The way news is reported and what is reported affects us all and requires much greater consideration. 

I personally was not too concerned about Frist’s insider trading charge only because I don’t tend to worry that much about insider trading.  Yes people abuse the system, yes people make money, extremely large amounts on information that is not general knowledge, but that is the way people and the world work, always have worked, and always will.  I suspect more people are hurt by the secrecy and sneaking around that have to be done because of insider trading legislation than would have been otherwise.  Perhaps I overstate the case. Perhaps I have not considered the issues thoroughly enough.  Perhaps I am overly cynical.

Decisions have to be made based on something.  Someone always knows something that no one else knows.  Where would our society be today if no one had ever acted on insider knowledge.  Yes there are issues.  Yes there are dangers.  But insider trading, like war, is so deeply tied to the human psyche that I think anyone is deceiving themselves if they believe these things can be eliminated. 

Still the article is important.  The implications are important.  The connection between Frist and HCA, his voting record on healthcare issues, the entire way the HCA fraud case was handled and settled, these are unsettling precedents for all Americans.  These, combined with the insider trading issues should give us pause. 

There is no malpractice for news media, for not looking up facts that are not on the surface although such is the case in medicine.  We expect our doctors to do all the research.   We expect them to protect us.  Frist, as a physician, is aware of this, but perhaps as a politician he does not feel the standards need be the same.  We do not seem to expect this from our government.  We do not seem to expect this from our news sources.

Beware of Good Intentions
And the Passions in their eyes
For None of them can open
The Gates of Paradise

                                            David Byrne "The Gates of Paradise"

Pardon my ranting, raving, and rambling.  I suppose I have been a little frazzled and as a result, not as coherent as I would like to be.  I should not have inflicted my silliness on you.

Following is a rather long quote I saved to my quote file when I was reading Ian McEwan’s "Saturday".  It seemed like a rather apt and well put description of a modern phenomenon, and I still like it:

Have his anxieties been making a fool of him?  It’s part of the new order, this narrowing of mental freedom, of his right to roam.  Not so long ago his thoughts ranged more predictably, over a longer list of subjects.  He suspects he’s becoming a dupe, the willing, febrile consumer of news fodder, opininion, speculation and of all the crumbs authorities let fall. He’s a docile citizen, watching Leviathan grow stronger while he creeps under its shadow for protection.  ….  Does he think he’s contributing something, watching news programmes, or lying on his back on the sofa on Sunday aftrnoons, reading more opinion columns of ungrounded certainties, more long articles about what really lies behind this or that development, or abut what is most surely going to happen next …  Either way, it amounts to a consensus of a kind, an orthodoxy of attention, a mild subjucation in itself.  Does he think that his ambivalence — if that’s what it really is — excuses him from the general conformity?

No answers, just something else to think about.

I sometimes think the world has gone to crazy extremes and there is no place left in the middle anymore.

FEMA is a joke, brimming with incompetence.   I have to say the same for the government as well.  These are the people who are supposed to be looking out for us?  And they think we are stupid enough not to notice?

The republicans are so far to the right I am surprised that they are even on the horizon, and yet, they seem to have successfully convinced us that they are pretty close to the 50-yard-line and we are going to be OK.  Are we waking up from this nightmare yet?

But the democrats!  Sometimes they too get so wrapped up they are almost rabid!.  At times they act like the poor revolutionaries (remember Nicaragua) who overthrow the Fascist government only to become Fascists themselves when they get in power.  The parties used to be much closer, now they are like polar opposites, and yet they both get so caught up in the screaming and justifying that they forget the ocean in between them.

What ever happened to responsibility and caring for your neighbors and your family/community/country?