Another Random Hate-Worthy Pet Peeve

The word 'verbage'.  I heard it today at work.  It really set me off.  It should never be used.  In general.  EVER.

Why?   Why not just say 'wording'.  Or 'words'.  I cannot think of any time either of these are not an acceptable choice.

This word just reeks of 'corporate speak' (see aslo: touch base).  It just sounds stuffy.  Intellectual wannabe-esque.  Every time I hear it, I want to counteract it with something highly undignified, such as 'DUDE' (which I find more socially acceptable).

Anyone else HATE the word verbage?  Anyone willing to voluntarily admit he/she uses it?

Undateable, Part 2

So I finished the book.  Freakin' hilarious.

Some common offenses men make that I found in the book:
--Zubaz
--Orthopedic-style shoes (EW!  And the worst part is, I see them CONSTANTLY)
--Corporate Swag (a.k.a. a fleece with, say, "MetLife" emblazoned on it)
--Wrong shoe/sock combinations (and I honestly feel this could be a book in and of itself)
--Tighty whiteys
--Jorts  (WHY?)
--T-shirts with various offensive sayings
--Zubaz (deserve a second mention)
--Bad dancing

I have seen many of the above clothing offenses.  In fact, a good amount of men I know have committed at least one clothing-related offense.  I have a lot of thoughts on this.  For instance, many men I know have committed some of these clothing offenses.  I do agree that black socks with sandals are a crime against humanity.   However, I do believe there are decent men underneath this.  At the end of the book, in fact, there was talk about how one of the authors' subjects transformed himself into someone completely dateable.

Now, I have some friends who have 'trained' some men.  I have a couple friends who have 'redressed' their men.  I have always been curious how one does this.  I have never done this.  I do realize that most men count on the women in their lives to help them with fashion decisions.  However, on the other hand,  I personally would not like it if I started dating a guy and, a couple dates in, he randomly 'suggested' I make some tweaks to my wardrobe.  I like to take some fashion risks - so if men think about or notice these things, I might be doing the man's equivalent of 'undateable' acts, and frankly, I don't give a damn.

I am also curious - I can imagine men have a list of 'undateable' qualities in women - some generally harmless qualities.  I can definitely see men getting put off by things like women not offering to pay on a date - but what are the more superficial qualities that drive men nuts?  Bad highlights?  A certain style makeup?  Do men care enough?  What are these qualities?  Do men get offended when women try to change how they dress, or are they happy to have advice?

There was so much great material in this book.  There's more to discuss.

Busy Busy

Carrie Bradshaw to the random businessman who bumps her on the street:
You're so busy...you're SO busy!!!

Is it just me, or does it drive any of my readers nuts when people constantly complain on how incredibly busy they are?  What is this, an epidemic lately?  The reason it bothers me is not I don't believe these people are busy, it's that, newsflash, WE ALL ARE.  In theory, if 'busy' is an acceptable excuse for having not done something, then EVERYONE could use it for EVERYTHING.

That, and people who actually are busy don't need to say it.  You had a baby last week?  Yeah, you're probably busy.  You don't need to explain it.  And THESE people usually don't.  I hate it when you ask someone a simple, reasonable request and they give you a dissertation on everything they've been up to lately - in the amount of time he or she spent making him or herself look/sound important, he or she could have instead performed said task.  That, and some of these 'busy' folks have simply overcommitted themselves.  Not that that's a crime, but again, that was said individual's decision.  Didn't you know what you were getting into when you volunteered for 85 different projects?

That, and this reminds of an episode of Oprah (I know, blush) where they staged interventions on people who were hiding from reality in what seemed to be socially acceptable outlets.  There was a woman who worked 110 hours a week at 3 separate jobs.  She made it out that she was trying to make the extra money to support her family, but according to her husband, they didn't really need it to live comfortably. In reality, she was avoiding her home because she was unhappy in her marriage and constantly arguing with her kids.  Had she chosen to deal with this problem by say, drugs or alcohol, people would have been all over her from the get-go, however, since she was hiding from her life in a 'socially acceptable' outlet, people who knew her looked the other way.  I think this is probably the case of a couple 'constantly super busy' people I know.  Not that they're unhappy with their marriages/kids, but that they're just making themselves busy as a means of avoiding dealing with something.

Sorry for the rant.  I am not really sure where this came from.

Groupon?

So, I will be honest.  I don't really know what groupon is.  But I do know that it's popular.  I could easily google it and look it up, but I'm lazy/not really THAT interested.

Anyhow.  I am now the proud owner of a 'groupon'.  I have an upcoming jewelry-making class at Caravan Beads, thanks to Emily!  Woohoo!

Pictures of my self-designed jewelry to come.

A Lovely Birthday Gift From My Mother

Undateable.  311 Things Guys do that Guarantee They Won't be Dating or Having Sex
By:  Ellen Rakieten & Anne Coyle

Elaine:  So basically, what you're saying is that 95% of the population is undateable?

Jerry:  UNDATEABLE!

Elaine:  So how are all these people getting together?

Jerry:  Alcohol!

I can't wait to read it!

More on the Baby-Sitter's Club

So my very good friend and loyal blog reader sent me a couple websites in response to my BSC discussion earlier.

www.claudiasroom.blogspot.com

www.whatclaudiawore.com

Love it.  Love, love, love it.

She also sent me a link to this article.  In it, we learn that Ann M. Martin only wrote the first 60 of the books or so, the rest were done by ghostwriters.  Tear.  Although this isn't shocking to me now that I think of it at an older age, there was a moment of disappointment for me there.

Anyhow - apparently, there is some movement to 'update' the BSC books (phase out the perms and keds and replace them when straightening irons and texting).  I will get into my thoughts on this in a later post.  However, from the comments section in this article, I learned something about myself.

You see, I always wondering whether I was Claudia or Stacey.  Claudia was all about the outrageous outfits and into fashion, however, Stacey was the only child and more studious.  I was always a bit torn between the two.  However, upon reading some of the comments on this page, such as:

*New hipster outfit for Claudia?
Bangs, oversized t-shirt, high-waisted bright pink pants, high tops, various necklaces, chunky jewelry, side ponytail...

*Does anybody else remember when Claudia wore clock-patterned tights with suspenders? Or what about that time she wore an oversized tuxedo with giant shoulder pads and a red cummerbund? Anybody recall her "Miss Frizzle" outfit?

I remember them all too well.

I blame Claudia for all my "artsy" elementary school fashion missteps

*Oh, God, yes. To this day I have an affinity for quirky earrings, which is probably the last vestige of Claud's influence on my wardrobe.

I do love my earrings, so I'll grudgingly thank her for that, though I still haven't forgiven her for inspiring that DIY shredded-and-knotted oversized craft-store T-shirt that I wore everywhere in sixth grade. Yikes.

Jury's decided.  I'm Claudia.

Some Thoughts on The Lost Symbol

So I just finished reading Dan Brown's 'The Lost Symbol'.  I was wanting to formulate an organized book report that ties everything together with a lovely introductory paragraph, thesis, conclusion, etc., but then I realized a) this blog isn't a 7th grade writing class assignment and b) I don't think I care enough to put in the time and effort to write that (nor do my readers care enough to put in the time and effort to read it).   So, with no further ado, a simple bulleted list of random thoughts/criticisms/opinions on said book.

Oh, before I do so....SPOILER(S) ALERT.

*Can we get our main character, Mr. Robert Langdon, a steady girlfriend?  Now, don't get me wrong - I realize these aren't romance novels.  If one read these books in order (Angels & Demons, The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol), which I didn't, it appears as though first there's Victoria, then there's Sophie, now there's Katherine (although there's no outright romance between Katherine and Langdon, just some brief implications that it could possibly be there).  At the end of the Da Vinci Code, it seemed that Langdon was ending up with Sophie, who is now completely and totally absent.  He supposedly ended up with Victoria at the end of A&D, and if I remember correctly, there's a very brief reference to her and her absence in the DVC, but really, nothing is actually explained.  Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that Mr. Brown has chosen to create intelligent, successful, strong-minded women as Mr. Langdon's counterparts, as opposed to just one-dimensional trophies.  However, I don't like their supposed disposability.  I can only imagine if there's a fourth book, there will be a fourth chick.

*Granted, I read the DVC five years ago at this point and I can't say I vividly remember it.  However, what I don't remember is Robert Langdon being a complete and total moron.   That and I can't remember the lead-ins to each scene being so painfully obvious.  It seems as though there were so many moments like the following:
--some sort of conflict arises
--other character suggests: haven't you heard of xyz? (as a potential explanation to the previous conflict)
--Langdon:  Yeah, but duuuuhhhh, everyone knows that's just a rumor (I'm paraphrasing)
--xyz happens to be true (who'da thunk?)
--Langdon:  Ohhhh....
This scene plays out multiple times throughout the book.  After a while I wanted to reach in and smack Robert Langdon, if for no reason other than the fact that he should have learned from the fact that he'd just made this same mistake 15 pages ago.

*Katherine's whole field of research 'Noetic Science' could have been completely edited out with no loss to the novel whatsoever.  Granted, although the fact that she was in a line of scientific research may have served as important character development, Brown could have made her some kind of biologist/historian/engineer, not over-explained her job, and moved on with it.  Also, I was waiting for some moment when it all tied together in the story, but it oddly didn't, leaving it seeming purposeless in the book.  Perhaps it had a greater meaning within the story that got somehow *thankfully* edited out - I say this because something of Noetics reeked of 'The Secret'.  Shiver/gag.

*The very end of the book (which was a simple letdown) made me question if Dan Brown was somehow just really excited by the Obama campaign.  Judging based on the timing of the release of this book, and presuming when it was being written, only gives more evidence to this argument.

*I do not remember feeling this disturbed whilst reading the DVC.  Although, again, I read it a while ago and don't remember it as clearly, so I may be off on this.

*It was completely and utterly ridiculous that Peter Solomon, after all he'd been through in the night, was, at the end of the evening, in decent spirits talking about Masonic secrets.

*I do believe Dan Brown is possibly on track to become M. Night Shyamalan.  Or, perhaps, they are the same person.  Now THAT would make for a good twist.

I will probably add to this list as I think of more.  Your thoughts?  Agree?  Disagree?  Like the book?

A Pair of Shoes I Owned Back in High School....

I remember the day I got these and how excited I was.  I loved them.  So practical.  I am pretty sure they still fit.  I think I'll wear them to the office later this week.  They make a statement.

Happy Dog Day!

Has Anyone Else Noticed....

So I'm watching Charles in Charge, Season 4 on dvd (and I realize I'm subjecting myself to a lot of judgment on this one) and I couldn't help but notice....

It appears as though the episodes are out of order.  For example, the first episode has Charles living in the basement and the pizza parlor has been remade into a diner, however, later episodes feature these events happening.  I am quite curious - did these episodes not have an order on file?  Was it forgotten?  Were the creators of the dvd not able to figure out a proper order?  I could see the confusion on some episodes, but based on some events, the chronology is clearly off.  I noticed on an earlier season that the first episode was a Christmas episode, which seemed off.  Do other series on dvd have this issue?  Am I the only one who noticed this about Charles in Charge?

Please stop judging me.

For Good Friday....

Happy Easter All!

Anyone Remember?

The Baby-Sitters Club books?  I don't know what made me think of these out of the blue, but I used to LOVE them.

Well, I started to wonder,  you know, 'where are they now?'   I think I stopped reading the books back around 7th or 8th grade because, you know, I thought I was suddenly too mature and sophisticated.  However, now I wonder what may have went on to happen in this series (where they always seemed to restart 8th grade every year with no explanation offered - I believe these girls spent around 9 Christmases together in a land where time froze).

Anyhow.  I went to the, cough, 'all-knowing' source Wikipedia for some further information.  As always, it looks as though someone (or several someones) have put in a lot of time and effort into the page.  It appears as though the series ended in 2000 (tear) on book 131.  As I looked over the list, I believe in my day, I got up to somewhere around the 90s.

It also appears as though the series is now out of print (?!?!?!) but will soon be reprinted.  I am not sure what this means.  But seriously, what are kids reading these days?!   That Twilight or Harry Potter crap!?  Please!

Anyhow - I always kind of wondered how this series ended (although I highly doubt anything earth-shattering happened).  One thing that I did find kind of interesting - I remember reading somewhere that Ann M. Martin is a lesbian.  I am not sure the accuracy of the source (I think I read it on some blog), however, it made sense considering that I seemed to remember she divulged a decent amount of personal information with respect to her hobbies and childhood, but nothing about her personal life (and as a children's book author, going back fifteen or so years, this clearly could have greatly affected her career).  Hmm.

Anyhow.  Does anyone have any additional information about The BSC or Ann M. Martin that Wiki seems to have missed?  Anyone else love this series like I did?