My mother recently called me an "old woman" because a bought a potpourri container at the show. You know: one of those lovely wooden bowls with a decorative lid designed to let out the aroma from the potpourri stored within.
I made some comment about needing to get some potpourri now that I have a lovely potpourri container, and she just looked at me and said "you really are turning into an old woman, you know that?"
I went to the show this year.
I hadn't intended to, as I usually avoid the show like the plague. The last few times I went I found it rather unpleasant - full of loud noises, overpriced rides, ridiculously expensive showbags and tacky stalls all selling the same cheap Chinese garbage.
Yes, I realise I really do sound like an old lady at this point. Let's face it, I was born a grumpy old lady - I'm just waiting for my hair colour to catch up.
Anyway, I have been harbouring a hankering to visit a "real show" - a proper country show with things like cakes and chutneys and cross-stitch and chickens and cows and sundry other things that may or may not involve the letter "c". A real show, where people win prizes like "best in show" and everyone else bitches about them bribing the judges. A "real show", where you can watch woodchopping and show jumping. A "real show", which may or may not involve the sudden death of the local vicar in the middle of the jam judging competition - leading to an amateur sleuth helping the police solve the crime...
Okay, that last bit probably isn't a deal-breaker, but you get my drift.
As it turns out, I was house-sitting a place that was walking distance from the show, and I thought I might just go after all and see if I could find the show I wanted to see somewhere under the overpriced showbags.
So, I went to the show. And I found it.
They had buried it deep. I only found the craft displays and flowers because I new that particular space existed. If you didn't know it was there, you would have walked right past it. I found things like the military memorabilia exhibit completely by accident. I found the chickens and the cows - but the time it took me to do so meant I missed out on seeing the circus. And while I saw some woodchopping, it wasn't because I actually knew when it was on.
I didn't manage to get my hands on a time table. I kept hoping someone on a loudspeaker would say "and now, on the such-and-such arena, you will see such-and-such" - but all I could hear was dozens of pre-recorded "Buy our stuff! You totally want a dagwood dog!" messages blaring from the food stalls.
I wonder why people feel it has become necessary to shout "hot chips!" at passers-by these days. I certainly didn't notice anyone suddenly going "Of course! I had completely forgotten to eat deep-fried food!" as a result of the constant stream of noise...
Eventually, after doing a couple of loops of the place and having a ride on a Ferris wheel (I do love a Ferris wheel), I decided to go home and eat real food for lunch. As I was walking away from the showgrounds, I realised I hadn't seen any cakes or jams. Had I missed them? Where they ever there?
Oh, well. At least I got a nice potpourri container out of it.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
A comparison
So, there I was, in the "washroom" at work. I was busy washing my hands while singing "Happy Birthday, Typhoid Mary" in my head (as I am wont to do of occasion), wondering if I'm the only person in the office who takes a full minute to wash her hands...
At that point, one of the other ladies swans out of the toilet, rinses her hands under the tap for two seconds (without even using soap), and then grabs hold of the door handle without even drying her hands first (nothing helps germs move from one surface to another quite like water).
And suddenly I felt completely okay with my habit of using paper hand-towels to open the door when exiting public restrooms (or washing my hands with sanitizer afterwards if I can't use any paper).
I may be unnecessarily fussy, but other people are icky.
At that point, one of the other ladies swans out of the toilet, rinses her hands under the tap for two seconds (without even using soap), and then grabs hold of the door handle without even drying her hands first (nothing helps germs move from one surface to another quite like water).
And suddenly I felt completely okay with my habit of using paper hand-towels to open the door when exiting public restrooms (or washing my hands with sanitizer afterwards if I can't use any paper).
I may be unnecessarily fussy, but other people are icky.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
94
Marks are back. I got 94% for The Most Annoying Subject I Have Ever Taken, so I guess I did okay on the Short Story... sorry, I mean "case study".
I wonder if I'll do as well on a case study where I don't make the entire thing up.
I'm actually a bit concerned about the maths involved because, unless they don't count half-marks, even if I didn't lose a single mark on the "case study" I should have only gotten 93.5. And, let's face it, I really should have lost marks for the short story... er, "case study". Even if they didn't notice it was completely fabricated and contained unnecessary details, it was too long and didn't have an introduction or conclusion (mind you, they didn't ask for those).
Score 1 for Autonomous Learning, though. I decided I was going to find what they wanted me to learn and learn it regardless of any lack of guidance. It might just have worked.
I wonder if I'll do as well on a case study where I don't make the entire thing up.
I'm actually a bit concerned about the maths involved because, unless they don't count half-marks, even if I didn't lose a single mark on the "case study" I should have only gotten 93.5. And, let's face it, I really should have lost marks for the short story... er, "case study". Even if they didn't notice it was completely fabricated and contained unnecessary details, it was too long and didn't have an introduction or conclusion (mind you, they didn't ask for those).
Score 1 for Autonomous Learning, though. I decided I was going to find what they wanted me to learn and learn it regardless of any lack of guidance. It might just have worked.
They call it "football"
I saw the last 15 minutes of a rugby league game the other night. Well, if you live in one of two states in Australia it was the rugby league game: The State of Origin.
Every year, the regular "football" season is interrupted by this meta-game that involves people from teams all over the country (*ahem*) coming together to play in a state team based on where they were "born" (or, at least, where they can pretend they spent some formative years).
By "all over the country" I mean the third of it that actually cares about or watches League. Most other places think of a different code when they say "football".
I have no idea why we call rugby league "football" in this country. They very rarely touch the ball with their feet. Mostly, it seems to be a giant wrestling match with a ball involved.
Here's my description of the rules of the game, based on limited periods of observation:
Someone kicks the ball, then someone catches it. That person then becomes "it" (like in tag). He attempts to run forward, but usually only makes it a couple of paces before several members of the opposite team drag him to the ground and sit on his head. There is a moment where he apparently tries to free himself, then he just gives up and passes the ball to someone else on his team. That person then becomes "it" and attempts to run forward a few paces before someone sits on his head.
At some point in time, after quite a bit of head-sitting, the person who is "it" manages to take the ball over a line, where he attempts to put it down. The members of the other team try to stop him from doing this - largely by dragging him back over the line and sitting on his head.
If he manages to put the ball down on the other side of the line, he's allowed to kick it at the goal. I think he can give away his turn at kicking to one of his other team members, but I'm not sure. Then the process starts again.
If anything goes wrong, and they aren't sure who should be "it", the teams form two horizontal human pyramids and try to push each other away from the ball. Somehow, as a result of all this pushing, the ball gets to someone hanging out the back of the pyramids, and he then throws it to someone who becomes "it". Then the head-sitting starts again.
As I said, I'm not sure why people call this "footy". I expect it's ironic.
I'm also curious to know why rugby league is considered manly while dancing is considered a threat to one's masculinity. There is much less full body contact between grown men in dancing - and fewer occasions where a man can expect to find another man's groin in his face.
But, there you go.
Every year, the regular "football" season is interrupted by this meta-game that involves people from teams all over the country (*ahem*) coming together to play in a state team based on where they were "born" (or, at least, where they can pretend they spent some formative years).
By "all over the country" I mean the third of it that actually cares about or watches League. Most other places think of a different code when they say "football".
I have no idea why we call rugby league "football" in this country. They very rarely touch the ball with their feet. Mostly, it seems to be a giant wrestling match with a ball involved.
Here's my description of the rules of the game, based on limited periods of observation:
Someone kicks the ball, then someone catches it. That person then becomes "it" (like in tag). He attempts to run forward, but usually only makes it a couple of paces before several members of the opposite team drag him to the ground and sit on his head. There is a moment where he apparently tries to free himself, then he just gives up and passes the ball to someone else on his team. That person then becomes "it" and attempts to run forward a few paces before someone sits on his head.
At some point in time, after quite a bit of head-sitting, the person who is "it" manages to take the ball over a line, where he attempts to put it down. The members of the other team try to stop him from doing this - largely by dragging him back over the line and sitting on his head.
If he manages to put the ball down on the other side of the line, he's allowed to kick it at the goal. I think he can give away his turn at kicking to one of his other team members, but I'm not sure. Then the process starts again.
If anything goes wrong, and they aren't sure who should be "it", the teams form two horizontal human pyramids and try to push each other away from the ball. Somehow, as a result of all this pushing, the ball gets to someone hanging out the back of the pyramids, and he then throws it to someone who becomes "it". Then the head-sitting starts again.
As I said, I'm not sure why people call this "footy". I expect it's ironic.
I'm also curious to know why rugby league is considered manly while dancing is considered a threat to one's masculinity. There is much less full body contact between grown men in dancing - and fewer occasions where a man can expect to find another man's groin in his face.
But, there you go.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
And now I will never know
I've come to the conclusion that I only ask questions of a certain unit coordinator if I never want to receive a clear answer or a useful reply of any description.
I base this on the fact that I have never yet asked her a question in which she didn't take great pains to fully explain something that did not, in fact, answer my question at all.
I don't know why this is. I sometimes suspect she isn't actually reading my question, but only scanning it for keywords - or that she is, in fact, willfully misunderstanding me.
It's either that, or she is on such a completely different wavelength to me that she cannot understand why I would want an answer the the question I have asked, and therefore tries to answer a different question instead.
It's the kind of situation where, if I asked, "do I need a carrot for this salad?" she would respond: "salads are known to have both fruits and vegetables in them."
Now, this could be a subtle way to say "I can't advise you on this, because deciding whether or not to include a carrot is part of the activity", but surely you don't need to say that subtly - you can come right out and say "you must chose for yourself if carrots are needed," can't you?
Or, even better, you could say "carrots are advisable" or "carrots are inadvisable" or "carrots make no difference one way or another".
Any of these things would be better than not talking about carrots at all.
Yet, that is how she answers the vast majority of questions: by not answering them at all.
I have this wonderful communicator again this semester (part two of The Most Frustrating Subject I Have Ever Undertaken) and I have been trying to ask her questions about the practicum for months, now. We were finally given access to the prac booklet and told to decide where we wanted to go within a week ("I must not fly all the way to Armidale just to shake a lecturer. I must not fly all the way to Armidale just to shake a lecturer...")
"Oh joy and bliss!" I think to myself, "There's an actual practicums experience office! I can ask practical practicum related questions of people who aren't frustratingly vague!"
So I fire them an email asking a couple of basic questions... and they write back saying my email has been forwarded to the unit coordinator.
A couple of hours later the unit coordinator sends out a generic email to everyone that doesn't really answer either of my questions. Is this because she simply hasn't gotten around to answering me yet, or is this the best I'm ever going to get from her?
Will I ever know?
I base this on the fact that I have never yet asked her a question in which she didn't take great pains to fully explain something that did not, in fact, answer my question at all.
I don't know why this is. I sometimes suspect she isn't actually reading my question, but only scanning it for keywords - or that she is, in fact, willfully misunderstanding me.
It's either that, or she is on such a completely different wavelength to me that she cannot understand why I would want an answer the the question I have asked, and therefore tries to answer a different question instead.
It's the kind of situation where, if I asked, "do I need a carrot for this salad?" she would respond: "salads are known to have both fruits and vegetables in them."
Now, this could be a subtle way to say "I can't advise you on this, because deciding whether or not to include a carrot is part of the activity", but surely you don't need to say that subtly - you can come right out and say "you must chose for yourself if carrots are needed," can't you?
Or, even better, you could say "carrots are advisable" or "carrots are inadvisable" or "carrots make no difference one way or another".
Any of these things would be better than not talking about carrots at all.
Yet, that is how she answers the vast majority of questions: by not answering them at all.
I have this wonderful communicator again this semester (part two of The Most Frustrating Subject I Have Ever Undertaken) and I have been trying to ask her questions about the practicum for months, now. We were finally given access to the prac booklet and told to decide where we wanted to go within a week ("I must not fly all the way to Armidale just to shake a lecturer. I must not fly all the way to Armidale just to shake a lecturer...")
"Oh joy and bliss!" I think to myself, "There's an actual practicums experience office! I can ask practical practicum related questions of people who aren't frustratingly vague!"
So I fire them an email asking a couple of basic questions... and they write back saying my email has been forwarded to the unit coordinator.
A couple of hours later the unit coordinator sends out a generic email to everyone that doesn't really answer either of my questions. Is this because she simply hasn't gotten around to answering me yet, or is this the best I'm ever going to get from her?
Will I ever know?
Headspace
I keep thinking of blog posts I could write when I'm no where near a computer. Then, when I'm finally sitting in front of one, with only a few minutes to bang something out...
Nothin'.
It's the same with emails I think of writing when I'm in the car or the shower, or things I think of saying to people when I'm not likely to see them for the next three days.
It's like my brain only works when I can't possibly put it to any use.
So, if you're wondering why I haven't been writing much these days - it's because I can't quite get my headspace and my physical space in the same space at the moment.
Nothin'.
It's the same with emails I think of writing when I'm in the car or the shower, or things I think of saying to people when I'm not likely to see them for the next three days.
It's like my brain only works when I can't possibly put it to any use.
So, if you're wondering why I haven't been writing much these days - it's because I can't quite get my headspace and my physical space in the same space at the moment.
Monday, June 17, 2013
Word of the day: propaedeutic
And the word of the day is:
Propaedeutic
"Propaedeutic" is an adverb meaning "serving or needed as preparation for learning or further study"1 or "relating to or of the nature of preliminary instruction"2. Or a noun for something that one could describe using those adjectives.
In other words, something propaedeutic is something you learn before you learn something else.
So, the claim that learning an auxiliary language like Esperanto or Interlingua makes it easier to learn a subsequent language is stating that auxiliary languages have propaedeutic qualities.
See if you can use it in a sentence and make it sound normal!
It's pronounced pro(as in 'professional') pae(as in 'paediatric') deu(as in 'deuce') tic(as in 'tick').
1. propaedeutic. (2007). In The Penguin English Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/entry/penguineng/propaedeutic
2. propaedeutic. (2005). In The Macquarie Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/entry/macqdict/propaedeutic
Propaedeutic
"Propaedeutic" is an adverb meaning "serving or needed as preparation for learning or further study"1 or "relating to or of the nature of preliminary instruction"2. Or a noun for something that one could describe using those adjectives.
In other words, something propaedeutic is something you learn before you learn something else.
So, the claim that learning an auxiliary language like Esperanto or Interlingua makes it easier to learn a subsequent language is stating that auxiliary languages have propaedeutic qualities.
See if you can use it in a sentence and make it sound normal!
It's pronounced pro(as in 'professional') pae(as in 'paediatric') deu(as in 'deuce') tic(as in 'tick').
1. propaedeutic. (2007). In The Penguin English Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/entry/penguineng/propaedeutic
2. propaedeutic. (2005). In The Macquarie Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/entry/macqdict/propaedeutic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)