Monday, July 24, 2017

A Random Assortment

~ More Jean Vanier. (And there's a documentary, Summer in the Forest! It's a bit over-produced, but the story is, of course, wonderful.)

~ Fireworks!

~ I had no issues with Goodnight Moon, but I do now.

~ I had never even heard of the Donner party before visiting the site. Reading more about it is even worse.

~ I think PAL would've liked this (about McDonalds).

~ On typewriters in prison.

~ The inventor of a self-cleaning house. (Charlotte Perkins Gilman might have loved this.)

~ Jane Jacobs, Georgia O'Keeffe, and the Power of a Marimekko Dress.

~ I think this is a powerful piece with an implicit criticism of the terrible NYTimes article advocating for the murder of disabled children.

~ I am partial to the Modern Love series, but this is especially profound. And I think it's applicable to more areas of life than just love.

~ Foster Care as Punishment: The New Reality of 'Jane Crow'." In the community I grew up in, CPS was eschewed because they might interfere with parents' decision to punish their children as they saw fit (i.e. with spanking). But racial and class-based interference is a far bigger problem. Free Range parenting should have something to say about this.


Miss Self-Important said...

You thought it was normal that the bunny's dollhouse should have its own source of power, and that there is a page on which he says goodnight to "nobody"?

Emily Hale said...

Ha! Imagination and poetry? (Admittedly a pretty nihilistic poetic sensibility.)

Miss Self-Important said...

I actually saw this Goodnight Moon post months ago, when I first acquired the book (I never read it as a kid but all the moms were like, "OH A CLASSIC MUST-HAVE PUTS CHILDREN TO SLEEP LIKE MAGIC"), and found it totally bizarre (and ineffective in putting my child to sleep) and started researching how this bizarre thing could've become A CLASSIC. This person understood my confusion. But I also came across this Slate essay extolling the poetic and imaginary genius of the book. I think this essay will make you feel better. (I was not persuaded though.)

Also, the article about Marimekko dresses as intended for reform-minded intellectual women is hilarious. Those things are such frump-sacks; I never understood how they could be so coveted. Also the idea that "modern living" can be achieved by the acquisition of the right sorts of tchotchkes and chairs and large pockets on your clothing.

Emily Hale said...

Saw that Slate article--liked it a lot.

Yeah--the Marimekko article didn't persuade me. And it didn't make hardly anything of (or include a pic of!) Jane Jacobs. It really made me wish I'd gone to that O'Keeffe exhibit when we were in Brooklyn last weekend though. I know next to nothing about Marimekko and enjoyed the barely relevant mention of the Trump women. But I can't pass up an article about fashion that is at least a little political.

Miss Self-Important said...

True, this article badly needed more illustration. But political women's fashion has always been political, and I think this idea that serious women need to wear frump-sacks to show that frivolities like clothes don't get in the way of their serious work has a long, ironic history. The frump-sacks always cost way more than any really practical clothing. I think the current equivalent would be athleisure like Birkenstock sandals and Lululemon, both of which cost a ton. Besides, if you really want to be practical and socially transgressive at the same time, you should just go out in your underpants. That way, there will be no textile barrier hampering your work.

Hopkins said...

You'd never heard of the Donner Party?!

Emily Hale said...

I don't think so! Or if I did, I didn't pay much attention. Until we stopped by the site.