Track-back Tuesday ~ "some day, mother f......s"

I've been shuffling the January archives again....here's one from January 2010:

In the Right Direction

Reading around various websites and forums recently, I got the feeling that people, in some perverse way, seem to be at best concentrating on negativity, and at worst almost willing on catastrophe and World War III. Heading towards yet more war, especially of the World War variety is not the direction in which the world is supposed to be moving. Later, I read an article by Stephen Gyllenhaal: Peace On Earth, the last paragraph struck a chord, then led me back to something else.

The last para:

I'll take it all and keep right on moving -- one little ant doing his little bit among six billion other ants, because one day, you sons of bitches who talk peace and deliver war, who talk health and deliver illness, who talk good and do bad -- some day, mother f--ckers there will be peace on this planet -- real peace -- because time, real time, is on the side of evolution.

That thought of evolution catapulted me back to a 2007 article which I have mentioned before on this blog, but do not apologise for re-airing: "A History of Violence" by Steven Pinker is interesting and a little uplifiting, though not without its own warning. As a prelude it states:

"In the decade of Darfur and Iraq, and shortly after the century of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, the claim that violence has been diminishing may seem somewhere between hallucinatory and obscene. Yet recent studies that seek to quantify the historical ebb and flow of violence point to exactly that conclusion."

Steven Pinker goes on to present his theory that, in spite of current world events, in his opinion man has become less violent over the millennia, centuries and decades. The article is well worth reading in full. He finishes with this paragraph:

"But the phenomenon does force us to rethink our understanding of violence. Man's inhumanity to man has long been a subject for moralization. With the knowledge that something has driven it dramatically down, we can also treat it as a matter of cause and effect. Instead of asking, "Why is there war?" we might ask, "Why is there peace?" From the likelihood that states will commit genocide to the way that people treat cats, we must have been doing something right. And it would be nice to know what, exactly, it is."

I want to shout out "Astrological Ages, sir?"

Age of Taurus, Age of Aries - two previous Ages when, in spite of progress in many other areas, violence and inhumanity to man flourished. The Bull and The Ram - neither signifies peace and fellowship, and the history of those Ages broadly matches the symbolism. It wasn't until The Age of Pisces dawned, that there was any sign of a very, very slow movement away from violence - but SO very slow that unless someone like Steven Pinker outlines the stages, and spells it all out, it's impossible to see. If we could have a magical video of the history of man on Earth, fast-forwarded at lightning speed, then it might become clear that we are indeed heading in the right direction, strange as it seems.

Astrologers cannot agree whether we are still in the Age of Pisces or on the cusp of the Age of Aquarius, or have entered it already. Whichever way one prefers to think, neither Pisces nor Aquarius symbolises violence. We must still be working through the dregs of what was left of the Age of Aries, I guess. Perhaps we are nowhere near as far along the astrological age trail as some suspect. But we are moving in a good direction.

Steven Pinker adds

"It is not a license for complacency: We enjoy the peace we find today because people in past generations were appalled by the violence in their time and worked to end it, and so we should work to end the appalling violence in our time. Nor is it necessarily grounds for optimism about the immediate future, since the world has never before had national leaders who combine pre-modern sensibilities with modern weapons."

We do have to accept that we live in risky times, of course. To continually focus on that fact, as so many tend to do these days, is not going to make things any less risky. All it does is to spread doom and gloom and take the joy from the life we have.

Music Monday ~ Martin Luther King Day

In 1968, and for many years after, I wasn't properly aware of the prominence of Dr. King in the affairs of the USA. Back in England I was living in something of a bubble, I suppose, without a reliable TV, and not often reading national newspapers. Reports of MLK's assassination, headline fashion, if I noticed them at all, must have gone right over my head. How different things are in 2016 when someone is killed or dies from natural causes. The internet is filled with notices of horror and/or grief - it'd be impossible not to be affected by such events now, wherever one's location.

On this Martin Luther King Day two musical interludes, and an apt cartoon drawing:





In a favourite movie of mine Across the Universe, the story is centered on songs by The Beatles. There's a scene depicting characters' emotions in the aftermath of events on that fateful day in 1968. The song was written by George Harrison.

 Cartoon by Bill Mauldin

Gary Gilmore & Barbara Amiel, Baroness Black of Crossharbour : Whodathunkit?

What to write about... what to write about? Well...tomorrow, 17 January, in 1977 was the day on which murderer Gary Gilmore was executed.

U.S. 1977 U.S.A. Gary Gilmore 17th January, 1977 : Gary Gilmore, convicted in the double murder of an elderly couple, is shot to death by a firing squad in Utah. (See here)

Wikipedia

Gilmore was the first person in the United States executed since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, his story had immense cultural resonance at the time. It continues to influence the works of writers, artists and advertisers in the early 21st century.

Hat-tip Daily Mail

Could I find an angle that nobody else has approached on this?

I've mentioned the TV drama The Executioner's Song, based on Gilmore's story, in a post comparing Tommy Lee Jones (who played the part of Gilmore) and Oliver Stone (who wasn't involved)- that post is HERE.

In Rachel Monroe's interesting article about Norman Mailer's book upon which the TV drama was based she mentions that during her researches she discovered that "in folder 192.6 of the Mailer archive, I found something unexpected: A 20+ page horoscope analysis of Gilmore from astrologer/numerologist Daniel Wexler, along with Wexler's bill for $250. (That's nearly $1000 in 2015 dollars; for comparison purposes...)." Astrologers have already referenced Ms Monroe's article and, unsurprisingly, offered their own interpretations of Gilmore's natal chart.

From Rachel Monroe's article:

Gary grew up to be a leather jacketed reform school kid with a disdain for authority and a strong anti-authoritarian streak. He chugged cough syrup and took hot-wired 57 Chevys for joyrides, abandoning them when they ran out of gas. He robbed pawnshops, grocery stores, and his friends' houses. He went to prison for the first time at age 16, and didn't spend more than two years free for the rest of his life. In prison, he was trouble, too. He spat on guards and flung his food on the floor when it wasn't to his taste. He displayed a visceral, undiscriminating hatred for anyone in uniform.

Despite his rage and selfishness, though, there was something about Gary that made people want to give him another chance. The flip side of his cruelty was his sensitivity; he was a man who'd been deeply wounded by the world, and it showed. Despite his long history of criminal behavior, Gary could seem almost innocent at times. He was a talented artist, and he produced dozens of sketches of his favorite subject: sad-eyed children, "round faces with a bewildered, inviolable innocence," Mikal Gilmore writes. But then again, he drew a lot of porno scenes, too.

Scratches head.

Glancing at Gilmore's natal chart (see below), it looks seriously uncomfortable. Look at those oppositions between Scorpio and Taurus, and the slightly listing Grand Square (the red lines). We know that Gilmore's youth and family background wasn't pleasant, that has to factor in.

Hmmm. Different angle?

Another person whose life story we know, who was born on the same date, same year as Gary Gilmore? Moon and rising sign would be different, but maybe a similarity of some kind would show through - not that I'd be expecting to find another murderer you understand - astrology ain't that good!

There is another person who shares Gilmore's date of birth and, importantly, whose life is documented online: Barbara Amiel. She was born across the Atlantic, in England. She's still around: "Barbara Joan Estelle Amiel, Baroness Black of Crossharbour (born 4 December 1940) is a British journalist, writer, and socialite. She is the wife of former media baron Conrad Black". Her marriage to Black was her fifth (some sources say 4th).

From a Guardian profile: She was the scourge of the left and the darling of the right - a powerful woman lusted after by powerful men - and she snared one of the most powerful when she married Conrad Black, the Canadian media tycoon and then owner of the Telegraph group, in July 1992.

Gilmore and Amiel - there could hardly be two more dissimilar people. He an impoverished youth, no stranger to violence and petty crime, family often "on the run" from the law; in adulthood he added the murder of two people to his resumé - and for no apparent reason. She from a disrupted family background, her father committed suicide in 1956. As life progressed she educated herself, used feminine beauty and seductive sexiness to drive her life in what she saw as better directions. She became a journalist. There were multiple marriages, her last to wealthy, powerful former media baron Conrad Black. In spite of her eventual obscene wealth, as described in newspaper and magazine articles, her life was not all plain sailing. Conrad Black was disgraced and jailed for several white collar crimes. Details at this NPR website. He served prison time: sentenced to six and a half years' imprisonment. In 2011, two of the charges were overturned on appeal and he was re-sentenced to 42 months in prison on one count of mail fraud and one count of obstruction of justice. He was released on 4 May 2012 (Wikipedia) Barbara Amiel, his wife, stood by him initially, but according to this 2004 piece from The Herald Scotland

"I HAVE an extravagance that knows no bounds." Journalist, author and society queen Barbara Amiel's words have returned to haunt her. Akin to Marie Antoinette's let them eat cake, they will go down in history as a memorable show of arrogance made by a powerful woman before her cut-glass world cracked around her.

To Amiel's horror, she and husband Conrad Black, former chairman of the Telegraph Group, are accused of using the New York-based publishing company Hollinger International, which he built from scratch, as a "piggy bank" to fund their lifestyles.

Such is Lady Black's upset over her fall from grace that she has abandoned Lord Black in the US and remains 3000 miles away in their palatial Kensington home with only two butlers, three maids, domestic staff, chef and chauffeur for company.

From the same piece:

Amiel took journalists from American Vogue through her London mansion and couldn't resist showing them her eye-popping collection of designer belongings. Furs, evening gowns, casuals, gloves, belts and shoes spilled out of two rooms and an area in her private gym.

One closet contained 12 Hermes crocodile bags, with a value of more than (pounds) 50,000 and an even more valuable collection of 40 Pellegrino jewel-handled evening bags. Other shelves groaned under the weight of more than 100 pairs of Manolo Blahnik shoes costing from (pounds) 250 to (pounds) 800 a pair. She was quoted as saying she thought nothing of spending (pounds) 35,000 on a cocktail dress and showed the Vogue team a necklace worth (pounds) 100,000.

And

Her [earlier] private life remained eventful. In her autobiography, Confessions, she admitted having been addicted to anti-depressants and painkillers. There was also a back-street abortion aged 24, which left her unable to have children. This fact has often been used by commentators to explain her need for material objects to fill her life.

 Conrad Black and Wife Barbara Amiel -"it's Fashion" Macmillan Cancer Relief Charity Hosted by Vogue Magazine at Waddesdon Manor, Buckinghamshire. ( Dave Benett 2001)

Their natal charts:


Gary Gilmore, born 4 December 1940, McGamey, Texas at 6.30 AM (Astrodienst, AA rating)

Barbara Amiel, born 4 December 1940, Watford, UK, time unknown, chart set for 12 noon.

Reconciling these two, astrologically, entails standing well back. Crucial data is missing for Amiel - her exact Moon placement, rising sign/degree, and house positions. Her Moon though, amazingly enough, is going to be somewhere in Aquarius, to match Gilmore's. Standing back, subtle and not so subtle correspondences could be discernible in spite of these two characters' only too obvious real life differences.

Those Scorpio-Taurus oppositions, and many square aspects are common to both. In Gilmore's case Scorpio translated more as darkness and death, but for Amiel Scorpio's other attribute, sexiness, dominates. Venus-ruled Taurus in Gilmore's case is reflected in his latent artistic ability - he is said to have been keen on drawing while in prison. In Amiel's case Taurus, in its other guise manifested in her acquisitive tendencies to own luxurious clothes, jewels, homes, etc.

Those uncomfortable square aspects common to both charts manifested with extreme intensity for Gilmore, both in his youth and his adulthood. They manifested to a lesser degree for Amiel in her youth, but mainly probably related to her husband's disgrace in her adult years.

I notice that Uranus at 23.24 Taurus was a couple of degrees from "demon fixed star" Algol, so could (just) be counted as a conjunction. Uranus is a generational planet though, only of interest natally if linked to personal planet(s). Gilmore and Amiel had Algol opposing their natal Mercury, with both Uranus and Mercury squaring natal Moon (not certain in Amiel's case) forming a T-square. I'm not sure whether a Uranus/Algol conjunction in aspect to a personal planet "counts" in astrology, but if it does, then Algol's more traditional attributes manifested for Gilmore, in Amiel's case the "female passion and power" side of Algol surfaced.

Here, and always, we're dealing with astrological potential versus real-world opportunity, and the way similar charts of near astrological twins can manifest in very different ways, but with subtle resonance.

Arty Farty Friday ~ Lee Bontecou

Lee Bontecou, born 15 January 1931 in Providence, Rhode Island. Another artist of whom I've been oblivious.




Snips from an article HERE

Lee Bontecou grew up in Providence, Rhode Island, where, during World War II, her mother worked in a factory wiring submarine parts. This memory, together with reports she heard about the war and the Holocaust, had a profound effect on Bontecou’s childhood consciousness. As an adult, she continues to be disturbed by world events, and her work often demonstrates a sharp awareness of the horrors of war and social injustice. As a child, Bontecou also developed her life-long love of nature, particularly marine biology, due to the many summers she pent in Nova Scotia, in her mother’s native Canada......


.......Frustration with the demands of the art market led Bontecou to gradually detach herself from the New York art world. However but the often-repeated idea that she became a recluse is misconception. Suspicious of the restraints imposed by scholarly and critical attempts to characterize her work, Bontecou had always remained independent of any single art movement. She continued to work in private, on a series of ceiling-mounted sculptures “constructed with a handmade welded frame and embellished with numerous small porcelain elements all made by hand. These works have an expansive and calming effect. They are both galactic and terrestrial.” These were revealed for the first time in 2003, when a major traveling retrospective of her work was held...

Born 15 January 1931, Providence Rhode Island. Chart set for 12 noon as time of birth isn't known. Moon's position not as shown, though probably would have been in Sagittarius. Rising sign unknown.

A few stand outs for me, relating to her art style:

Her Fire Grand Trine linking Venus (planet of the arts) to Uranus and Mars reflects her dynamic, out of the ordinary style rather well. Her stellium (cluster) of personal planets in Capricorn reflect, in a different way her art style. Her natal Sun loosely conjunct Saturn (Capricorn's ruler) underlines the "hardness" of the sculptural style to which she gravitated (as against the softer flow of paint from brush to canvas).

Those uncomfortable square aspects between Uranus and her Capricorn planets perhaps somehow represent her suspicions "of restraints (Saturn) imposed by scholarly and critical attempts to characterize her work", as mentioned in the snips above, and led to her need to detach herself from the art world for a time.

Doubts - I have a few...

I do harbour doubts about some areas of astrology - others do too, even fully fledged astrologers. Here are a couple of excerpts from a 2001 piece by Australian astrologer, Candy Hillenbrand: WHAT'S IN A NAME? Deconstructing the Roots of Astrological Meaning

There was a time, a few years ago, when after a lengthy and dizzying honeymoon period with astrology, I finally began to think and question, and to ask why, where and how does this cosmic craft of ours work, and if it does indeed work, what is it that works? Questioning is a dangerous pastime for an astrologer, for once we become converted and begin practising this most princely, or is it queenly of stellar sciences, there is generally no turning back. We are hooked: where once our lives were chaotic and meaningless, now we have substituted order, meaning and numinosity. Like many of my fellow colleagues, I initially embraced astrology with a fervour not unlike that of a born-again religious convert who first meets with his/her God/dess.

Astrology's Uranian quality turned on a light, illuminating once mysterious corners of my life and being. It explained and named the previously un-nameable. It was nothing short of an aha experience - so that's why I'm like that I mused - I'm not a dialectical nightmare after all, as one former partner had endlessly teased - I'm a very normal and stereotypical Libran! What a relief it was.

[She goes on to explain her own areas of later doubt.]

......In the face of such gargantuan claims to be able to answer life's big and little questions, to be able to tell us the why, who, what, where and even when of life, many of us can forget the need to question, to inquire, to investigate, to think for ourselves, to examine and ultimately to doubt. The 'd' word is clearly a dirty word for many astrologers. In the presence of doubt we can find ourselves in a highly uncertain and formless place, bereft of answers, shorn of predictability, and of course we all know that astrologers need answers and thrive on certainty. After all, predictability is our greatest claim to fame. Without that, perhaps we may cease to exist!

But what this questionless state of affairs really engenders is little more than a fundamentalist belief system with all the hallmarks of a somewhat rabid religion. Those few who do dare to ask the difficult questions are more often than not marginalized as heretics to the true cause of astrology, for it seems apparent that astrologers are threatened by too many questions. Yet it is my belief that the discipline and practice of astrology could only benefit from some serious questioning, investigation and ultimately deconstruction. It is important to note that deconstruction is a dismantling process: it is not a destruction as many believe, and its purpose is to find the source of meaning which lies at the core of any system or set of beliefs.

My own doubts were outlined during my earliest blogging days, most of them remain :

#1 I don't believe that when a natal chart seems not to match its owner, using the most basic methods of delineation, the astrologer should use a "deeper" set of techniques, or add more ingredients, to make it fit. If a chart doesn't fit, the reason is most likely to be attributable to the native's heredity, location, environment, health, circumstances, etc. Transits and cycles, especially those of Saturn, will be observable in the life, in accordance with the natal chart, even when personality, as traditionally described, does not clearly manifest in an individual. I see astrology as a fragile natural manifestation originated in the moment of birth. The fragile, natural effect is going to be modified in any number of ways. It's amazing that the effect remains discernible at all in so many cases.

#2 The idea of hard and fast divisions in an astrological chart bothers me. There is no universally accepted "correct" house system or even correct zodiac. Signs and houses ought to be open to some blending effect. "There are no walls in space". I believe a natal chart is capable of displaying a view of the native, not exact, but through swirling mists - hints, outlines and suggestions only. Likewise for astrological predictions - hints only, and plenty of swirling mists there too!

#3 Progressions, secondary, primary or any other -ary do not impress me much. Likewise for solar arcs, midpoints, solar return charts, and lunar return charts. My instincts go against these astrological "tools". They reduce astrology to some kind of board game. The fact that they originate from the past isn't enough to change my mind.

#4 I'm wary of any theory related to karma, soul purpose, reincarnation.

#5 I'm skeptical of the idea that names from mythology, allocated to newly discovered/designated celestial bodies, should be taken as a guide to a celestial body's meaning. It makes no sense - even less sense when astrologers jump on the idea the day after announcements are made by astronomers, the very people who look on astrology as total bullshit!

The way I see it is due to the way I am "wired". I could be wrong, but well... so could you!

Postscript

This morning's very sad news of the death of Alan Rickman caused me to search for my own post featuring him, and his natal chart. For anyone interested, it's at:
http://twilightstarsong.blogspot.com/2009/08/alan-rickman.html

Rantette - with a nose for Galbanum

I was about to prepare a rantette bemoaning the fact that when things change it's rarely for the better. Things in question at the time: perfumes.

Never having been a big fan of most perfumes, I'm really, really picky. Greenish, citrus-ish, light flowery and/or fruity blends are the only "families" of fragrances I can bear to wear. Back in the days of vacations by air, from Britain, I'd scour airport duty-free shops to try tester bottles, hoping to find something acceptable. That's how I found three that became my favourites: Vent Vert by Balmain, Calyx by Prescriptives and Spring Fever by Origins.

My rantette was to be about the way two of those have been reformulated in recent years, and the other one has been dropped completely, in spite of petitioning by other rantetters like me. The reformulations of Vent Vert (it had two during the 1990s) and Calyx which was "taken over" by a different cosmetics firm, Clinique, a few years ago are but shadows of the originals. Why, I wonder should this be?

I've come to the conclusion in the case of Clinique's version of Calyx, it's likely a matter of making the fragrance generally weaker, possibly omitting some more expensive ingredients, and so cheaper to make, but the price is either the same as, or higher than before. Origins' Spring Fever disappearance is a puzzle, but that too could be due to increasing cost of ingredients, I guess.

The most interesting, the one with most information available on its reformulation, is Vent Vert.

It appears the main difference in the original Vent Vert and the reformulations is less of, or complete lack of Galbanum, which is said to have made the original so outstandingly striking. The reviewer at the above link wrote, of the original format of Vent Vert:

The interplay of contrasts and harmonies in the composition is simply breathtaking. Vent Vert is a ruffian dressed in transparent chiffon. One cannot help being mesmerized by her.

And of the first reformlation:

While Vent Vert is still lovely, it lacks its most remarkable quality — its renegade spirit.

Writers about perfume are wont to use similar heady descriptives as those beloved of wine buffs!

So then, what is Galbanum? It has a more interesting background than I expected.

From Wikipedia

Galbanum is an aromatic gum resin, the product of certain umbelliferous Persian plant species in the genus Ferula, chiefly Ferula gummosa (synonym F. galbaniflua) and Ferula rubricaulis. Galbanum-yielding plants grow plentifully on the slopes of the mountain ranges of northern Iran.

Aha...Iran! Is this a clue ? Are supplies of this ingredient not easily come by any more?

There's more...

In the Book of Exodus 30:34, it is mentioned as being used in the making of a Ketoret which is used when referring to the consecrated incense described in the Hebrew Bible and Talmud. It is also referred to as the HaKetoret (the incense). It was offered on the specialized incense altar in the time when the Tabernacle was located in the First and Second Jerusalem Temples. The ketoret was an important component of the Temple service in Jerusalem. Rashi of the 12th century comments on this passage that galbanum is bitter and was included in the incense as a reminder of deliberate and unrepentant sinners.

It is occasionally used in the making of modern perfume, and is the ingredient which gives the distinctive smell to the fragrances "Must" by Cartier, "Vent Vert" by Balmain, "Chanel No. 19" and "Vol De Nuit" by Guerlain. The debut of Galbanum in fine modern perfumery is generally thought to be the origin of the "Green" family of scents, exemplified by the scent "Vent Vert" first launched by Balmain in 1945.

Some of the mythology may have transferred to the related galbanum which was referred to as the sacred “mother resin.” Galbanum was highly treasured as a sacred substance by the ancient Egyptians. The “green” incense of Egyptian antiquity is believed to have been galbanum. Galbanum resin has a very intense green scent accompanied by a turpentine odor. The initial notes are a very bitter, acrid, and peculiar scent followed by a complex green, spicy, woody, balsamlike fragrance. When diluted the scent of galbanum has variously been described as reminiscent of pine (due to the pinene and limonene content), evergreen, green bamboo, parsley, green apples, musk, or simply intense green. The oil has a pine like topnote which is less pronounced in the odor of the resinoid. The latter, in turn, has a more woody balsamic, conifer resinous character.[unreliable source?] Galbanum is frequently adulterated with pine oil.

Galbanum oil is steam-distilled to yield a green, fruity-floral odor reminiscent of fine malt

“Isn't it funny how day by day nothing changes, but when you look back, [or sniff back] everything is different?” ~ Anon.

Track-back Tuesday - "hell of a way to run a railroad"

Wondering what I was posting on this date in 2008, I shuffled around in the archives. It was another General Election year, in fact my first election year in the USA, and it was to be my first voting year too, as I became a US citizen in August of 2008 - just in time!

Here's my brief post published on 12 January 2008:

Confused US Presidential election watchers, in the States and elsewhere, who are not completely clear about the way the system works, might be interested to read an excellent explanation, written by an astrologer, at the Skyscript forum. Here is the relevant thread. As the astrologer points out, without a clear understanding of this convoluted system, predicting becomes even more of a crap-shoot. The rest of the thread adds useful information, including links to charts for all US states.

I checked, to discover whether the Skyscript link in my old post still holds good. It does, but I've decided to borrow that forum contribution to copy here, just in case at some point the original does disappear. I hope the writer, Tom, and Skyscript will not object; if so I shall remove it on request, leaving only the link.

Here's the Skyscript posting. For 2016, of course, names of candidates have changed, but the system remains the same. I like this explanation, it was written by an American for British (and other) readers, but is a useful reminder to us all of the convolutions of the American electoral system.

Posted by "Tom", Moderator of the forum at that time: Fri Jan 11, 2008.
Post subject: The US Primary Election System.

I really haven't been able to figure out which is worse: the astrologers lack of understanding of this quadrennial phenomenon or the media's. So I'm going to try to give a brief, but accurate description of this system and where it stands today, January 11, 2008, so that interested astrologers might be able to use it to make sensible predictions.

1) The US government is two tiered, and commonly but inaccurately called "federal" and "state." The state part is accurate, but when people say "federal" they really mean "national." "Federal" is the word that describes the system in its entirety. The federal system has two levels: state and national. I'll stick to the word "federal" because that is the term most people use.

2) The US Constitution, the supreme law of the land, sets out a system of how the President is elected. In the beginning the President was not chosen by a national election, but that changed along the way. The basic method remains the same. Each state is assigned an certain number of electors based on the state's representation in Congress (House plus Senate). These electors vote for President. Each State Legislature is given the authority to determine how the electors are chosen. The word "legislature" is specifically used in the US Constitution. It is this system that planted the seeds for the growth of the two-party system we currently live with.

3) Political Parties are not mentioned in the Constitution. Therefore the rules for the primary elections and caucuses are established by each state (see the 10th Amendment to the Constitution) and actually by each party organization within that state. States are not required to hold a primary election, and not all states do. Some, like my state of New Jersey hold them so close to convention time that the election rarely matters. Why this is so is a whole other topic.

4) It is more accurate to say that we really have 50 different party organizations for each major party, despite their each having a national organization. It is at the state level that things get done. But it is at the federal level that things get noticed and reported upon. So if you want to be President, you have to traipse from state to state to win the nomination of your party. You do that by winning delegates to the convention. These delegates are pledged to vote for the candidate who wins their primary on the first ballot only and some are not even pledged to do that. The Federal Government has no say-so in this. How you win delegates is by getting votes in each of the primaries and caucuses.

For those who look at this askance, and believe there is a man behind the curtain who makes things happen, I can only suggest that you go and work for a political party for a time. You will discover they are not well oiled machines humming along on orders from Washington. They are actually quite chaotic. If you don't want to do this, then sit back and watch the unfolding drama of the Clinton machine fighting the Chicago/Daley machine which is backing Obama. These are two strong political organizations who play for keeps and there is no one at the head of the Democrat National Committee who is going to get in the way. The idea that Bara[c]k Obama is the product of a virgin birth, and is this wholesome idealist who is above machine politics is too absurd to consider. He's the product of a rough and tumble organization, and he's no virgin himself

5) Many, if not most or possibly all states are not "winner take all" primaries. In other words if a state has 10 delegates the delegates are not all pledged to the person who gets the most votes in that state. If there are three major candidates, the may be split up 4, 3, and 3. This is key to understanding where we stand today.

6) The goal in the primaries then is to win enough delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot, because after that anything can happen. If this does happen (and it hasn't happened in more than a half century I believe), it is called a "brokered" convention. It is possible in that case that none of the major candidates would emerge as the party's nominee.

7) The mainstream press is reporting the primaries like they are all "winner take all." Therefore it is vitally important for proper understanding and prediction to ignore the mainstream press. For example, the current wisdom in the mainstream press is that Republican Candidate Mitt Romney must "win" in Michigan or he is through. Guess who has the most delegates pledged to him at this moment? That's right - Mitt Romney. And the only thing Romney has "won" is the Wyoming caucuses that no one is even aware of. On the Democrat side, the current leader in pledged delegates is Bara[c]k Obama. He has one more delegate than Hillary Clinton and John Edwards is 3 or 4 behind her. So this thing has a long, long way to go.

8 ) Second reason to ignore the mainstream press: despite how it is being reported what happened in New Hampshire was not an upset on either side. This is flat out misrepresentation by the press. Hillary Clinton was expected to win in New Hampshire all along. It was only at the last minute that the press published their own polls that showed her losing, by double digits in some cases, to a "surging" Bara[c]k Obama. The late polls were wrong. There was no upset. On the Republican side John McCain was always expected to win in NH and the polls got it right - so how can we call a victory by the favorite an upset? We can't. So stop believing these guys for anything other than time and dates of the opening of the contests and double check that.

9) The only reason any of the major candidates would drop out now is lack of funds. John Edwards is too close in the delegate count to quit, but it is rumored that he is short of money. If that is the case, he might be forced out prematurely. However, even if he drops out, his delegates are most likely, depending on state rules, are still obligated to vote for him on the first ballot unless he releases them to vote either how he instructs them or he can tell them to vote their conscience. But state rules vary, so he may not even be able to do this. I told you it was chaotic. If he accumulates a lot of delegates, but cannot win outright, he can become a "king maker" by throwing his support to one candidate or the other in exchange for some political favor, say a cabinet post or the vice presidency. So let's say Clinton has the most delegates and Obama is close but neither has enough to win outright on the first ballot, Edwards can make a deal for his delegates. This scenario is possible but unlikely. It is also possible that if three candidates or two are close in delegate count but do not have a majority no matter what, and the convention cannot decide which of the two to nominate, they could nominate a third person who never participated in the primaries at all. Again this is possible but highly unlikely.

10) This may seem like a hell of a way to run a railroad, but ultimately it produces what it is intended to produce: a nominee for the office of President of the United States. At that point the electoral system as outlined in the Constitution takes over, and on January 21, 2008, [I think he meant 2009] we will have a new President for four years and three years into that Administration, the whole damn process starts over again for at least one of the parties. When Jan 20, the usual day set for inauguration, falls on a Sunday, as it does this year, the inauguration is postponed one day. At least I think that is true.

I hope this makes some sense, especially to those unfamiliar with what is going on over here. It is confusing enough for most Americans. I can't imagine what it looks like to those living outside the US.

Tom

Music Monday ~ Your Birthday #1 ?

Inputting one's birth date at this website brings up the title of the song that was #1 on the day you were born. Turns out, according to this (and presumably in the USA) that #1 on my date of birth was Over the Rainbow (Judy Garland).

In Britain, maybe Over the Rainbow was also very popular at the time I was born. Another popular number of the 1930s, had became even more popular when Mitchell Parish added the lyrics in 1938 to Deep Purple. Larry Clinton and His Orchestra recorded one of the most popular versions of the song on 23 December 1938. Featuring vocalist Bea Wain, the Clinton version was a huge hit. Released in January 1939 on Victor Records, the Clinton recording was number one on the U.S. popular music charts for nine consecutive weeks in 1939. It was Adelaide Hall who introduced the song to Britain and recorded it for Decca. Her version was released on 15 May 1939. (See here).

I like the Larry Clinton/Bea Wain version:

On husband Anyjazz's birth date #1 wasSing Sing Sing - Benny Goodman, which as it happens, has been one of his longtime favourite jazz/swing pieces! He likes the longer version, but this one's good for the rest of us, it's from The Benny Goodman Story movie:



What was your birth-day #1?

Wordy Weekend

I stumbled over the word "fnord" when reading online the other day. I initially took it as a typographical error, but checked anyway.

Wikipedia: Fnord is a word used in newsgroup and hacker culture to indicate that someone is being ironic, humorous or surreal. Often placed at the end of a statement in brackets (fnord) to make the ironic purpose clear, it is a label that may be applied to any random or surreal sentence, coercive subtext, or anything jarringly out of context (intentionally or not).

So now I know.

Another look-up occurred when husband called to me "What's a pinniped?" He was in the midst of his breakfast-time read of our local newspaper. Wikipedia to the rescue again: Pinnipeds (from Latin pinna "fin" and pes, pedis "foot") commonly known as seals. Oooo-kay - but I couldn't help wondering why someone writing for a local newspaper in Oklahoma would be writing about seals, and further, why didn't they simply write "seals"?

Looking for a book to read while drying my hair I picked up a stray I didn't recognise from my bookshelves: Ella Minnow Pea. I still do not remember why I bought it, or from whence it came. It's a 2001 novel by Mark Dunn. The full title of the hardcover version is Ella Minnow Pea: a progressively lipogrammatic epistolary fable, while the paperback version (mine) is titled Ella Minnow Pea: A Novel in Letters.

More look-ups!

A lipogram (from Ancient Greek leipográmmatos, "leaving out a letter") is a kind of constrained writing or word game consisting in writing paragraphs or longer works in which a particular letter or group of letters is avoided — usually a common vowel, and frequently E, the most common letter in the English language. Larousse defines a lipogram as a "literary work in which one compels oneself strictly to exclude one or several letters of the alphabet."

Writing a lipogram may be a trivial task when avoiding uncommon letters like Z, J, Q, or X, but it is much more difficult to avoid common letters like E, T or A, as the author must omit many ordinary words. Grammatically meaningful and smooth-flowing lipograms can be difficult to compose. Identifying lipograms can also be problematic, as there is always the possibility that a given piece of writing in any language may be unintentionally lipogrammatic. For example, Poe's poem The Raven contains no Z, but there is no evidence that this was intentional.

I haven't read very far into the novel yet, and am not confident I shall stick with it.
From the book's back cover:

Ella Minnow Pea is a girl living happily on the fictional island of Nollop off the coast of South Carolina. Nollop was named after Nevin Nollop, author of the immortal pangram,* "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog." Now Ella finds herself acting to save her friends, family, and fellow citizens from the encroaching totalitarianism of the island's Council, which has banned the use of certain letters of the alphabet as they fall from a memorial statue of Nevin Nollop. As the letters progressively drop from the statue they also disappear from the novel. The result is both a hilarious and moving story of one girl's fight for freedom of expression, as well as a linguistic tour de force sure to delight word lovers everywhere.

*pangram: a sentence or phrase that includes all the letters of the alphabet.

From the little I've read, so far, I have Ella Minnow Pea categorised as a very, very twee lady's version of "1984", and suspect I shall come to the conclusion that it'd be preferable to re-read "1984".

Ella Minnow Pea is, I guess, an allegorical novel. At last, a word I do know well!
Simple Definition of allegory : a story in which the characters and events are symbols that stand for ideas about human life or for a political or historical situation.

All of which brings me nicely to this:

Flicking through my copy of "Taking Off Emily Dickinson's Clothes" (oddly named volume of selected poems by Billy Collins) I landed on The Death of Allegory. I like it! It reminded me of a couple of old posts of mine touching on the topic of allegory: Stops on a Mythical Journey from 2013; and The Rabbit Hole of a Wandering Mind from last year.

To save copy typing I've lifted it from Poetry Foundation website.

(I trust I am not going to be hauled over the coals copyright-wise - if I am breaking any law the item will be removed forthwith upon instruction to do so.)




The Death of Allegory
By Billy Collins

I am wondering what became of all those tall abstractions
that used to pose, robed and statuesque, in paintings
and parade about on the pages of the Renaissance
displaying their capital letters like license plates.

Truth cantering on a powerful horse,
Chastity, eyes downcast, fluttering with veils.
Each one was marble come to life, a thought in a coat,
Courtesy bowing with one hand always extended,

Villainy sharpening an instrument behind a wall,
Reason with her crown and Constancy alert behind a helm.
They are all retired now, consigned to a Florida for tropes.
Justice is there standing by an open refrigerator.

Valor lies in bed listening to the rain.
Even Death has nothing to do but mend his cloak and hood,
and all their props are locked away in a warehouse,
hourglasses, globes, blindfolds and shackles.

Even if you called them back, there are no places left
for them to go, no Garden of Mirth or Bower of Bliss.
The Valley of Forgiveness is lined with condominiums
and chain saws are howling in the Forest of Despair.

Here on the table near the window is a vase of peonies
and next to it black binoculars and a money clip,
exactly the kind of thing we now prefer,
objects that sit quietly on a line in lower case,

themselves and nothing more, a wheelbarrow,
an empty mailbox, a razor blade resting in a glass ashtray.
As for the others, the great ideas on horseback
and the long-haired virtues in embroidered gowns,

it looks as though they have traveled down
that road you see on the final page of storybooks,
the one that winds up a green hillside and disappears
into an unseen valley where everyone must be fast asleep.

Arty Farty Friday ~ Luiz Gasparetto's Amazing Ability

Just before Christmas occasional commenter "JD" passed on to me links to information about Luiz Gasparetto. I'd not heard or read about his amazing abilities.

“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
(William Shakespeare's "Hamlet")

PART 1

PART 2

From astro.com - Luiz Gasparetto's natal chart is available there, I've added a chart here too.

Brazilian member of a famous family of psychics. Their mom, Zibia, channels discarnate entities, Luiz channels famous painters and his brother Irineau channels classical musicians. Luiz continued his education to also become a psychologist.

Born on 16 August 1949 in São Paulo, Brazil, at 6.55 AM ("A" rating = reliable)

The Grand trine linking Venus (planet of the arts)in Virgo to Taurus Moon (Taurus is ruled by Venus), and Jupiter in Capricorn, jumps out first from his natal chart. The Grand Trine is in Earth signs, so doesn't immediately lead one to suspect indications of psychic or mediumship abilities. So, what would indicate those types of skills in a chart? I'd expect, at least, prominent Water. Uranus and Mars are in Cancer, but Mars squares Neptune (I'd have expected some softer links to Neptune, but see nothing that helps.)

His Leo Sun and ascendant helped him into the public spotlight for a time; Sun semi-sextiles Venus in Virgo, which could mean that he wasn't always comfortable in the spotlight - maybe.

I don't see anything that immediately fits the amazing ability to channel great artists this guy appears to have - do you?

Resonance

Thoughts on astrology which resonate with

me. They come from Richard Grossinger in his book The Night Sky - The Science and Anthropology of the Stars and Planets. There are several posts, from 2008 onward mentioning Dr. Grossinger's writings - they are all easily accessible via the Label Cloud in my sidebar. In recent years I notice, from his website (which is mentioned in my 2010 post) that he has joined astrologer Robert Phoenix (see astrology blog links in sidebar) for interview on occasion.

Although responses to the planets of the Solar System cannot be demonstrated experimentally in the way that patterning by the Sun and Moon can, we cannot overlook how much electrical, magnetic, and gravitational material is supplied by them, especially those that are particularly close to us (like Mars and Venus) or particularly large (like Jupiter and Saturn). Each of these bodies helps to maintain the overall equilibrium of the Solar System, and each of them gives off varying forces as it passes nearer to and further from the Earth. Jupiter cannot be seen by a bird in flight, nor can Mars be heard by a mole in its tunnel, but these planetary bodies generate resonance, perhaps of a discrete and profound sort not yet discovered, and that resonance makes up part of the overall environmental background in which the Earth occurs. Unquestionably, the influence upon us of Jupiter is small, and the influences of Uranus and Neptune are respectively smaller still, but they are not nil. And it is not their present resonance that matters so much as the repetition, for millions of years, of the same complex pattern in watery mirrors on Earth.

I've quoted this paragraph before, but it bears repeating:

Astrology is patient and long-standing. It tries to coordinate large dynamic blocks of time, space, and personality. It is an attempt to say the impossible, a system for measuring the immeasurable. If it fails, it fails the biggest task of all: to define the simultaneity of life, thought, creation, and space-time. It is better to attempt such a measurement than to pretend it could have no relevance at all.