Archive for May, 2009
Sorry to be so scarce…
Kasia May 18th, 2009
Thursday evening, Canuck and I went to visit with the DJs. (Yay!)
Friday evening, Canuck and I had a wedding rehearsal to attend. (Yay! ono two counts: one, that Peanut and Cletus got married, and two, that it wasn’t OUR wedding! Much more relaxing that way!)
Saturday morning, we went to the Rite of Reader at the Cathedral, then to Peanut and Cletus’ wedding. After the wedding we went to the hospital to see Adam. Then we went to the reception, had a lovely time, and got home…on the early side for a wedding reception, but quite late for us.
Sunday morning: 10:15 Mass, then a talk by a fellow parishioner, then errands and shopping. Canuck wanted to go down to Belle Isle (he’s never been) to do some photography, so off we went, then out to dinner.
Late last night, I found out that Adam died at 3:20 yesterday afternoon. I’m glad he’s not suffering any more, and while the Church doesn’t take a position without miracles and whatnot, with all he suffered I’m confident that he’s either with Jesus already or going to be very soon. But it’s still very sad, especially for his family and his closer friends. (HUGS!)
So now I’m waiting to hear about funeral arrangements for him…and then I heard that one of Canuck’s uncles (by marriage, but still) is in the hospital and not expected to live. (This uncle and aunt were unable to come to the wedding because of the uncle’s health…it’s been coming, we just didn’t know quite when it would be.) Prayers for Mac would be appreciated.
I will try to be back and posting later this week.
(Oh – and be sure to wish my beloved Canuck a happy birthday tomorrow! 
)
Urgent prayer request
Photo angst
Kasia May 14th, 2009
Our parish has decided to do a photo directory.
May I just say that I would like to smack whatever brainiac came up with the concept of photo directories? I thought I’d finished with yearbooks when I graduated high school.
OK, so I’m complaining more than is warranted. Here’s the real crux of my angst: I don’t like the way I look in photos, no matter how good the photographer. The best you can hope for is that I’ll be tepid about the shot, especially if it includes my face. (Sort of a, “Well, that’s about as good as a picture of me gets” kind of attitude.)
I realize that such a notable lack of self-confidence and self-appreciation is less than ideal (and less than attractive). But there you have it.
So I was thinking of ways to make the experience more pleasant, and more likely to result in a picture that I’m moderately happy with. (In addition to the photo being preserved for posterity in the directory, we are given a complimentary 8×10 or somesuch for participating. I am assuming the photo company more than recoups its costs by people ordering photo packages, “because it’s so much more convenient” than wrangling the kids into yet ANOTHER family photo to send to Grandma and Aunt Martha and Cousin Mae.)
The photo company suggested that some groups choose to go for a “unified” look by coordinating their colors. My first thought, honestly, was that that sounded kind of creepy. Well, maybe “creepy” isn’t exactly the word, but…how about “artificially uniform”? You know, like when the whole family’s names (right down to the dog) all start with the same letter and they run around in matching outfits every day? Not “creepy”…just perhaps excessively cutesy, and definitely not what I’m used to.
But then I thought about the picture Jaibee so kindly took of me and Canuck at a parish function, in which I’m wearing a burnt-orange turtleneck and brown sweater, and he’s wearing a blue-and-white button-down shirt. (We weren’t expecting to have our picture taken.) The background is blue. I look conspicuously out of place. My outfit looks great on me, as his does on him; but together we look…odd.
And I thought about our wedding pictures, in which everyone in the bridal party coordinates except my poor cousin, who was pressed into service as a groomsman after my friend who was supposed to serve got a horrible, nasty ‘flu. My friend still drove in from Chicago for the wedding, despite my arguments; but I told him he was NOT going to seat guests or stand up when he’d had a 103-degree fever twelve hours earlier. So my cousin Peter, bless his heart, borrowed a gray suit from my father and stood up, for which I was and am profoundly grateful. That said, because my dad’s suit was a blue-gray and the other suits were charcoal…well, you know. It’s one of those things I’m glad I didn’t notice on the day of the wedding, because there was nothing to be done anyway. And I’ll always be able to laugh and relate the story when I show people the pictures.
Then today I was looking at Michelle’s post of her family pictures. I like how each sub-family (as it were) chose a color or set of colors to wear. It gives a tied-in look without screaming “OSMONDS!” – each person is wearing a shade and style that suits them, rather than being all matchy-matchy bridesmaid-perfect.
So in short, I now see the wisdom of the photo company’s advice. Now, the real challenge begins: choosing a color that both Canuck and I can wear and not hate, and finding us each something to wear in said color.
Did I mention the photo is May 30?
I’m going to be a busy bee…
A brief Clam rant
Kasia May 11th, 2009
Who the **** is the fashion buyer for Kohl’s in Novi?
Whoever you are, if you are reading this: what possessed you to ONLY order capri-length work pants for women for this summer?
I realize that you work in the fashion industry. Consequently, I am sure you have a lot of latitude in your work apparel and style. I mean, if the Flock of Seagulls hair somehow came back into style (Heaven forfend), I’ll bet you could wear it to work and get nothing but compliments. You could probably dye your hair hot pink with blue polka dots, as long as it was done at a chic salon and matched your shoes.
Some of us, however, work in more conservative industries and workplaces. Banks and finance, for instance. Churches and religious organizations. Heck, even the university I worked for last, depending on the department or office, might have been too conservative for your herringbone gabardine capris (or whatever they were).
I could probably get away with wearing them in my particular office. Provided that I knew for certain I wouldn’t have to go downtown, that is; and provided that I knew for certain that no one from the downtown offices would stop by.
But frankly, I don’t want to “get away with” wearing something. Especially not something that looks, quite honestly, stupid. Dress pants are meant to be pants. “Short pants” were worn by little boys back in the day, and I’m willing to bet even they didn’t look as silly as what you’re marketing.
Maybe you think it’s a little sexy. Is that what you were thinking? (Because honestly, most retail skirts are shorter than these pants; but skirts are expected to show some leg. Pants aren’t.) If so, here’s a news flash for you: for those of us who do not work in the fashion or adult entertainment industries, “sexy” is not considered “professional” and is not favorably looked upon at work.
Here’s my other beef, and I don’t know whether this is a beef with Kohl’s corporate office or with the Novi store manager. What brainiac decided to sandwich the store’s five square feet or so of (ugly) plus-sized women’s clothing in between the swimsuits and the petites?!? What kind of marketing disaster is that?!?
Thank you for reading. This has been a Clam rant. If the buyer for Kohl’s Novi does happen to read this: yes, I do realize I am hopelessly fashion-impaired. I like classic clothing that takes forever to go out of style, if it ever does. I am sure you were following a great tip on a hot trend. I wish you well. But your store will not be getting any of my money this year.
Action…consequence! Neat, isn’t it?
Kasia May 9th, 2009
Ten years or so ago, when I was seriously looking at law school, I remember looking at Brigham Young University. I’m not a Mormon, I’ve never been a Mormon, and I think I can safely say that I will never be a Mormon. However, they were listed as one of the best ConLaw schools in the nation, and ConLaw was one of my main interests.
So I went onto their web site to figure out whether I could, in fact, handle BYU and their expectations of their students. Including reading their code of conduct, which stipulated that not only was I expected to conduct myself like a Latter-Day Saint (no caffeine, no tobacco, no alcohol, no sex, etc.) while at school, but I was expected to conduct myself thus on my vacations too. You know: at home. In another state.
I think my response was something to the effect of: “Screw that.” And I decided that Brigham Young was not in my future.
Why do I bring this up?
Because apparently some kid in Ohio and his family have decided that the code of conduct they agreed to at the fundamentalist Baptist school they have been sending him to…well, it’s just not fair and it shouldn’t apply outside of the classroom.
Never mind that the kid signed an agreement at the beginning of the year. Never mind that the parents have been tacitly consenting to the code of conduct by paying tuition at this private school.
Now, to be honest, I am not sure I agree with the principal’s having signed the form, although it does underscore the point that in life we have to make choices, and sometimes there are nasty consequences when we make a decision. It’s a very good lesson in free will, actually; the kid knows what his options are and what the consequences will be if he chooses to go to the prom with his public school girlfriend. As of when that story was written, he was planning to go to the prom. That will result in his being suspended from the remainder of classes and from the school’s commencement exercises. Clear, knowable consequences.
I wouldn’t send my children to Heritage Christian. Why not? Well, because I’m not a fundamentalist Baptist, and I disagree with their code of conduct (which I would have read prior to giving them a tuition check) just as much as their theology. But I hope they stick to their guns on this, even though I think their objections are misguided and wrongheaded. Because just once in a while, it would be nice to see the entitlement mentality we’ve adopted have a little ding put in it.
I didn’t apply to Brigham Young, because I wasn’t prepared to change my life to suit their rules. (I didn’t even apply to law school, as it turned out, but that’s another post.) Had I gone to BYU, I would’ve done my level best to meet their expectations, if for no other reason than to protect my investment (legal education, like private school, ain’t cheap) but also as a matter of personal integrity. Seems like common sense to me.
These are the things that grind my gears and will eventually give me ulcers…
