text:
Pageviews past week

Sunday, January 30, 2011

How I grubby my candles

After Christmas I really stocked up on candles. I think I paid 63 cents for these candles...I usually wipe my candles off with alcohol before I paint them. This helps remove some of that waxy feel.

I let the candle dry. Then I paint the candle with black acrylic craft paint. I usually do two coats of paint.

Once the black paint is dried I dry brush some burnt umber acrylic paint over the entire candle. You may have to practice some to get the kind of look you want. This gives the candle a brownish/black look.

Once the candle is painted and dry I brush the entire candle with Mod-Podge. While it is still wet I sprinkle the entire candle with cinnamon...I keep my candle over a aluminum pan while doing both the Mod-Podge and the cinnamon..This gets messy :)

This is how the candle will look once the cinnamon is sprinkled on.

I usually let mine set for about an hour to dry. Once the mixture is dry I just take my hands and rub lightly over the candle. This removes some of the cinnamon and allows the color to show through. You can also use a small paint brush and just brush the cinnamon off.

I just wrapped/tied a piece of cheesecloth around this one..

And there you have it...My version of a simple grubbied/grungy candle...Fun, cheap and simple to do!!

Oh, these are only for decorations...I don't burn mine!!!

Wasn't that easy!! My motto...".I'll paint anything if it's not moving."

  1. Thanks for sharing that seems easy enough. Prim Blessings! Robin

  2. You did a GREAT job!!!!You are blessed with craft talent which I am not!!
    Prim Blessings,

  3. Oh, how easy. Thanks for sharing it!

  4. What a great tutorial Rhonda, I'm heading to the dollar store next time I'm in town! Just found your blog through Tracy at Crafts Supplies Sales and Resources blog, looking forward to following you! Deb


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

WARC-Type: response

text:
Friday, March 30, 2012

Smell Great with Solid Perfumes by Ferragamo, Estee Lauder and More!

Do you like perfumes? Perhaps you have a collection of those beautifully bottled designer fragrances eh? But you know there are more attractive-looking perfumes that you can add to your collection. And you don't always have to stick to the typical liquid perfume.; there are solid perfumes avaiable as well and they are just as sweet smelling!
If you're looking for something like this you can try the Bloom Solid Perfume Broach by Salvatorre Ferragamo. This creation can serve a dual purpose. Just remove the the bow from metal case and voila! simply use it as a "Vara Brooch" or accessory. This will only cost you $42.

Robert Piguet has somehting similar to offer as well. It's a compact solid perfume that offers a fabulous scent made up of tuberose, white flower, orange, jasmine, jonquil. lily, white iris, and pink geranium. This one costs $75.

French company Quelques Fleurs is also offers a Solid Perfume Compact. It's has a very attractive and expensive 24-karat gold plated compact with a jewel stone perched in the middle. this is more expensive at $195.

And the most expensive of all is Estee Lauder's Sensuous Success Solid which is contained in a purple lock container. This uniquely-designed solid perfume can be worn as a pendant. It's the most expsieve of these four at $225.

You can all these at Neiman Marcus.

Sunday, March 18, 2012

Just Fab Shorts for Summer!

Summer time is the best time to how off your long, shapely legs. But it doesn't have to be by wearing a swimsuit you know. You can display them in a less obvious garment like shorts! Just in case you don't have any cool shorts for summer I have some for you! Maybe you'd love some of my choices.

The Candela Baker Beaded Denim Shorts is a very sexy choice with its bead accents on the hem and on top of the pockets. You'll have plenty of storage because of its 5-pocket styling and one-button closure. This one costs $209.
Do you like animal prints? Then the Python Yoke Front Pleated Shorts. This is a very classy pair that you can wear on a special date just make sure to wear it with a stylish belt. It's has a very feminine flow that's emphasized by the line that hugs your waist and hips. It also has a nice yoke front pleating. This pair can be yours for $59.90.

The High Waist Cut Off In Medium Destroyed Morea costing $189 is a very stylish pair of shorts dyed in rich indigo. It has lighter shade in some areas which makes it look even sexier. Use it on the beach or even while relaxing at home.

 Crochet shorts are among the hot trends right now so I think it'd be nice for you to have one too! Take a look at this $69.90 Crochet Shorts. This is a very nice pair featuring scalloped lace pattern over soft knit. Closure is a hook and button with zip fly.

Another very classy creation is the Proenza Schouler Flap Pocket Short. Being from a well-known designer label, expect it to be pricey. It actually costs $400. It features flap front  j-pockets, rear welt pockets, and side zipper.
Colorful shorts will go amiss this summer, so there's the pink Rugby Short by Textile Elizabeth & James, bright red Pop Shorts by MM Couture, turquoise by Robbi & Nikki, and the marigold-hued New Boymuda Shorts by Diane Von Furstenberg.

These shorts would be also awesome to wear in concerts and no merely on the beach! And if you're thinking of going to one has tickets for the seating info for Kansas City Chiefs tickets for all games and Oakland Raiders tickets maps tickets and the Denver Broncos tickets access to all home games!

Which one do you like best?

Saturday, March 3, 2012

Spike It Up with Christian Louboutin!

Today's times are tough and dangerous. Crimes are almost everywhere! And women are the ones who are more at risk of these crimes. When you walk down the street there's a chance that you could get mugged, even during day time! What more when you go out after dusk? But a lot of women today usually go out at night for some socializing so the best thing to do is to arm themselves with well. And I don't mean with a gun or anything like that. Having a pepper spray in your purse would be great. But the weapon I'm hinting at are fashionable ones, very chic. popular and totally outrageous! It's Christian Louboutin shoes, the kind that have spikes!

The spikes shoes are among the most popular footwear by the said designer.And he has several of them so if you're thinking of shoes that you can use for self defense Christian Louboutin is the brand to remember.

One of these shoes is the Asteroid Spike-Toe Pump that features sharp spikes and crystals on the almond toe. It is ,made of high-quality suede and patent calfskin with 6 1/4" covered heel and 1 3/5 concealed platforms.  This pair costs $1,595 at Neiman Marcus.
Another fab choice would be the Alti Pump Spikes. No one would dare to do something bad to you if you're wearing these because it is fully surrounded by spikes! It has 6-inch heels with 0.5 hidden platform. Get at Net-A-Porter for $1,495.
The Lady Max 100 Spike-Embellished Metallic Leather Sandals is a very sexy choice. It features spikes in the middle and near the ankle straps. You won't fall in these because it's 4.5-inch heels are quite manageable. Net-A-Porter is selling it for $1.495.
Another super sexy choice that you can have is the J-Lissimo Sandals. This metallic-turquoise sandals are made of high-quality leather with spikes starting from the vamp up to the ankle straps. Just be sure to get a dress that fully complements its amazing color. A pair will cost you $750.

And the last one is the Leather Black Bootie with a round toe, leather lining, leather sole, and spikes all over it! It also has 2-inch heels to boost your height. A pair also costs $1,495.

All of them are quite unique and outrageous. But which one would you choose?

Viola Davis in Lorraine Schwartz Emerald Earrings

The fabulous gowns weren't the only ones to make a huge statement at this year's Oscar Awards. Jewelry and extra bling were great attention-getters as well. The pair of emerald earrings worn by Oscar nominee Viola Davis was one of the stand-out pieces. You know, when I saw it it reminded me of the pair worn by Angelina Jolie at the previous Oscars.

Anyhow, Viola's emerald earrings are by renowned jeweler Lorraine Schwartz. The pair is made of 112-carat faceted Colombian emeralds with lace diamond design. The diamond filigree covering the emeralds made them truly standout. If you look closely you'll see the intricate design it has.

Viola was wearing an emerald green gown by Vera Wang which complemented her Lorraine Schwartz emerald earrings perfectly!!

Now, wouldn't you just love to have this pair of earrings in your jewelry box? You'd probably have to rob a bank because it costs a fortune!

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-146-51-29.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2018-13
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for March 2018
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

text:
Thursday, 28 June 2012

One Foot in The Grave: some thoughts on a masterpiece

One Foot in the Grave is one of the least suburban, least traditional sitcoms ever made. It's worth stressing this, because the Daily Mail tends to print Victor Meldrew's picture whenever there's a piece warning that old-style BBC 1 sitcoms are on the way out. However often you may have heard people say "I don't belieeeeve it," there's nothing safe, cozy, conservative or reactionary about One Foot in the Grave, and nothing grumpy about Victor Meldrew.

Victor Meldrew's greatness as a character lies in his iconic rather than realistic nature: he is at once a blue-collar man of the people and a voice for middle-class frustrations of his creator. The two jobs we are told he's had in his pre-retirement days - a security guard, a milkman- and the considerable array he takes on during the series - a lollipop man, a window cleaner, a doorman, a chauffeur, a gardener - are blue-collar. He's splendidly articulate, clearly intelligent and contemptuous of bad television, but when there's nothing on the television or the radio he's clearly restless in his own house: unlike his wife Margaret he can't pick up a book, except when he's fretting over medical encylopaedias.

At other times, Victor is a champion of the people. The remarkable episode Hearts of Darkness sees this moving beyond locking locksmiths in their porches and standing up to litterbugs. Victor stumbles across a care home in which the residents are being abused by the staff. His outburst to the monstrous woman in charge of all this carries the same humour and signature style ("What language are you speaking -  oh, that's right, bollocks!") as his outbursts about anything else, rendering its dignity and moral force all the more moving. The episode closes with the image of the abusive care workers, tied up with their feet encased in cement, disguised as scarecrows, while Social Services arrive.

Something extraordinary is also achieved in the episode The Worst Horror of All, in which Victor takes a job as a hotel doorman. He's subjected to a nasty bout of snobbery by a toff who demands that he fetch his wife's fur coat from the taxi. Victor catches sight of a wheelchair-bound man getting out of his car into his chair unaided. Enough is enough. Victor rips the toupee from the toff's head and hurls it down the drain.

I'm sorry neither of you have managed to master the mechanics of a doorhandle yet, it must be very complicated for you with your limited brainpower. Oh, and do forgive me for not getting the fur coat out. Of course if you hadn't chopped all its legs off it could have climbed on its own, but there we are. You ask me whether I want to go on working here, well if it means sucking up to odious bastards like you two every day then I think I'd rather remain unemployed thank you very much.

Richard Wilson's power as an actor really sells this: we genuinely feel that Victor is standing up for the people, for workers at the mercy of those with money, connections or power, even though elsewhere he articulates the frustrations of a middle-class TV writer.

Few writers have shared David Renwick's gift for imagery, or his mastery of the setpiece.. Each episode delivers big thrills and unforgettable visual moments: Victor's head under a bucket, a car in the skip, a cat in a freezer, a machine gun massacre of garden gnomes, a tortoise buried alive, a audio tape full of abuse from rebellious car mechanics. As with Seinfeld, these are carefully built up to, and Renwick too has a flair for planting seemingly innocuous details that will take their part in the payoff. This allows the show to bring joy and genuine laughter to a wide audience, but Renwick's technique is anything but easy. He uses each setpiece in careful alignment with the script's take on life in general, in much the same way that good science fiction or fantasy uses the fantastic as metaphors as well as things that are cool in themselves. We sense that Renwick has captured the misery, cruelty, random stupidity and occasional miracles of life itself. This monologue from The Beast in the Cage is a sublime example:

Mirror image of your life really, isn't it? Car Journey on a bank holiday. First 50-odd miles, on the go, all they way, a sense of direction, bowling along. Get past sixty everything slows down to a sudden crawl...and you realised you're not going anywhere anymore. All the things you thought you were going to do that never came to anything. And you can't turn the clock back. One way traffic just gradually grinding to a complete halt.

It's extraordinary - and yet hardly noticeable - that this speech occurs after Victor has put some music on only to find the car mechanics he's been quarrelling with have stuck a piece of chewing-gum in the record protect hole and performed a song of mutiny ("Victor Meldrew, Victor Meldrew, he can stick it up his bum" to the tune of Bread of Heaven), yet Victor, Margaret and Mrs Warboys act as this is just the kind of thing life throws at you, and Renwick and the cast sell this so well that the viewers don't find it jarring: it's part of a unified worldview.

Similarly, the episode The Man Who Blew Away ends with Victor inheriting a collection of antique dentures from Mr Foskett, who, on hearing by phone that his wife had left him, committed suicide after Victor and Margaret had just suffered his company for a day, and whose last thoughts were gratitude towards them for their kindness and hospitality. Victor looks at the teeth. "You can see why they do it," he says, "Those people next door, laughing and playing music all day long. I mean, if we couldn't laugh at this, we'd be committing suicide." There's a mirthless pause, while Victor and Margaret gaze at the teeth. "Where are the sleeping tablets?", Victor asks. Like the transformation of Kafka's Gregor Samsa, each bizarre concept never strikes the viewer/reader as anything other than part of the author's world. Kafka convinces you that a man turning into an insect is a summation of the misery, fear and struggle caused by life in general, David Renwick convinces you with a cat in the freezer, a head under a bucket and a very large collection of false teeth.

The show is also genuinely moving. Amidst all the overpraise for the merely good Peep Show, we'd do well to remind ourselves of such One Foot in the Grave  masterpieces as Timeless Time and Rearranging the Dust. The former episode takes place entirely in the Meldrews' bedroom and sees Victor and Margaret unable to sleep for a variety of reasons, culminating in Victor returning from deactivating the car alarm with his foot lodged in a rotting hedgehog he mistook for a misplaced slipper. Amidst these splendid setpieces, we get this moment, after Victor has been mocking tabloid headlines and used the phrase "no British babies believed to have been killed" and promptly apologised for saying "the first thing that came into my head...I wasn't thinking":

"I was thinking about him just this morning, funnily enough, running into Glynis outside the post office with Michael. She had him just a few days before, if you remember: she was coming out of the hospital just as I was going in. He's still working for that insurance company. They're talking about moving him to his own branch up north somewhere. She'll miss him. She never had any others. He'd just bought his mum an ice cream and then he was going to run her up to the doctors. It doesn't seem like five minutes since it was the other way round. I always think of Stewart when I see him. God, he's enormous now. His eldest girl's just starting at the secondary. I wonder what he'd have gone into? I wonder if he'd have gone into insurance?
Not if I'd had my way
You make so many plans for your life when you're young. I don't know what I imagined I'd be doing when I was 55. Seemed like so far in the future it would never happen. A year seems like an eternity when you were a child. The time between one Christmas and the next:
Yes, it's about two months now. The'll be draping tinsel over the Easter eggs before long. Why can't they let you live your life at your own speed?

In Rearranging the Dust, Victor and Margaret are stuck in a solicitor's waiting room for the whole episode. Margaret recollects the days of their courtship, and talks about the handsomest boy at the dance, and how they finally ended up kissing, ending with the inevitable punchline: Margaret had got the wrong one. "You were always my first choice," says Victor. Margaret is stunned: "You never told me that." There's a pause. "But then you never say much, do you?" She then gazes at him with a brief look of thrilled adoration (a brilliant bit of non-verbal acting from Annette Crosbie), and then the solicitor arrives.

My main purpose in citing those scenes is to show that It's absurd to suggest Peep Show has ever been that good. Genuine emotion, rather than angst, takes centre stage here. Rather than Peep Show's increasingly artificial "hah, he didn't do anything again! That's so true to life" brand of characterisation which appeals to Guardian TV critics, the series balances an unflinching look at the darker side of life with hope, wonder and humour. I can't resist one final example of how Renwick's writing dwarfs Peep Show: in the episode Warm Champagne, Margaret seems to be on the verge of beginning an affair with the ghastly Ben, who charms her and takes her out to a swanky restaurant. He asks the waiter to ensure that the champagne is chilled: "there's nothing worse than warm champagne."

Margaret: You talk about being sensitive - I'm afraid that's Victor's trouble. He's one of the most sensitive people I've ever met, and that's why I love him, and why I constantly run to ram his head through a television screen [...] do you know what's actually worse than warm champagne.
Ben: no...?
Margaret: No, I really don't think you do.

What a brilliantly subtle bit of writing those last two lines are, and how much insight into snobbery and insularity are compressed into them. If there's one thing that Victor Meldrew stands for, it's that there are indeed much worse things than warm champagne.

From the last episode of series one to the fifth Christmas Special, almost every episode is flawless. It's a shame, though, that the magnificent fourth Christmas special, The Wisdom of the Witch, was not allowed to remain the final episode, as it was clearly intended to be. In series 6, the magic's faded a little. For the first 5 episodes at least, it's still funny, but now Mrs Warboys's tall tales and the bizarre stories Victor reads out from newspapers sound like gags for the first time, just as the plot about a critic giving stinking reviews to everything from Victor's window-cleaning to someone's suicide comes across a writer's in-joke rather than the invigorating metaphors for the unfairness of life itself that Renwick's vintage set-pieces gave us. There's also a worrying sense of awareness of its own success: the episode in which Victor and Margaret's life is turned into a play - with a punchline in which someone else criticises the play with "I don't beleeeive it" - brings to mind a rare miss-step made by Seinfeld in its fourth season with its similar "show-within-a-show" plot.

The final episode, Things Aren't Simple Any More,  is an artistic disaster I haven't been able to watch since its first broadcast. The problem is that it comes with a built-in smug response to criticism: "ah, but people die," "Ah, but all good things have to come to an end" "ah, of course you didn't want Victor to die: but we don't mollycuddle the viewer". The flaw with this argument is that fiction has a tremendous advantage over life: it can end in ways other than death, and the ending shouldn't just be a way of ensuing the writer isn't tempted or badgered into writing any more, it should be in keeping with the tone of the overall work, and it should do justice to the characters. To let a character live doesn't change the fact that they will die, it just allows us to keep them alive in our minds: who they are, what they mean to us and what they represent. Frustratingly, the ending that would had achieved this was filmed and broadcast: it's the ending of The Wisdom of the Witch, which teases us with Victor's death, before revealing him in front of the tv with his arm in a sling, angry as ever. That said, killing off a character in a comedy series can work - as Blackadder Goes Forth and series 7 of Seinfeld testify - but instead of a thematically appropriate death, Renwick cobbles together something of a Midsummer Murders storyline, with Hannah Gordon playing it straight as the hit-and-run driver responsible for Victor's death, and Annette Crosbie forced to ignore the fine work she's put into Margaret and play the role of a vengeful widow who may or may not have have killed Gordon in retaliation by the end, and who will presumably be alone for the rest of her life. What this has to do with One Foot in the Grave is anyone's guess.

The real blasphemy in this episode -  far more than the decision to kill off Victor - is that Mrs Warboys (Doreen Mantle) Mr Swainey (Owen Brenman) and Patrick and Pippa (Angus Deayton and Janine Duvitski) don't appear and aren't even mentioned. Appreciating the work this fine troupe of actors do (Deayton is a revelation here) is yet another reason to buy the DVD boxset and watch from the start rather than catch the odd repeat.

Stumbling upon a showing of the episode The Pit and the Pendulum while channel-surfing, for example, one might laugh at Patrick removing a bucket and finding the head of a buried Victor underneath it, but then wonder why Renwick has to put the laughs on hold when Margaret comes and tells him she's just had a phone call telling him of her mother's death. Watched properly, one appreciates the juxtaposition of Margaret's news with Victor's predicament. It's often a mistake when sitcoms with studio audiences have "no laughter" moments, but here it works due to Renwick's delicate interplay of imagery, his control of each episode's themes and the tremendously strong performances of Wilson and Crosbie. The DVD set reveals a show that stand alongside The Singing Detective and I Claudius as one of British television's finest moments. It used the sitcom form to explore depression, death, cruelty, wonder, hope, misery, love, friendship and morality, all through the imagination of a writer with a gift for surreal imagery and performed by outstanding actors, and yet for more casual viewers delivering slapstick and setpieces of such unsurpassed quality that they often become
iconic in their own right. Was there really a time when something like this was allowed to go out on BBC1? I don't believe it.

Friday, 15 June 2012

Ian McEwan Reconsidered

Ian McEwan is often mistaken for a major novelist. I've made this mistake in my time. After reading his early, taut yet graceful novel The Cement Garden in the Sixth Form, I sought out a later book, Enduring Love. It is a seductive book for a teenager with a love of reading and budding realisation of the potential of the modern novel to discover. Its opening chapter - among the greatest in all of fiction - describes a hot air balloon accident which the protagonist Joe and four other men - a doctor, a young man, a farmer and his labourer - attempt to prevent. Joe is enjoying a picnic in the Chilterns with his girlfriend. He turns and sees a stray hot-air balloon: its pilot has fallen out, but his child is still trapped in the basket. The five of them run towards and then cling to the balloon; they shout to the child to jump out, but he's paralysed with fear. As the balloon rises, the men let go, but after hitting the ground, the they look up and see one of the five was braver than the other four: the doctor held on. The balloon soars, and the doctor falls to his death. This is a brilliant piece of writing, generating imagery that works both as an exciting piece of action and as a metaphor for thematic concerns and philosophical questions. It is up there with Magwitch accosting Pip in the graveyard. Atonement - which I read that summer as a delayed post-A-level treat to myself - is also an exciting book to start one's acquaintance with contemporary fiction, with its marvellous evocation of summer heat, childhood innocence, sexual tension and the eerie images generated when the one misinterprets the others. It differs from Enduring Love in sustaining its high quality to the end of the book, and left this reader eager to read anything McEwan published the minute it hit bookshelves.

Things that were overrated tend to end up being underrated, and vice versa. It's not unfashionable to deride McEwan these days, but it tends to be for the wrong reasons. A piece in the New Statesman by Ziauddin Sardar lamented the rise of "Blitcon", by which he meant the supposedly conservative politics of the three leading British novelists, McEwan, Amis and Rushdie (which amounted to their opposition to the invasion of Iraq being accompanied by reservations). Like the (admittedly not unfounded) attacks on Amis by Ronan Bennett and Terry Eagleton following some revolting remarks he made about Muslims, and the attacks on McEwan for not boycotting Israel, they invite one's sympathy for the beseiged novelist to a tiny extent, if only because one can't help suspecting that they seem to demand a rigid, orthodox political and social outlook which is anathema to literature. Would Evelyn Waugh, had he lived in this age, be established as one of the greatest craftsmen of English prose, or would we pretend otherwise because as a person he said nasty things? The extraordinary writer and prose stylist James Ellroy is on record as saying he loves Bill O'Reilly, believes the Rodney King incident was blown out of proportion by the liberal media and that he shook Kenneth Starr by the hand to congratulate him on his role in exposing Clinton; while Ben Elton describes himself as a believer in the politics of Clement Attlee. Obviously Elton's politics are preferable, while Ellroy's comments make one's teeth grind, but whose novels have we truly benefited from? Do we really require nice, calm, sensible orthodox beliefs from novelists? The lack of political spark among our more feted contemporary writers is certainly depressing and worthy of a separate essay, (since I posted this, McEwan has made transphobic comments, defended the bigoted Ayaan Hirsi Ali, made lazy attacks on supposedly "no-platforming" students and joined Zadie Smith, Julian Barnes, Amis and Philip Pullman in taking an anti-Corbyn stance) but when it comes to assessing McEwan's novels, the reactionary nature of his politics (mirrored in many ways by the often downright repugnant politics of Amis,  and friends such as Dawkins, Rushdie, Steven Pinker, Howard Jacobson and Hitchens) requires a more literary riposte.

On the other hand, the literary world's objections to McEwan aren't much use either. John Banville's excoriating review of Saturday for The New York Review of Books failed to burst McEwan's bubble because it revealed a viewpoint far more impoverished than McEwan's. Banville genuinely finds it unconvincing that a neurosurgeon should know so little about Matthew Arnold. And there we'll leave him.

There's also often a laziness in the way supposedly refined prose is deprecated. John Crace described McEwan's prose as "forensic and cold" while Rick Gekosi dismissed Saturday as a book containing too much "studiedly fine writing". This is sloppy, unfinished criticism. If there's something wrong with a piece of writing, we should identify why it isn't actually fine even if it sometimes gives that impression, or why the forensic detail isn't enough. After all, Evelyn Waugh's prose is cold and Updike's is studiedly fine, but those writers could (and rightly are) just as easily be praised for those qualities. As anyone who reads the anonymous critics in Private Eye’s dreary “Literary Review” section knows, "It's all a bit too neat", "if only he'd stop showing off" and "the writing draws too much attention to itself" are the familiar cries of the critic who doesn't want to agree with the praise for the author, but can't be bothered to properly reassess the writing and offer grounds for disagreement.

What, then, is the real flaw with McEwan's work, which makes his books so unimpressive on rereading? I think the main problem is that unlike, say, Anita Brookner or John Banville, McEwan is often seen - and clearly sees himself - as a visceral writer, someone whose writing packs that extra punch and that extra illicit thrill that makes him appeal to more than just Frank Kermode. This leads, inevitably, to the "Ian Macabre" label that accompanied McEwan's more overtly horrific first four books (two collections of stories, First Love Last Rites and In Between the Sheets, and the novels The Cement Garden and The Comfort of Strangers). Since The Child in Time, McEwan's fiction has tended to favour more redemptive characters and denounements, but the moment of visceral horror has remained his most prominent motif. In every one of his books, something frightening happens (the twist on this occurs in On Chesil Beach, when the thing that goes wrong is actually just marital premature ejaculation, but becomes violently horrible by being shown from a sexually uneducated bride's point of view). He possesses an admirable desire to thrill the reader, but is thwarted by the curse of his generation: in contrast to that of Graham Greene (whose novels McEwan admits to not greatly admiring in his Paris Review interview because "the prose is too flat for my taste") the plotting muscles have atrophied. Raymond Chandler used to say that when he got blocked he brought in a man with a gun. McEwan prefers a man with a knife. The latter tactic is used to heat things up in Saturday, while Enduring Love opts for both that and Chandler's option. The scene where two hitmen working for the antagonist make an attempt on Joe's life in a restaurant certainly jolts the reader, but it also renders the plot nonsensical (why do the hitmen shoot the wrong man when their employer can give a description of Joe? Why do it in a high-class crowded restaurant when he has Joe's address? Why does he attend himself but pay others to do the shooting? Is it just a dumb coincidence that the man they kill by accident is a more credible assassination victim?). By the time of McEwan's most recent novel Solar, the reader can see the thriller moment coming: when the protagonist is arguing with the eager young physicist next to the polar bear rug that's been present as a symbol of Man's feeble effort against global warming all along, who doesn't expect the latter to trip over it and break his neck? It's the feeblest moment in fiction since EM Forster tipped a bookcase upon Leonard Bast, and certainly a long way from Miss Havisham's wedding dress catching fire.

Unfortunately, adding dead bodies isn't the only way McEwan has tried to sugar the pill: in Solar he tries to be funny. The scene in which McEwan tries out the old "he kept taking my cigarettes/biscuits/crisps/KitKat then I lifted my newspaper/looked in my bag and there were my cigarettes/biscuits/crisps/KitKat"' routine without realising this had been made famous by Douglas Adams and widely circulated as both a gag and an urban legend is one of his most notorious mistakes (after being appraised of this during a reading  from the work-in-progress at a literary festival, he clumsily inserted it into the book itself, with someone telling Beard later on that crispgate is a common experience that Douglas Adams and others have written about. Yeah, that makes it a lot less embarrassing.) This and the inexplicable scene in which Beard attempts to make his wife jealous by turning up the radio to give the impression he has female company (a scene that violates the laws of logic and physics almost as much as it does the laws of comedy) see McEwan actually straying into the area of incompetence.

When one looks past these "and then a shot rang out" moments and the embarrassing (and hopefully one-off) attempt at humour, all one finds on the page is the voice of a polite, bookish, liberal writer, the voice of a man happy to discuss Darwin, religious fundamentalism, the war with Iraq and nuclear weapons over a nice dinner. and for whom literature and classical music are factors in his reactions to anything. The trouble is, many other people aren't like this, and McEwan's novels are about other people (in contrast, say, to Philip Roth's Zuckerman novels, where it doesn't matter that the protagonist sounds like a novelist because he is one). In The Child in Time, this is McEwan's idea of how a couple whose child has been abducted cope with the crisis:

She was reading mystical or sacred texts - St John of the Cross, Blake's longer poems, Lao-tzu. Her pencilled annotations crowded the margins. She worked hours each day at a Bach partita. The rasp of double-stopped notes, the spiralling frenzy of semiquavers warned him away. For his part he made the most approaches to a serious drinking habit and indulged the books of his adolescence, reading of unencumbered, solitary men whose troubles were the world's. Hemingway, Chandler, Kerouac.

Not only does he find it impossible to imagine characters who don’t rely on literature to help them get through tough times - even one as hideous as this - but he divides the reading preferences according to gender. Similarly, in Enduring Love Joe's girlfriend Clarissa, after witnessing the horrific sight of the man falling from the balloon, is instantly reminded of Milton's line "Hurl'd headlong flaming from th'Ethereal sky". One is reminded of Orwell’s criticism of Graham Greene, in his review of The Heart of the Matter, that too many of his characters were starting to write poetry.

McEwan relies on extensively researching the occupations of his characters. He shadowed a neurosurgeon for the writing of Saturday, while Joe's job as a science writer and his girlfriend's as a Keats scholar in Enduring Love clearly also led their creator to do his homework, but constant details of singed bone and bloodclots or digessions on evolution and Wordsworth's snubbing of Keats - both often occurring right in the thick of the action - do not create the illusion that these are different people to the author; only good writing can do that.

Other McEwan characters are blatant avatars. In The Child in Time, McEwan dares to let his imagination loose upon the most macabre nightmare of all: suppose Ian had ended up as a mere successful children's author? Sadly, this dystopia was explored further in McEwan's worst novel, The Daydreamer, a hideously twee children's book with a preface in which its author - no longer pretending to be a fictional character - argues that children's literature has no literary value ("when did you last curl up with The Swiss Family Robinson?"), but since it provides an opportunity to bond with one's children, here's his own contribution, which was certainly good enough for his own children ( to which he dutifully read each finished chapter). This insufferable, patronising tone - after a few sentences of which, the reader feels like they've been stuck in the interval of a school play hearing parents use the phrases "he plays at the fourth grade level" "already reading Harry Potter" and "hoping to get into Bennett Memorial: his sister's there already" - is rarely absent in a McEwan novel, and strips his work of a great deal of imaginative power. It renders it incapable of empathy. McEwan tries to compensate for this by adding winsomely self-deprecating vignettes on the hubris of the novelist. Henry Perowne, the protagonist of Saturday, is proudly displayed before us us an example of McEwan's magnanamosity: he can actually write about someone who doesn't like novels. "It seemed almost blasphemous to write about someone who doesn't think Anna Karenina is much cop," sighed McEwan in an interview. It should seem second-nature. Reasons for why somone doesn't like novels are no more interesting than an account of why I never took up gardening, but McEwan offers reasons for Henry's lack of interest which sound less like the opinions of someone who isn't McEwan than inverted claims for the novelist's supremacy, as do the comments on science's superiority to literature from Thelma Darke in The Child In Time and Joe in Enduring Love (it's interesting, too, that while Henry has no time for novels, he's able to devise a sickly pun about his daughter based on a Henry James title: "What Daisy knows!"). It builds up to a painfully cute moment where the plot details of books Henry disliked are listed, and one of them is unmistakably The Child in Time.

Even when the sentiments are reasonable, they often strike one as the words of a well-researched novelist at his computer screen rather than the thoughts of someone in the outside world. When Perowne drives past the anti-Iraq war rally, he notices a placard for The British Association of Muslims, and McEwan writes: "Henry remembers that outfit well. It explained in its newspaper recently that apostasy from Islam was an offence punishable by death." A perfectly good point, an important one in fact, but is it really feasible that someone on their way to a squash game would think this while glancing out of the car window and seeing one of their placards go by? Henry has extraordinary powers of lightning-fast visual recognition if so. Here Natasha Walter, in an otherwise favourable review of On Chesil Beach, was perceptive:

[The characters’] innocence is seen as political as well as sexual. They meet at a CND meeting in Oxford, and McEwan seems to suggest that anyone who was active in the peace movement then was naive - as he suggested about those who protest against war in our time in Saturday. "Florence knew in her heart that the Soviet Union, for all its mistakes - clumsiness, inefficiency, defensiveness surely, rather than evil design - was essentially a beneficial force in the world." This characterisation of peace activists as hopeless naifs stuck in my throat, but you cannot judge a novelist for his political views.

It would indeed stick in most intelligent readers' throats because it sounds more like a novelist's assumption than the passing thought of someone at the time: to use DH Lawrence's indispensable term, McEwan's thumb is in the scale. Nevertheless, McEwan was irked by this fine point and insisted in a subsequent letter to the Guardian that

Historically, such a position was perfectly possible; I knew of people who thought this even in the 1980s.

He unconsciously validated Natasha Walter's argument, however, with the following:

When she was still at her primary school I was campaigning, writing and speaking against nuclear weapons. I was a member of European Nuclear Disarmament and travelled to the Soviet Union with Mary Kaldor and Jonathan Steele of the Guardian to make contact and common cause with the unofficial and harassed peace movement there. With the composer Michael Berkeley I wrote an oratorio against the nuclear arms race. I am proud to have appeared in public with EP Thompson.

It's hard to see how anyone can deny a patronising attitude while using the phrase "when she was still at her primary school"; this airy, assumptive quality in McEwan's writing, in his novels as well as his letters, often has a whiff of "I tell you, these kids today..." about it. A key scene in Saturday dramatises arguments for and against invading Iraq in the form of a quarrel between Henry and his daughter Daisy. This doesn't for a second read like a conversation between two human beings. Although Daisy is wearisomely gifted (she's studied English at Oxford, won the Newdigate Prize and just published her first collection of poetry, with the revolting title My Saucy Bark and the quotes offered to the reader taken from the real-world source of Craig Raine), McEwan makes every argument of Daisy's fatuous. and every one of Henry's considered. Many people of Daisy's age would have rather more stimulating arguments against the invasion, including those without the prodigious literary talent. The result reads like one middle-aged person arguing with whatever he imagines the impetuous youngsters of today are saying.

In Solar the problem has exacerbated. The protagonist, a lauded scientist named Michael Beard, is at the ICA. A caricature of a pretentious left-wing academic speaks on the topic of science as a mere social construct, and is followed by a nervous female academic from Tel Aviv, who struggles with her contribution because the audience, according to McEwan, are resentful of her Israeli background and equate her with oppression of the Palestinians. Again, the problem is not the reactionary sentiments - the offensive equation of criticism of Israel's foreign policy with antisemitism, the portrayal of the next generation of leftists as hateful - that makes this bad writing, but the way they are panel-beaten into the shape of fiction.

When McEwan attempts to introduce characters with none of his viewpoints, the results are often embarrassing. There's a dreadful scene in The Child in Time in which the protagonist, Stephen, is involved in a car accident and rescues a chirpy comedy cockney lorry driver named Joe trapped in his vehicle. Addressing Stephen as "mate", he asks him to take down several messages for him in case he doesn't make it out of the wreck. The first one is a message of love to his girlfriend, insisting he would have come back to her and the kids eventually, another is to a friend apologising for not being able to make the Snooker tournament on Saturday or to pay back the 100 quid he owed him and another is a riposte addressed to a teacher who never thought he'd make anything of his life. Stephen helps him out of the lorry, the two share a drink and a round of "for he's a jolly good fellow", and both decide to live life to the full, in Joe's case means "I'm going back to Jane and the kids and bugger Wendy McGuire." It's a middle-class writer's twee, folksy idea of what working-class life is like. Instead of verisimilitude we get sentimentality.

Hari Kunzru, appearing on BBC4's documentary In Their Own Words, and to some extent Will Self, in a profile collected in his book Junk Mail, both noted that in Martin Amis's novels, there's a curious sense of class anxiety manifested in scenes in which a tougher working-class guy threatens the middle-class protagonist. This is also strongly present in McEwan's work, particularly in Saturday and Enduring Love. Baxter (he has no first name) in the former novel is first encountered by Perowne running from a Spearmint Rhino with his cronies (no doubt having indulged in distinctly unMcEwanesque behaviour) whereupon they attack our mild-mannered hero. It's oddly like the confrontations that Clark Kent, Bruce Banner and Peter Parker often endure, only without the superpowers (in much the same way that the squash game where Perowne and his friend clash resembles something a neutered Ian Fleming would have written). Having said that, Henry has a superpower of a kind: he can use his superior intelligence to talk the lower classes into laying down arms. He diagnoses Baxter's Huntingdon's disease there and then, and talks him out of violence with a promise of a diagnosis. And did I mention that the two cronies are called Nigel and Nark? McEwan really should have had the guts to call them Bebop and Rocksteady.

The novel climaxes with one of the iconically ghastly moments in modern fiction, in which Henry's daughter's recital of Matthew Arnold's ”Dover Beach” moves Baxter into holding off his attack, demonstrating that some superpowers are hereditary, as well as providing the most stirringly idiotic argument for the power of literature since Joseph Brodsky's declaration in his Nobel Prize speech that "for someone who has read a lot of Dickens, to shoot his like in the name of some idea is more problematic than for someone who has read no Dickens."

Jed Parry, the antagonist of Enduring Love, might seem to be exempt from this criticism due to hints of wealth, but it's striking that from his first appearance his accent is described as having a touch of cockney, and he speaks with the Australian question intonation, or as McEwan puts it:

his generation's habit of making a statement on the raising inflection of a question - in humble imitation of Americans, or Australians, or, as I heard one linguist explain, too mired in relative judgements, too hesitant and apologetic to say how things were in the world. Of course I didn't think any of this at the time. All I heard was a whine of powerlessness, and I relaxed.

The hasty insertion of the penultimate sentence and the clause about the linguist can't disguise the snobbery here (and given that Jed is a murderous stalker, and that the letters from him that form some of the chapters are full of psychotic delusion and nothing else, one can hardly play the unreliable narrator card and plead that McEwan is implying that there's more to Jed than his narrator Joe tells us).

Tom Aldous in Solar is a mixture of McEwan's prejudices. Like Parry, he has a pony-tail, and just as Parry retained a cockney accent despite a hint of a posh background, here we are asked to believe that, despite attending Imperial College, Cambridge and Caltech at Pasadena, he still retains a Norfolk accent "suggestive to Beard of hedgerows and hayricks" which "seemed to mock what he was trying to to say". McEwan ensures we don't forget this last point by nearly repeating the sentence two pages later with a reference to: "the Norfolk lad's bucolic tone, so at odds with what he was trying to say". As with the references to the Australian Question Intonation in Enduring Love, the idea that the youth of today - particuarly those without Received Pronounciation accents - can not truly articulate themselves is a given. His eagerness to save the planet makes him yet another of McEwan's "these kids today" caricatures.

Rodney Tarpin in the same book - Beard has to face off again each of them within pages of each other - is a more straightforward, Baxteresque bogeyman. With all four characters, there's a tangible sense of McEwan struggling to keep snobbery in check, as in this dubious passage:

Beard was disappointed not to see a tattoo, a snake or motorbike or hymn to his mum. But the physicist, as he fleetingly acknowledged, was an ageing bourgeois in the grip of stereotypical thinking

What's striking about the second sentence, rushing in to chide its predecessor just like the the ones in the passage from Enduring Love, is the sense of damage limitation: it hardly sounds like the thoughts of a man in the middle of an intimidating and potentially violent confrontation with his wife's lover (who would ever have time to rebuke themselves for bourgeois stereotyping when caught up in such a predicament?) , but it does sound like the afterthought of a novelist aware of the snobbery in his previous sentence.

The threats posed by Baxter, Parry, and Tarpin are both violent and sexual. Baxter holds a knife to Perownes's wife's throat and attempts to rape Daisy, Tarpin cuckolds Beard (as does Aldous) and beats both him and his wife, Parry (suffering an entirely fictional psychological condition) is convinced that Joe shares his love for him, and threatens his heterosexuality as well as his beautiful girlfriend (again with a knife). Near the climax of the book, Joe is reduced to visiting a bunch of drug dealers literarily too stoned to know what day it is to buy a gun. There's a real sense of entering the heart of darkness, at least for McEwan. Consider this passage:

It was impossible not to look at his moustache [...] It was dyed a fierce burnt orange, and ramrod-straight, waxed to prissy Prussian points. I brought a hand to my face to conceal a smile. I felt weightless and shivery. The shock of yesterday's shooting, this plan of reckless acquisition, the background fear - all combined to make me feel I wasn't really here, and I worried that I might do or say something stupid. [...] I could not stop the similes accumulating round Steve's moustache. Two rusty nails hammered outwards from his gums. The pointy masts of a schooner I built as a kid. Something to hang tea towels on.

Has any author been more frightened by a moustache? (and note again that those last sentences read like similes that a novelist would create but that no person in that situation would think) Like Perowne, Joe finds himself relying on language to counter brutality. When two of them have a hideous fight he tells the ringleader - a guy whose "mighty forearms"' are emphasised - "You're going to kill him. Is that what you want? [...] If he dies you'll be inside for the rest of your life." When one of them offers some vaguely hippyish advice on the cause of allergies, Joe tells us "When I said this was unfalsifiable, he looked pleased. I began to think he might not detest me after all." It's impossible not to think of Kunzru's take on Amis when reading these scenes: a sense of fear that the natives might get restless, and that the rungs on the ladders of literature, science or education may give way when one tries to make one's escape, seems to prevail.

It's not just his male characters that embarrass, though: McEwan is sporadically the worst writer of female characters since Dickens. The three offenders here are The Child In Time, Enduring Love and Saturday (Atonement, The Innocent and The Cement Garden are exempt). The Child In Time subscribes to a winsome kind of gender-essentialism: the vague, half-assed implication that women know things that men don't. While Stephen responds to the abduction of his daughter by drinking, reading Hemingway and Chandler and generally going to pieces, his wife Julie cuts her hair short, plays the piano, reads mystical texts, and spends some time at a monastery. It's Stephen's lot, as a man, to spend the novel on his own, trying and failing to find a way of dealing with his loss, while Julie has the mystical feminine wisdom that allows her to cope. The idea that when your child has been abducted leaving your husband on his own to go and find yourself in a monastery might be cruel or even dangerous (wouldn't he be a suicide risk?) is never raised. Her appearance at the end is like the appearance of a Guru at the culmination of a spiritual quest: after holding forth to an unquestioning Stephen about why she had to deal with this by herself, she performs the most feminine miracle of all and gives birth, which McEwan seems to think will heal them both. In McEwan's universe, men really are from Mars and women really are from Venus.

Enduring Love has the same flaw. The book is sold to us as an unreliable narrator novel: McEwan constantly implies that Joe is missing the point, responding to his crisis in the same misguided masculine way that Stephen did, while his girlfriend Clarissa deals with it in the wise feminine way; yet it's hard to see exactly what Joe did wrong. He tells Clarissa that Jed is stalking him, but in scenes oddly reminiscent of those unconvincing "there's someone outside with an axe/ Well, there's no-one there now" moments in horror movies, Clarissa is sceptical, even though the idea that she wouldn't be frightened by this is nonsensical, and her reasons for not believing the threat are hard to fathom. At one point, her only response when Joe shows her Jed's letters is to comment that that two men's handwriting is very similar, but this ludicrous implication of hers (who would say such a thing in those circumstances?) is forgotten about by the time it becomes clear that Joe is not suffering from a Fight Club syndrome. At the end of the book, a chapter consists of a letter from her to Joe. Although Joe tells us he dislikes its wounded, self-righteous tone, McEwan clearly wishes us to see the story from both angles. Unfortunately it's impossible to disagree with Joe. An earlier chapter tells the story from Clarissa's point-of-view to demonstrate why she doesn't believe Joe, but the details McEwan piles on - she's got a touch of glandular fever, her seminar was a failure because her students (these kids today!) didn't do the required reading - don't change the fact that any sane person whose partner tells them that a madman is stalking them in person, by phone and by letter would react with concern rather than scepticism.

In Saturday, McEwan continues his unattractive habit of idealising his female characters. Daisy Perowne is perhaps the worst character in his whole oeuvre: it's quite chilling to see how utterly unable McEwan is to evoke either genuine love or warmth between father and daughter, or a love of literature. The texts that Daisy loves, studies at university or recites feel like a standard reading list, and the opinions she offers hardly lend any more verisimilitude:

You ninny! [...] You Gradgrind! It's literature, not physics! [...] Look at your Mme Bovary again [...] he was warning the world against people just like you"

Does that really sound like a human being? Even Dead Poet’s Society wasn’t that cloying. We're also told that she can recite a page of The Golden Bowl, that she thinks "people can't live without stories" (a hideous sentiment in a world where so many people are deprived of the things they actually can’t live without, and McEwan's patronising acknowledgement that Henry is "living proof this isn't true” is scarcely better: he puts forth the proposal that people who don't like fiction aren't dead as if it were something that's only occurred to him lately), that she was upset that poor Gregor Samsa was treated so badly when she first read Metamorphoses, and that she has told Henry that a Jane Austen novel is a microcosm that gives you the whole world. McEwan is oddly conflicted towards her: he uses her as his poster girl for literature and as the antithesis of Baxter, and yet he mocks her as an emblem of the naivety of her generation (during her second year of Oxford, she comes under the sway of a charismatic teacher and announces that madness is a social construct to keep the rich in power, only to be deflated when Henry offers to show her a mental hospital. What kind of moron is she?). Towards the end, of course, she turns out to be pregnant, and as with Julie this has a mystical quality, almost as useful as “Dover Beach” for repelling rapists.

Henry's wife, like Stephen‘s, is blandly perfect to the point of non-existence (despite being a newspaper lawyer: the sharp moral judgement Henry displayed when seeing the British Association of Muslims from his car window doesn't seem to extend to his wife's job, and McEwan seems no more interested in it than he is. Oh for the days of Dickens when novelists set out to grab lawyers by the throat).

It’s not just McEwan’s characters that are impoverished due to his bookish liberalism: something sleazier is needed for satire, a genre he often attempts. The feeble anti-Thatcher satire which feels like an after-thought in The Child in Time and the attempt to write a poisonous black moral fable in the Evelyn Waugh/Muriel Spark mode that led to the lightweight Booker winner Amsterdam are topped only by McEwan's excruciatingly bad screenplay for The Ploughman's Lunch, a best-forgotten Richard Eyre film. It runs through the motions of an angry anti-Thatcher satire, and yet ends up just as prissy, sheltered and smug as any government. There's a deeply patronising scene in which the protagonist (played by Jonathan Pryce) returns home to his working-class parents, and some quite unbearable scenes of him and a friend (Tim Curry) sniggering their way through the Q and A at a mutual friend's poetry reading as numerous members of the public are foolish enough to hazard comments on the poem.. One of tbe most fatuous scenes in the film sees the same two playing squash (always a bad sign in McEwan's work), and then sitting down in the Court and smoking, and then giggling when the Squash Court Attendants rebuke them. By the end, the best McEwan can manage as a symbol for Thatcherite ruthlessness and corruption of the idealistic is the revelation that Curry was sleeping with Pryce's would-be girlfriend all along. McEwan has often said that working with Eyre on The Ploughman's Lunch was so enjoyable that it spoiled him for future screenwriting, as he didn't realise that it wasn't normally such a cozy experience. It's hard not to picture McEwan and Eyre smirking at their own wit, much like Pryce and Curry in the Squash Court and at the poetry reading, while they go to lunch, scout out locations, meet the cast, compare notes with literary friends, and bask in the warmth of knowing that they've helped bring down the Government, all thanks to a film that only their friends will see. McEwan, as we saw in his letter, is someone who fought the nuclear arms race by writing an oratorio about it.

Satire requires an acknowledgement that some horrors are irreducible. What's ultimately nauseating about The Child In Time is that McEwan creates a believable and horrifying situation (the abduction of a young child when a parent is distracted during a visit to a supermarket), but instead of honestly following through this terrible event and its implications, attempts to slap a happy ending and his own brand of cozy warm rationalism onto it. The book seems to confuse abduction with bereavement. At the book's denounement, Stephen finally says to Julie "she was a lovely daughter, a lovely girl", and the two cry, finally grieving: but McEwan seems to forget that no parent could talk of their child in the past tense until they knew she was dead. During the couple's affirmation of their love as Julie prepares to give birth, we encounter this odd passage:

while they could never redeem the loss of their daughter, they would live her through their new child, and never close their minds to the possibility of her return

So they will continue searching for her? One hopes so, but until she's found, dead or alive, the couple can't regenerate and focus on their new child in the way McEwan seems to envisage. It feels like an afterthought of the author's: does he mean they will attempt to get the investigation and public interest going - as any parent would have to - or does he just mean they won't forget?

By contrast, a great novel like Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five triumphs due to its open acknowledgement that the traumatic event it describes - the Dresden fire-bombing - cannot be made more palatable by a novel, or reduced to something noble or majestic in its tragedy. Vonnegut and the reader cannot make sense of the horror of it at the start of the novel, and they still can't by the end. ("this book will be a failure", he warns us at the start). Paradoxically, Vonnegut's refusal to console and his acknowledgement of the inadequacy of fiction to do justice to such horror results in a far greater tribute to the victims of war and a far more affecting portrayal of trauma and suffering. One thinks also of Atom Egoyan's magnificent film The Sweet Hereafter, about a schoolbus crash that deprives a town of its children. It conveys the searing agony of a town that has been visited by a Pied Piper, and unlike The Child In Time, it has the courage to follow this through without flinching: there's no sense that this pain will pass once a new child is born.

Because McEwan's focus tends to be towards the "novel-of-ideas", his characters often suffer because they are at the mercy of whatever intellectual concept he wants them to enact. The short story "Psychopolis", the novels The Comfort of Strangers, Black Dogs and On Chesil Beach and the previously mentioned Iraq war discussion in Saturday all focus on couples so that McEwan can explore dualistic ideas. The first three take whatever for-and-against debates McEwan is interested in at the time and once again hammer them into the shape of dialogue between two people. In Black Dogs, we are told that Bernard and June represent rationality and superstition respectively before we even meet them, whilst On Chesil Beach is marred on re-reading by the patronising way that Edward and Florence are set up to illustrate McEwan's assumption that sex began in 1963 (and while reviewers were quick to suggest those words of Larkin's as an epigraph for the novel, they missed the point that Larkin was simplifying for comic effect. It wasn't one of his more complex poems). The effect is too schematic for these characters to convince us as complicated human beings: McEwan seems too complacent in his assumptions regarding gender or social history to allow them to breath, and then develop in surprising ways.

An attempt to fuse his interest in couples and the state of the nation is naked in this line, again from that same passage (In fact, the same sentence) at the climax of The Child In Time:

In the wild expansiveness of their sorrow they undertook to heal everyone and everything, the Government, the county, the planet, but they would start with themselves.

Unlike in an oddly similar moment with Christopher Banks, the protagonist in Kazuo Ishiguro's When We Were Orphans, whose bizarre fantasy of being a great detective extends to a belief he can stop the Second World War, (one is reminded also of McEwan's proud list of all the things he's done to stop nuclear proliferation while Natasha Walter was still at her primary school) there's little sense of madness, surrealism or delusion in this line. Instead, some attempt is made to wring some meaning out of the pointless scenes featuring Thatcher that have appeared throughout the book. It's tempting to see it as an emblem for McEwan and many other writers of his generation: earnestly vowing to heal the whole world, just as soon as they've sorted out their own problems. Could Stephen and Julie be planning an oratorio?

McEwan has produced good work: Atonement, The Cement Garden, The Innocent. The overpraise he has attracted, and his attempts to write both state-of-the-nation novels and those with plots gripping enough for a popular readership, have shown up the limits of his talent: his clumsy thriller plotting, his fruitless attempts to write convincingly about anyone other than himself, his fear of the working classes, his lack of patience with the younger generation, his inability to see through or subvert his more reactionary opinions and his tendency to take whatever ideas or research are interesting him at the moment and jam them into a fiction-shaped hole all rule him out from greatness, sometimes even from competence.


WARC-Truncated: length

text:
Changchun Friends

a great way to get involved

Manuel Mayansky
  • Male
  • Ciudad de Buenos Aires
  • Argentina
Share on Facebook Share
  • Blog Posts
  • Discussions
  • Events
  • Groups
  • Photos
  • Photo Albums

Gifts Received

Manuel Mayansky has not received any gifts yet

Give a Gift

Manuel Mayansky's Page

Profile Information

What city, and country are you from originally?
Buenos Aires - Argentina
What are you doing/plans here?
Studying Chinese
A little something about yourself - hobbies, interests, favorites, goals, etc
Reading, going to the movies, learning languages.
Finally...we get way too many spam accounts trying to apply. Can you say something about Changchun to show you are legitimate (sorry, but we have to ask)
I got the Hanban scholarship to go to Jinlin Daxue to continue learning chinese

Comment Wall

You need to be a member of Changchun Friends to add comments!

Join Changchun Friends

  • No comments yet!

In and around Changchun with QQ Soso street maps:

Martin Hendrick's "The Choonies!"

A few more players that have made my season exciting.The year of...

A few more players that have made my season exciting.

The year of the fox 2016

© 2018   Created by Richard Roman.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


text:
Cars 2018-01-22T10:44:32+00:00
End of Life Car Recycling

We Buy Cars at the End of Their Lives

Richmond Steel Recycling offers top dollar for all vehicles. We pay cash for your scrap car or truck, even if it doesn’t run. Have your cars recycled before they become a liability and get fair and competitive pricing today!

Automobiles (except purchased by Richmond Steel for vehicle depollution) must have the following removed prior to delivery: fluids (e.g., fuel, motor oil, coolant, refrigerant, hydraulic fluids) to the extent practicable or otherwise required by law, batteries, leaded battery cable ends, mercury convenience light switches, other mercury containing devices as required by law.

Do I need ownership papers to sell an automobile?

This is a must, as required by law and our Company policies.

Car Crushing for the Auto Industry

We also crush cars in bulk for the auto industry. Richmond Steel Recycling’s electronic scale ticket system ensure you’re getting the full value for the cars you recycle with us!

Thanks to our mobile car-crushing equipment, we are able to service individuals, municipalities and large auto yards no matter the location.

We pride ourselves in meeting Provincial and Federal environmental standards in our recycling practices.

Mobile Crushing Unit
More Info

Scrap Acceptance Agreement

Save time by filling out and submitting our Scrap Acceptance Agreement online.
More Info


text:
for Sep 24 DVDs

    Michael Douglas stars along with Shia LaBoeuf in the long-awaited sequel to Wall Street

    Romantic comedy with Kristin Bell, Sigourney Weaver, and Jamie Lee Curtis.

  • 1. ROBIN HOOD:

    Russell Crowe stars as Robin of Loxley in this “origins” film that has Robin returning from the Crusades where he fought with Richard the Lion Heart, and now is back in England to try to build a life.  Crowe’s character seems a little old for Robin, but I liked what he did with the character, and I liked the way that each of those who would become part of the Robin Hood legend were introduced.  Not a box-office hit for sure … but I thought it got the job done showing a very gritty, dirty, cold and wet environment – probably much closer to the truth than the stylized Robins of other movies. Rated 14A.

  • 2. ONDINE:

    If you like Colin Farrell, you’ll get a good look at what you like best in this made-in-Ireland film about a fisherman who catches … a young woman in his net, whom he believes to be a mermaid.  Living in a small Irish fishing village, Farrell is Syracuse, a man who has no secrets, as everyone knows everyone else’s business here … his sad life turns around when she shows up.  A good romantic story with no Hollywood stuff to mess it up. Rated PG.

    Not likely you saw this one in theatres.  It got the Oscar for Best Foreign Film last spring.  A retired prosecutor puts pen to paper to write a novel to try, in a fictional sense, to solve a crime that has haunted him for two decades … but he opens up a can of worms … that just won’t go back into the can.  Spanish with English subtitles.  Good film, but it takes a little work to get through. Rated 18-A.

  • Fall 2010 TV Debut Week - Click to View
  • 4. ROBIN HOOD:

    At age 45, Russell Crowe is the oldest actor to ever have played Robin Hood. When it appeared he might not get the part, he crash-dieted and lost 40 pounds.  He still looks old though!

Seldom will a direct-to-DVD movie fall into this “Classic” category, but this one does.  Cuba Gooding, Jr. stars as a disbarred lawyer turned writer who takes a colleagues work for his own … with chilling results – a great murder mystery!  Tom Berenger co-stars.

    A cute enough 3D animated feature about wolves … for the kids

  • THE TOWN

    Ben Affleck in a character driven heist movie that’s a little too much character, a little too little heist

  • DEVIL

    M. Night Shymalin has a few chilling moments here

  • EASY A

    Better than you might expect – a high school girl’s reputation is damaged because of one little lie.

View U.S. TV Online


text:
Friday, March 12, 2010

continued reverence and now some optimism.

The essay originally terminated just there. All those pseudo-non-sequiturs and then it’s stopped. Nothing profound, uplifting, moral, or anything else. Just kinda dropped off.
After a recent meeting, and with the prospect of some springtime optimism, I’m revisiting. There may be some dignity after all.
I realize, in my own space, that I have a tendency to justify/lay blame as much as possible, on circumstance or persons other than myself. I will work hard to rectify it all. I will not voice my accusations, but I think them nevertheless. This is not fair. This is not just. This is completely immature.
There is a lack of identifiable dignity in the youth of today. And I refuse to let it be.
Once upon a time, I was wearing mittens in November. They were fleece mittens, polartec 300, navy blue, size large. Warm. Breathable. Basic. Necessary. We were out roaming the countryside, backpacks full of sustenance and legs full of energy. I stepped over a creek, braced with my hand on a rock, and soaked my mitten.
Never having done it before, but having memorized the various ‘insulates when wet’ claims of the miracle that was polartec, I took the mitten off and wrung it out. About a third of a cup of water dripped onto the ground. I put the mitten back on. It was practically dry, and very warm. I walked on.
This year is the third season of heavy road riding on my OEM campagnolo cables and housing. My bar tape needs replacing, as I’ve worn through the surface in all those perforation spots. I just replaced the saddle, and probably lost a pound off the bike. I toy often with the prospect of an entire makeover for the serotta.
And every time, I realize that I like better, I enjoy more, the things that I’ve fixed with my own two hands, re-vamped, re-worked, re-invigorated through ingenuity, research, and not a little bit of hard work. The old things that I’ve fixed mean more than the new things I’ve purchased. I guess it’s kinda like love versus sex.
So the youth need some re-vamping. They’re actually, probably, likely, the same youth that have always been around. Chemically imbalanced, caught between childhood and adulthood, and thoroughly confused and overwhelmed by all of it. And it’s okay. This is probably the way it should be, the way it has always been, and the only way that something great can come about. Oxygen used to be poison. Evolution is billions of chance combinations of trial and error. Flowers have to come from dirt. So there’s opportunity here. Time to strip the paint, grease the threads, start over again. Make it roll, make it glide, make it beautiful. We are all individuals.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

reverence. to be continued

This is not a diatribe or dissertation, and it is certainly not a disrespect. It’s noting and then wondering, how has it all come to this?

As I type, I am aware that what I am attempting to do is not even registered in the consciousness of anyone younger than my own generation. Few individuals younger than I, even by a few years, possess the attention span or conceptualization to even read something longer than a ‘tweet’. This is going to take a while, so the majority of people out there have already given up, because I’m still in the intro and there are top-40 songs shorter than this. I want to take a moment to recognize something that is at the core of so many problems, in education and beyond, with the youth and beyond, with pop culture and self-respect: reverence.

My dad moved to Canada before the rest of us so that he could establish employment for himself, get the enormous Immigration ball rolling, and start scouting out the living scene before his partner and four children arrived. Being young then and old now, my recollections are not trustworthy in the details, but the overall remembrances have stayed with me.

My dad, being far away from us long before the internet and MSN and iChat video, reestablished the most ancient of cultural development media, the oral tradition. He wrote us letters, instead of sitting around a fire and telling us where we came from, but his letters, at least the parts that my mom read to us, were entirely composed of stories. Like any good oral tradition, the stories were most true, muchly exaggerated, and entirely engrossing. Best of all, they were inclusive and expressive, and we felt involved in hearing about where he was and where we would soon be and who was doing what. I haven’t heard these letters then, but I remember them.

The letters were well-written. The stories were cohesive, entertaining, enlightening, and simply great. Importantly, the stories were about the people with whom my dad was working, and they became characters beyond ordinary men and women. They were true, they were real, and through words and paper and stamps back when they were cheap, they became awesome. I eventually met many of these people from my dad’s letters. They were no less important. They weren’t disappointing. Reality didn’t reveal an undesirable truth. They were people from stories I revered.

My dad wasn’t the only one who told me stories. The letters weren’t the only stories I remember. My uncle chip used to tell us stories long into the night, not for any reason other than his stories were great, and we adored them and him. My dad taught me about the beauty of bikes and horses and nature and landscapes and good people. I revered my dad. If he admired or respected someone else, mentioned why s/he was ‘classy’ or ‘a good man’ or ‘an amazing _______’, then I did too. I would nod, file the thought for later, and remember what made someone great. Greg Lemond. Omar the mechanic. Willard the potato farmer. Tony the logger. Mike the paddler. Paul Mason and his son. I revered my family elders. They were like superheroes with specific strengths and powers. People weren’t just people; they were amazing and could do certain things really well. They took time. There was respect.

As I grew up, I wanted to do things well. I wanted to go out with the most athletic, intelligent, beautiful girl I could, and even better if she was older than I. (Later I figured out that it was more about the girl than the external qualities that could be listed to approving nods by my grandmother, and it became about challenge and heartbreak and the more challenging and heartbreaking, the better.) I wanted to ride my bike well, or at least maintain it well and buy the best one I could after a summer of sweating buckets digging holes on ozone red-alert days in Virginia. I wanted to jump high, get big muscles, write poetry worth reading (still working on that one), get good grades, make good dinners, be a good brother. Doing these things wouldn’t pay me or get me something else I wanted or keep me from going somewhere I didn’t want to go. Doing these things was necessary; they were done for the sake of doing, and doing the best I could.

Of the adults I knew, I probably couldn’t think of one that didn’t do at least one thing to the best of his/her ability. Plowing snow or plowing fields or cutting wood or teaching physics or running a mile or running a school or running an engine, these adults did things, and did them well, maybe beyond what their best was once upon a time. They tried. They succeeded. They built on success. They failed. They built on failure.

Maybe it was the lack of desperation in my life that allowed me to do things for the sake of doing them. I didn’t have to work to get fed so I worked to buy the best bike I could, even though I wasn’t the best rider. I didn’t have to milk cows when I got home so I jumped my snowboard over the driveway instead, then studied or did art homework or talked on the phone. Life was easy. I never thought about the roof over my head beyond an abstract consciousness of the fact that I was lucky to have one.

This could go on and on and it already has and shouldn’t anymore. The youth have no dignity today. (yes, this is a generalization.) Because they have no dignity, they have no sense of purpose or pride, and therefore cannot conceptualize respect. They don’t respect themselves; they cannot respect others. They go through the days, insulated from consequences, eating and sleeping and mostly sleeping some more. Nothing has happened to them. There is nothing that will happen to them. The best rhetorical question for the youth: ‘So what?’

Without dignity and purpose, shame has no meaning. Shame can be a crippling tool of oppression, but avoiding it can also translate into motivation. It used to be shameful to ‘fail’ a grade. Now it’s okay to be 18 in grade nine and that’s only if you can manage to actually fail. That was also back when there was failure, when there wasn’t a trophy for everyone, when friendship wasn’t the winner, when something was someone’s own damn fault. Now, without shame, it’s everyone else’s fault, and it’s okay to be a failure anyway because hobos can make almost as much as garbage collectors who make twice as much as teachers who make less than half as much as doctors who are distant second citizens to professional hockey players. At least we have our societal priorities…

So what.

What happens now? Johnny grows old, leaves school because he can finally sign himself out of grade nine at age 18, lives in his parents’ house. That’s it. There is no resolution, none required, and the story ends. No one is ashamed because we don’t have shame or pride anymore, as dignity will die with my generation. Everybody wins. Friendship is the winner. We’re all individuals. There is no bell curve.

to be continued.


text:
Saturday, April 3, 2010

Kaden's 1st T-ball game!

Can you believe that Kaden played in his first t-ball game?!? I know, me neither. He had lots of fun and everyone did really well. You could see the pride in all the Dad's eyes! Kaden batted really well and was very aggressive in the field. We LOVED watching his intro into competitive sports! Good job Kaden and good job Daddy for coaching a great group of 3 and 4 year old super stars!

Our littlest guy! Very cute!

No comments:

Post a Comment


text:
Friday, October 03, 2014

Crony Capitalism

You want a textbook example of crony capitalism?  I've got your example right here:
“The approval of SB 270 by the California legislature and Governor Jerry Brown could serve as a case study for what happens when greedy special interests and bad government collide in the policymaking process,” Lee Califf, the group’s executive director said Tuesday. The “bill was never legislation about the environment. It was a back room deal between the grocers and union bosses to scam California consumers out of billions of dollars without providing any public benefit – all under the guise of environmentalism.”
Crony capitalism explains why Californians soon will have to pay for grocery bags at the store.

No comments:


text:
rio-nido-store mardi3 Rio Nido Banner Will Osborne

    No events to show

Northern California’s own Country Star!

FRI 15 SEP 6:00 pm RNR features McKenna Faith–Northern California gal, Nashville recording star. Back by popular demand. Country all the way! $15 cover. Both the BBQ pit & the kitchen will be open to serve you our great roadhouse food! Come see and dance to the music of this up and coming young country star […]

Russian River Watershed Annual Clean Up

SAT 17 SEP 8:30 am – 3:00 pm Join the Clean River Alliance (aka Garbage Patch Kids) at Johnson’s Beach on First Street in Guerneville for the annual Russian River Watershed Clean-up of our local stretch and tributairies. Wear sturdy clothing/shoes/boots and prepare to have fun, talk trash and feel incredibly accomplished afterwards. The Clean […]

Help Clean Up… then go dance to Hot Zone

 SAT 14 NOV 11:00 am Friends of Rio Nido is hosting a clean up of the river front for the newly acquired local access to the Russian River.  Meet at the Rio Nido tunnel that goes under River Road. You bring your work gloves and sturdy shoes, FRN will bring the garbage bags. Pick up […]

Rio Nido Cleanup on July 9th

A cleanup day will be held on the Rio Nido Homeowner Association grounds between Pee Wee Golf and the Fire Station.

FREE Collection will be offered for the following items. Be prepared to show proof of residency or home/property ownership in […]

Big week coming up in Rio Nido

Mark your calendars for upcoming events in Rio Nido, including: Pee Wee Mini Golf volunteer day, National Night Out, Marshmallow Roast, Pancake Breakfast, and Art Festival […]

Three cheers for the 2010 Rio Nido Clean-Up crew!

The Rio Nido Clean-Up was held on July 9th-10th 2010.

Rio Nido Task Force Beautification Committee Lead Jennifer Ostrom reports that this year’s Rio Nido Clean Up (held on July 9th and 10th) was a HUGE success! Thanks to our hard-working volunteers, dumpsters provided by Redwood Empire Disposal (with huge help from Pam Davis), […]


text:
ZBA to rule on fate of South Jamesport house

09/16/2011 5:38 AM |

BARBARAELLEN KOCH FILE PHOTO | House under construction on Green Street in South Jamesport.

The case of the large South Jamesport house that one neighbor argues was built without proper permits is now before the Riverhead Town Zoning Board of Appeals.

The ZBA held a public hearing last Thursday on builder Glen Ravn’s request for three zoning variances for the 2,786-square-foot house at 23 Willow St., a property he bought in November and began construction on shortly afterward.

Mr. Ravn is seeking variances to allow a 16,125-square-foot lot area, instead of the required minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet; a front yard setback of 30 feet, instead of the required 50 feet; and a rear yard setback of 30 feet, instead of the required 60 feet.

Larry Simms, who owns property across the street on Dunlookin Lane, said the town building department alerted Mr. Ravn by letter in December that a ZBA variance obtained by the prior property owner in 2003, which allowed the land to be subdivided from an adjacent parcel, had expired.

Mr. Simms believes that Mr. Ravn shouldn’t have been able to continue building without a valid variance, but he said the building department did nothing to stop him.

Mr. Simms also contends that the house, as built, doesn’t conform to what was proposed in the site plan, and that by raising the property six feet above grade, neighboring homes will be flooded by rainwater coming off Mr. Ravn’s property. Deborah Lagana-Lorber, who owns property nearby on Willow Street, also expressed concern about flooding at the ZBA meeting. She said the area already is prone to flooding.

“It’s a beautiful home, but that’s not why we bought in South Jamesport,” she said. “This is a historic district and it has a certain charm, with smaller houses. We didn’t expect to see big mansions going up.”

Mr. Ravn told the ZBA last Thursday that he bought the property to build a home for his family and that it was part of a two-lot subdivision obtained by Ashley Homes of L.I., the previous owner.

Mr. Ravn said he was assured by both his attorney and Ashley Homes’ attorney that he could build, and said he received a building permit from the town and approval from the county health department.

Since then, Ashley Homes president Ashok Agrawal has written to the planning department asking that Mr. Ravn not be allowed to build using his permit, because he doesn’t want to be liable if something goes wrong.

Mr. Ravn acknowledged that he got a letter from the town building department saying the 2003 variance had lapsed. But he said he knew nothing of the variance at that time, and had already received building permits and health department approval.

He eventually applied for the variances, which were the subject of Thursday’s hearing.

Mr. Ravn’s property was originally part of a 32,000-square-foot parcel that was granted a subdivision in 2003 by the ZBA, which carved it into two 16,000-square-foot lots.
Zoning in the area now requires a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet, or approximately one acre. The prior zoning called for minimum lot sizes of 20,000 square feet. The 2003 subdivision was granted shortly before the Town Board was set to approve a new Master Plan, which instituted the 40,000-square-foot lot minimum in 2004.

While subdivisions are normally the jurisdiction of the Planning Board, Ashley Homes of L.I. had originally applied for an area variance from the ZBA to allow the smaller lots, and was approved. In 2005, the ZBA also granted a one-year extension of that variance.

When Ashley Homes submitted a subdivision application to the Planning Board in 2005, it was rejected on the grounds that it didn’t comply with the new zoning. Ashley Homes took the Planning Board to court on that ruling, and was successful in both in state Supreme Court and the state Court of Appeals, which ruled that the Planning Board could not overrule the ZBA’s verdict.

The 2007 Court of Appeals ruling pointed out, however, that the ZBA approval had expired, although it said there was nothing in the ruling prohibiting the applicant from applying for a further extension.

Mr. Simms said he’d never met Mr. Ravn before Thursday’s hearing, and said Mr. Ravn seemed to be “between a rock and a hard place.” But he also said he said he didn’t believe Mr. Ravn knew nothing of the 2003 ZBA variance.

“The idea that somebody could purchase a property without doing any due diligence is hard to accept,” Mr. Simms said at the ZBA hearing.

He said Mr. Ravn shouldn’t be allowed to claim a hardship if can’t get the current variance application approved, because he was told in December that he needed the variance.

“He was told in December that a variance was needed and he proceeded without it,” Mr. Simms said. “It was his decision to put all that money at risk.”

Mr. Ravn told the News-Review earlier this year that he was required to build the house on a raised grade because of new laws regarding building in a flood plain. He also said the property is engineered so that all rainwater will stay within its boundaries.

Mr. Simms told the ZBA that since Mr. Ravn continued building after he received the December letter saying he needed a variance, the ZBA should not use the argument that it can’t make him tear the house down because he’s invested a lot of money in it.

“This board faces that decision at every meeting,” said ZBA attorney Scott DeSimone, adding that builders often erect structures before getting approvals.

The ZBA made no decision on the application Thursday and adjourned the hearing to its Sept. 22 meeting.

[email protected]


text:
12/04/13 12:30pm

JENNIFER GUSTAVSON PHOTO | Shoreham-Wading River superintendent Steven Cohen gives a presentation at Tuesday night’s school board meeting.

Shoreham-Wading River School District’s elementary students will be divided among buildings based on grade level — not neighborhoods — starting in the 2014-15 school year.

The school board voted 4-2 in favor of implementing what’s called a Princeton Plan — developed in Princeton, N.J., and currently used in other districts — to enhance educational opportunities by grouping elementary school teachers and students by grade in the same buildings while downsizing staffing levels.

Superintendent Steven Cohen said a Princeton Plan model will benefit students because teachers will be with all their grade-level colleagues, which he said will result in an increased opportunity to collaborate on lesson plans.

But which grades will be housed in each building isn’t yet known.

Under one proposal for implementing the Princeton Plan, Briarcliff Elementary School would become a kindergarten-only building. That school currently runs a K-1 program. Students in grades 1-3 would attend either Miller Avenue or Wading River elementary; those in grades 4 and 5 would go to the other.

“The most important benefit from the Princeton Plan is that there’s much more dynamic interaction among teachers in order to improve and distribute high-level instruction and continuity of curriculum,” Mr. Cohen said. “In these days of heightened demands from Common Core and state ed, that is an important consideration to keep in mind as we talk about elementary school.”

The second Princeton Plan option, which would only be implemented if the budget fails in May, would involve closing the Briarcliff school.

During his presentation Tuesday, Mr. Cohen said his office has also drafted a Neighborhood Plan, an option that groups students by “catchment areas,” or where they live. Mr. Cohen wanted to present it for the board’s consideration because residents have said they’d prefer a more traditional option, but the board opted to go with a Princeton Plan.

School board member Robert Rose, who, with Sean Beran, cast a dissenting vote against the Princeton Plan, said that although he liked the Princeton Plan, he believed it would be more appropriate at this time to implement the Neighborhood Plan, which he described as “a baby step” toward the large-scale reconfiguration of the elementary program.

After a nearly two-hour discussion, and with more residents speaking in favor of the Princeton Plan than against it, the board approved the Princeton Plan proposal, with school board vice president John Zukowski and members Richard Pluschau, Michael Fucito, and Jack Costas voting for it. School board president Bill McGrath was absent from the meeting.

Now that the board has agreed to move forward with a Princeton Plan model, Mr. Cohen said it must now look at ways to reduce expenditures in the district’s secondary program.

He said that should the district do nothing, it would face a $8 million budget deficit next year.

The deficit was caused in part by the district’s pulling from its reserves in recent years to maintain programs and staffing levels at the school. Last year, the district used $5.5 million in reserves and leftover balances from the previous year.

Were this year’s budget to roll over into 2014-15 as-is, the district would be looking at a $2.5 million increase in expenditures.

[email protected]

11/13/13 5:00pm
11/13/2013 5:00 PM
SAMANTHA BRIX FILE PHOTO | The Briarcliff School in Shoreham.

SAMANTHA BRIX FILE PHOTO | The Briarcliff School in Shoreham.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated Briarcliff Elementary School may close as the district could not prepare separate plans for this year’s budget. Both plans the school board is debating offer options to leave Briarcliff open or close the school, depending on the results of May’s school budget vote.

If voters don’t approve this May’s Shoreham-Wading River school budget, Shoreham’s oldest school, Briarcliff Elementary School, may be no more.

Shoreham-Wading River’s school board is planning to give residents two options this spring: vote for a budget that pierces the cap but keeps the district schools the way they are, or vote for a budget in June that stays under the tax cap but closes the Briarcliff school and shuffles around the district.

District officials had told the board it would be a logistical nightmare to draft up two separate plans, contingent on a vote outcome. The board must now choose between two plans. The first plan would split the kindergarteners between Miller Avenue and Wading River Elementary Schools. The other option — the so called “Princeton plan” — puts all the first- and second-graders in one elementary school, with the remaining grades up to fifth into the other elementary school.

Both plans will include two drafts, one with Briarcliff opened and with Briarcliff closed, said Superintendent Steven Cohen. If the school closed, the distrct would save about $2 million in principal and teacher salaries and operating costs, he said.

The Princeton plan would save slightly less money due to increased transportation costs, Mr. Cohen said, but would also allow teachers to collaborate more among the grades.

Board vice president John Zukowski asked why it would be so hard to prepare separate plans.

Assistant superintendent Alan Meinster answered that too many factors would need to be taken into account, such as instructing teachers and administrators on how to prepare for the coming school year. School officials later said that so long as the board decided on either the neighborhood school plan or the Princeton plan, the administration could prepare adequately to have options to keep Briarcliff open or close the school.

[email protected]


text:
A Review Of Best Insulated Water Bottle

The Contigo Autoseal West Loop received’t preserve drinks incredibly hot for practically providing a Zojirushi, but at near to 50 percent the price of our principal choose, it truly is a reasonable substitute.

Despite the fact that we didn’t place Significantly emphasis on maintaining cold liquids cold for this information—take a look at our water bottle guide for what’s best in that regard—we did realize that the Zojirushi New Stainless Mug retained cold a lot better than all the other mugs in our tests lineup.

Health and fitness :: In 2014 and beyond, we have been meticulously selecting and rising a range of normal well being dietary supplements in conjunction with our consulting naturaopath, Julie McNab. We have been at this time researching & sampling our vary, which is able to proceed to expand because the calendar year progresses, concentrating on awesome merchandise not effortlessly found in your local browsing centre. Careful interest takes time. You should let us know When you have any distinct demands.

Not like many of the other corporations that we looked at, Zojirushi gives its travel mugs in several dimensions. Besides the twelve-ounce and 16-ounce measurements that the first Stainless Mug is available in, the new edition is likewise sold inside a twenty-ounce capability.

As well as its lighter weight, The brand new Stainless Mug features a a lot more compact lid style and design that, when popped open, obscures significantly less of your respective watch if you suggestion the mug to your mouth to consume. As with the first mug, the lid locks and unlocks once you press a button, enabling you to definitely drink from it conveniently without searching.

After regular use for close to three a long time, our decide retains heat just along with to the day we acquired it. Though cleansing during the dishwasher is not really advisable for double-walled stainless steel (begin to see the Treatment and servicing area under), this mug has survived numerous accidental trips throughout the dishwasher without any visible reduce in performance. It has also traveled in lots of crowded bags, backpacks, and purses without any leaks.

Double-wall vacuum insulation keeps the contents very hot for six hrs. and chilly for 24 hrs. so that you can warm up with cocoa or cool down with your preferred chilly beverage

No matter palate sophistication (or absence thereof), our experts and analysis agreed that a vacuum-sealed vacation mug manufactured fully out of stainless-steel (help you save for that lid) was the best option for most makes use of.

It also has volume measurements up the facet meaning you could see particularly the amount of you’re consuming and you will clip the bottle for your bag you can try here While using the loop about the lid. It’s a sound sporty possibility.

Whatever the mug layout, you’ll require a several dimensions of bottle brushes to scrub in and across the lid system, the spout, and deep to the vacuum bottle by itself.

Foods :: You are Everything you take in, and what your body can digest and absorb. We have now style tested our way by means of a huge selection of products and solutions to locate the best in normal & Accredited organic and natural food stuff and superfoods that contain NO preservatives, NO artificial colors or flavours.

I have experienced ice very last for approximately 60 several hours On this bottle, and i am sure it might have lasted more time had I Enable it. There exists also no condensation, which is really nice. The look is so modern and beautiful with lots of colors. I are actually much more motivated to consume water because it's normally refreshingly chilly. I have two by now and want to acquire much more for my family and friends. I will NEVER head over to almost every other bottle. Which is for sure. Date printed: 2016-03-24

No matter whether you’re looking for a new bottle to acquire towards the health and fitness center, go functioning or biking with, or you merely need to make sure you’re ingesting the encouraged six to 8 glasses of water per day, purchasing a reusable bottle could help you save cash In the long term.

#endthetrend #endthetrend of single-use plastics that has a bottle manufactured to final. find out more. about us our mission supply a more sustainable solution into the squander made via the 38 billion disposable water bottles thrown absent each and every year inside the U.S. learn more our business

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


text:
The “Harmless” Habit That Could Make Your Teeth Fall Out. Literally.

Do you wake up some mornings with a headache of origins you can’t define? Do you experience vague muscle pain in your face? If so, you may be experiencing symptoms of bruxism. What’s bruxism? You likely know it by its more informal name – two names, actually: “clenching” and “grinding.” It’s also not something you’ll […]