The Twelfth Five Books of 2007.......BUT FIRST!

.

Before we get into the latest batch of books, you have to check out what we're going to do. And what I totally want to be for Halloween.

The Brass Clan can get tickets before they are generally available and they emailed and asked if we'ld like to go. Needless to say, we're all stoked. The Big O can't wait to see the dinosaurs eat other dinosaurs. I'm just making up for missing Gertie ninety years ago.

Anyway. It looks awesome. Click on any of the dino photos and watch the videos. I'm pretty excited.

As for the books, we've got a few classics (The Pearl and , perhaps the best new newspaper comic of the last decade, the Great (and Controversial!) Mormon Horror Novel, plus Book #60. Expect long diatribes--or at least discussion--over the G(aC!)MHN and Foundation.

Plus lots of cool dinosaur photos!


060) Tales of the Black Widowers by Isaac Asimov, finished September 14

I have already gone on about Asimov at some length in this five, so I will keep this brief: Fun little mystery stories. My favorite was the one about the fire, although it was the closest to a cheat. My least liked was the one about Alice, because it seemed to break the rules of Henry's skillset. Technically, I was most impressed by the effortlessly drawn characters, each of whom remained distinct. The perfect book of short stories to carry about in a pocket for instant distraction with minimal requirement.


three weeks

059) The Pearl by John Steinbeck, finished September 11 and again on September 12

We read this book aloud in both my freshmen classes. It was my first book since reading Of Mice and Men in high school. And this one has a pretty similar ending. Makes me wonder if Steinbeck has any other tricks. Anyway, I won't write him off entirely until I've read East of Eden and Travels with Charley.


about a week

058) The Dog Is Not a Toy: House Rule #4 by Darby Conley, finished September 3

Someone left this book next to the changing table, and I've been reading a bit here and there as I've changed diapers. Then, today, as the Large S took a nap on me, I finished it up. Good book. The first Get Fuzzy collection. I started reading Get Fuzzy online when it was only a few weeks old and I still count it one of the best new strips of the last ten years, even though I don't read newspaper comics online like I used to. Good stuff.


four days

057) Brother Brigham by D. Michael Martindale, finished August 29

For those of you who haven't been paying attention (or have been too far removed from Martindale's shouting), this is a Very Controversial Book. I'll get to that later, but first I just want to say that those of you who like idea-driven fiction, this is a great book. If, only the other hand, you read to luxuriate in the wordsmith's killer style, forget about it. I'm going to talk about style first, so we can move onto the meatier stuff without worrying about it, but if you're totally disinterested in issues of style, skip ahead to the *****.

So it's kinda clunky. Let's just say it cause it's true. The dialogue's not terrible, but no one's going to be putting him on list's with Every-Critic's-Favorite Elmore Leonard any day soon.

The worst thing (maybe) is this: Martindale can't seem to decide who his audience is. Since the book is steeped so heavily in Mormon doctrines and culture, he seems to be aiming directly at Mormons--who else could follow the twists, other than someone who's been going to their church meetings the last decade or so? But on the other hand, if his audience is all schooled Mormons, why the occasional dunderheaded explanations? (Example: "the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price".)

Actually, I think I can explain that, because it's not just Mormon stuff that gets overexplicated now and then, and Martindale is hardly alone in committing this sin. Too many writers add awful sentences at the end of paragraphs that make the reader wonder if they think I'm stupid. This is a complaint I make a lot.

But enough on style. Let's wrap it up with a question: is Martindale a writer whose virtues outweigh a lackluster style or not? Is he like Harry Turtledove, an excellent storyimaginer whose crappy storytelling renders him unreadable (at least to a sometimes snob like me)? Or is he like Dean Hughes who admits to not being a stylist, but is so compelling and unpretentious that it hardly matters? (Or, for that matter, Asimov?)

I don't know. I've only read one book.

*****

Let's start with the assertion I've never heard argued, that everything in Brother Brigham is doctrinally sound, from a Mormon point-of-view. This is, in fact, arguable. But only arguable. Also arguable is some of the Church-procedural stuff, but like I said before, this is a novel based in ideas, and I think I'm going to go with the crowd and not argue with the it's-doctrinally-sound assertion. After all, it's an argument I could lose.

This book had a certain fame and notoriety among Mormon literary circles as the Great Unpublishable Mormon Novel, and I had been anxious to read it for, mm, five years? The first chapter has been online for a while, but I couldn't see much point in reading it without access to the rest of the book.

(Update: since I read that first chapter a few months ago, the page has been changed to increase readability; which was sorely needed.)

Then came Zarahemla Books, looking for "edgy but not apostate" Mormon lit and snapped BB right up as one of its first books. So I read the online first chapter. I had style issues, but assumed an editor would have fixed them up (wrong there)--and besides, the opening salvo was plentiful intriguing. I wanted to read more. So I bought the book.

It took me a couple months to get to it, but finally I did. And now I've read it. And what do I think?

Hhhhhhhhhh.

First, I would have undoubtedly liked the book a lot more if I hadn't heard so much inaccurate praise for it. All the comparisons to Stephen King and nonspoileralerted exclamations like (spoiler alert) SEX! VIOLENCE! EVIL! POLYGAMY! that completely mislead me and led me to expect something other than what was delivered. I mean--there's nothing that explicit in it. The Infamous Masturbation Scene, for instance, occurs between two adjacent paragraphs. That's hardly shocking.

Although the books' big reveal was never announced to me--although it occurred to me (as a well versed Mormon) before the second chapter ended. The details of the big reveal felt more like namedropping than revelatory, but that's getting way too nitpicky. And, in fact, I would not have recommended the namedropping be changed if anyone had asked me.

Which brings me to something really important I had better say now: Unless you're kind of squeemish when things that aren't supposed to happen happen (and this book will let you know if you are), then this is a book worth reading. Yes, it's hugely Mormoncentric; yes, it's got some style issues; yes, there is SEX! VIOLENCE! EVIL! POLYGAMY!; yes, yes, yes. But the book offers a hugely different place to stand and examine your faith and that's never bad.

So here I'll say something about (spoiler alert) the hopeful denouement. It is good and right and proper and nothing like a copout. It's even--I'll say it--faithful.

And no matter what you think about Brigham Young appearing to a man mowing his lawn, that's an idea worth taking for a drive.


say two weeks

056) The Foundation Trilogy: Foundation, Foundation and Empire, Second Foundation by Isaac Asimov, finished August 27

I have been meaning to read the Foundation books for some time--their importance to the development of the thinking and style of American science fiction really can't be overestimated and I felt an obligation to read them. But I never got around to it until Recession Cone lent me his three-in-one set. Although even three books only take us about halfway through the story of the fall of one empire and the creation of another.....

Style first: Asimov rejected style entirely and in doing so created a voice that has been mimicked and copied to no end. This is recognized pretty widely. So how does his styleless style strike me? Pretty good. Unlike some other styleless writers, his writing is not that clunky. Most of the clunkiness has to do with the book becoming dated (notable it's weirdly period tobacco use and sexism)--the plain style of Asimov's prose holds up fine. Or at least compared to the other fiction I'm reading at the moment. ¶ And the story? Hmm.

Prefirst: It was surprising to get invested in characters only to turn a page and find out they had suddenly been dead fifty years, but I got used to it and I understood and it makes sense given the story being told.

Now. First: I love the idea of plotting history mathematically and sculpting a better future through a precise understanding of the human mass. Very cool. And I was in favor of the Foundation all the way. But, in the third book (SPOILER ALERT), we learn that the Second Foundation had been pulling strings all along, I felt these two things equally strongly: a) Those bastards! How dare they! and b) Well, duh. Of course! It makes sense! Good for them. I'm not comfortable with that split in response.

Anyway, the first book I was in and out of in no time. I slowed down and took many breaks with the others, but they're fast reads too--in no small part to Asimov's styleless style. Should anyone at all interested in American science fiction read at least the first? Of course. Would I recommend it to them? Yes. But I probably wouldn't use it as an example of SF's reasonable claims to ahrt. But it would be an easy recommend to a younger chap wondering where to start.

I'ld just warn him first that women aren't that docile in real life.


two months and two weeks

055) Ode To Kirihito by Osamu Tezuka, finished August 20
054) Polygamy Was Better Than Monotony by Paul Bailey, finished August 10
053) Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar: Understanding Philosophy Through Jokes by Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein, finished August 7
052) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling, finished July 24
051) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by J. K. Rowling, finished July 21
050) The Ruins by Scott Smith, finished July 13
049) Favorite Stories by Margret Rey, illustrated by H.A. Rey, finished July 12
048) Criss Cross by Lynne Rae Perkins, finished July 2
047) Flight Volume Three edited by Kazu Kibuishi, finished June 27
046) Nobody Is Perfick by Bernard Waber, finished June 14
045) First Paragraphs: Inspired Openings for Writers and Readers by Donald Newlove, finished June 12
044) The Universe in a Nutshell by Stephen Hawking, finished June 11
043) Dune by Frank Herbert, finished June 9
042) The Gifts of the Jews: How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels by Thomas Cahill, finished June 8
041) The Roald Dahl Omnibus by Roald Dahl, finished June 6
040) Troll: A Love Story by Johanna Sinisalo, finished May 31
039) The End by Lemony Snicket, finished May 23
038) The Complete Peanuts 1961-1962 by Charles M. Schultz, finished May 22
037) The Penultimate Peril by Lemony Snicket, finished May 21
036) The Grim Grotto by Lemony Snicket, finished May 18
035) The Eyre Affair by Jasper Fforde, finished May 15
034) Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman, finished May 14
033) Chip Kidd: Book One: Work: 1986-2006 by Chip Kidd, finished May 9
032) Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë, finished May 7
031) The Complete Peanuts 1959-1960 by Charles M. Schulz, finished April 25
030) Devils & Demons edited by Marvin Kaye, finished April 23
029) Talk Talk Talk: Decoding the Mysteries of Speech by Jay Ingram, finished April 23
028) Einstein's Dreams by Alan Lightman, finished April 20
027) The Long Chalkboard: and Other Stories by Jennifer Allen and illustrated by Jules Feiffer, finished April 19
026) Babbitt by Sinclair Lewis, finished April 19
025) Frank by Jim Woodring, finished April 12
024) The Complete Concrete by Paul Chadwick, finished April 3
023) The Rumpelstiltskin Problem by Vivian Vande Velde, finished March 30
022) Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson, finished March 28
021) Batman: The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller et al, finished March 23
020) A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers, finished March 16
019) Batman: Gothic by Grant Morrison et al, finished March 13
018) Wild at Heart by John Eldredge, finished March 7
017) Stink: The Incredible Shrinking Kid by Megan McDonald, finished March 7
016) 50 Professional Scenes for Student Actors: A Collection of Short 2 Person Scenes by Garry Michael Kluger, finished March 6
015) Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair by Pablo Neruda, finished March 5
014) Frindle by Andrew Clements, finished March 1
013) Brain Wave by Poul Anderson, finished February 27
012) The Best American Comics 2006 edited by Harvey Pekar and Anne Elizabeth Moore, finished February 26
011) Everything Is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer, finished February 15
010) The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ edited by Mormon and Moroni, finished February 7
009) Lisey's Story by Stephen King, finished February 1
008) The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett, finished January 26
007) Empire by Orson Scott Card, finished January 24
006) Stargirl by Jerry Spinelli, finished January 22
005) Vile Bodies by Evelyn Waugh, finished January 17
004) Superman Adventures Vol. 1: Up, Up and Away! by Mark Millar, finished January 16
003) A Walk in the Woods by Bill Bryson, finished January 12
002) Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud, finished January 11
001) Galápagos by Kurt Vonnegut, finished January 10

Read about

The First Five
The Second Five
The Third Five
The Fourth Five
The Fifth Five
The Sixth Five
The Seventh Five
The Eighth Five
The Ninth Five
The Tenth Five

Coming to America

.

Visitors to this great land of ours really need to know how to handle themselves in certain everyday, quintessentially American situations. The problem, of course, is that they may not know the correct vocabulary to employ in such situations.

I don't know about you, but I have often fretted on behalf of, for instance, young Japanese women who haven't enough time for both toning up their bods and their English before coming here on vacation.

Thankfully, they no longer have to make that choice:

The Tadpole Polka

.

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

OOM pah pah
PAH lee wog

A very little bit on doubt a svithe

.

There are gobbles to say on the importance of doubt to a religious person; tonight, however, just a sampling.

I have long believed--and it is certainly a Mormon doctrine--that truth is out there, we are intended to look for it, and we can know it when we find it. This is the process of faith. If you'll allow me to define the terms, faith is two things:

1. Trusting that truth can be found.

2. Accepting truth when found.

This definition presumes that somethings are true and somethings are not. Thus it also presumes that as we have faith that we can find truth, we must also assume that we will find things which are not truth.

We call this assumption doubt. And it is important. Not just because it is faith's opposite, but because they travel the same road together--they are fellow guides to bring us to the truth.

“Doubt is a pain too lonely to know that faith is his twin brother.”
----- Kahlil Gibran

Of course, what this means is that the truth-seeker must be willing to be proved wrong. As time goes on and the fine-tuning of faith occurs, the changes required of one's belief may become smaller, but giving up those small falsities may be all the more difficult.

“Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt.”
----- Paul Tillich

But that's the way it works. Doubt and faith are complements, not competitors.

“Doubt is not the opposite of faith; it is one element of faith.”
----- Paul Tillich

I don't think that all roads lead to Heaven, but I do believe that all earnest seekers find roads that lead to the road that leads to Heaven. I do think that the play of faith and doubt runs a different course for every soul. I do believe that we are obliged to support one another and trust one another's faith/doubt processes. I do think in appropriate relationships we are constrained to share our own discoveries. I do believe that without a Godlike omniscience, faith and doubt remain elements of every person's inner life. And I think it's healthy to recognize that a proceed recognizing that they work together for our benefit.

As Hugh B. Brown was wont to quote:

“No one deserves to believe unless he has served an apprenticeship of doubt.”
----- Will Durant

Let us all serve honorably.


last week's svithe

Chambers of Oz

.

Last Christmas my brother Reb and I met at our parents' house with our respective families in tow. We all had a good time. That was the heartwarming, family-oriented portion of this post, folks. Get your buzz, then read on.

Reb had brought a mix cd of Kasey Chambers he had burned for his own (more-or-less constant) listening pleasure. But don't worry: one of Reb's greatest virtues is superpar taste in music and Ms Chambers is no exception.

Reb loves telling her life story, but that's not what I'm about tonight. The issue in question is how this Aussie chick is one of the best things going in modern country music. How can Oz out-America us in this artform we Americans see as purely American (whether we like it or not)?

This isn't like Italians playing crappy football americano--this is country music, darn it! And this chick from the Outback is better than anything on our American country radio stations, IMHO.

Not that American country is bankrupt--there are some promising trends--I'm just not that impressed with the radio. If you need hope, check out Miller Tells Her Tale (and, um, ignore the fact that the host is British). And, of course, as long as we have Emmylou Harris we will be spared. Abraham didn't have to stop at ten--if he had said, Peradventure Emmylou Harris shall be found there," I'm sure God would have replied, "I will not destroy it for Emmylou Harris’s sake."

Bad luck for Abraham that Emmylou Harris wasn't born yet.

Anyway, so it was Christmas time and I'm happy to finally be hearing this denizen of Oz that I've heard so much about and so Reb burns me a copy of his mix.

I was listening to it today and while sure, there's only one banjo song, it's terrific stuff. I really like it. In fact, you should go over to Pandora right now and start yourself a Kasey Chambers station.

Or, you know, get a moral degenerate to burn a cd for you.

Love you, Reb!

[more]

Sibs (update)

.

I've updated some of my siblings identities and I'm adding ages as well, with me as the base:

Theric

Canary -2

Reb -4

Bojangles (formerly Braj) -7

Giggles -9

Schmetterling (formerly Wyote) -9

STOP LOOKING AT ME!

.


.

I'M SERIOUS! YOU'RE CREEPING ME OUT!

The relationship between X and Y and 45

.

No dot-to-dots, no sex, no thumbnail sketches.

No apocalyptic visions, no meanings, no summer nights.

No aquatic critters, no punctuation, no catalogues.

As far as I can tell, that leaves no relationship whatsoever.

Darn.

Thelebrity

.

So I realized today that I would never be able to handle being famous. For heaven's sake, I'm just a school teacher and I'm already in constant dread of being recognized at Costco! I can't imagine having to smile and sign autographs every twenty feet!

How Berkeley can you be? (a svithe)

.

I really like living in (or, rather, near) Berkeley. And I love attending the Berkeley Ward. Since we've been married, Lady Steed and I have moved quite a bit (mostly interProvo), yet we've managed to live in only four wards. I'm glad of this because I'm of a mind that one should really become part of a ward, make it family, and that's hard to do when you're swapping families all the time.

One interesting thing about Berkeley is it's sense of history. When our building was dedicated by President Heber J. Grant, a young girl was there who is still in the ward.

We have all sorts of jolly history (eg, J. Golden Kimball helped build our building at 50¢/hr), and all sorts of documentation thereof, which is awesome.

Mormons are a record-keeping, history-building people, but often that history is hidden away and never seen by the people, which sort of defeats the purpose, if you ask me.

Anyway, the ward had an 80th-anniversary celebration this weekend. It wasn't done up as big as previous decades, when former members from all over the country were invited to attend, and many came or at least sent photos. But it was still cool.

One highlight was a timeline that ran all along one wall. It contained info from the adding-on to our totally awesome organ to a recounting of the civil (but passionate) debate in Relief Society over Prop 22.

Sometimes I hear people complain about the pettiness of their fellow Saints (re: beards, colored shirts, makeup, hairspray, artsiness, blah blah blah); I've never seen it. And I don't even sense a tendency toward it here.

Christ opened his arms to everyone. I don't claim perfection for my ward by any means, but I feel welcomed, and I've heard others say they now feel that way for the first time.

So I think Jesus must be reasonably happy with us.

Me, I think I'm going to start being nicer too. After all: Everyone else is doing it.






last week's svithe

Thesis schmesis

.

I got so worked up during yesterday's post that I forgot all about what I was allegedly upset about in the first place: that the Chronicle's coverage of this issue was biased beyond belief. How every word choice was slanted, the construction was slanted, the presentation of evidence was slanted; how every detail was constructed to make this look like a partisan issue when it is Very Possible to treat this without such undertones. Yes, it's a shame that the timing of this could have strong partisan consequences, but the concept itself is a sound one; one that, as long as we must have an Electoral College, all states would do well to follow.

Post #600, in which I rant about something rational for a change (if the Electoral College counts as “something rational”)

.

I like to defend large media against either brand of political rancor, whether right or left (because let's face it: both sides are peopled with loonies who think the media's out to get them), but the front page story in the San Francisco Chronicle today was so deliriously Democrat-leaning that I can do nothing but cry foul.

Although I encourage you to go read the article, you might not. So let me tell you what's wrong with it, starting with the title and subtitle:

WINNER-TAKE-ALL? NOT NECESSARILY
Move to split state's electoral votes by congressional district could elect a GOP president

Now for those of you modern Americans without an opinion on the Electoral College (even after the last two elections), let me tell you what your opinion should be: The Electoral College is antiquated and we're ready to switch over to a more directly democratic (little d) method for picking a president.

For you farners, here's the deal: Each state votes for president. Whoever wins the popular vote in a state gets all it's Electoral College votes. California, for instance, has 55 Electoral College votes (out of 538 total, so it's a lot). California tends to vote for Democrats, but not overwhelmingly so. Which means that millions of votes basically get tossed out when the state's 55 electors fly to DC and turn in blue ballots. No one should like this. No democrat (little d) at least, that's for sure.

So some Republicans in Sacramento have come up with this brilliant idea to let the state's Congressional Districts pick their own Electors, one by one.

Skip this little-text explanation on why we have 55 votes if you don't need it:

So! Bicameral legislature! The Senate = two seats per state. The House = 435 seats split amongst the states by population. The Electoral College = The Senate + The House, divvied up by legislative seats. California has two Senators and 53 Reps, ergo we have 55 Electoral votes. Savvy?

Now, in this proposed plan, the winner of the state, instead of getting all 55 votes, would get 2. And each Congressional District (an area electing a single Representative) would get 1 vote each. And how they voted would determine which Elector they send to vote for president.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'm from Kern County. A county that never votes Democratic (the opposite of Park City, Utah, you might say). So except for the few Demos scattered here and there, our vote for president hasn't counted since . . . Reagan, I think.

Me, I don't know what party I'll be voting for in 2008 yet. There are worthy candidates on both sides and we'll just have to see how things go. But our friends the Democrats have been screwed by the Electoral College recently, winning the popular vote nationally but losing anyway, so they've been moaning (and rightly so) about how the Electoral College sucks and is a big meanie.

And so this proposal, a step closer to onevote=onevote, should be welcomed by them. But no. It isn't. And why not? Because without California's 55 votes, they don't think they can win. And, as always, winning first, principals second. This is why I really don't much care for either of the Big Parties. Crap like this. Just check out these quotes from the article:

Howard Dean: "This is not reform. It's just another Republican attempt to rig an election. This is partisan, it's wrong and the Democratic Party will not stand for a repeat of 2000."

Uh huh. Now, I'll admit that short term, this is extremely likely to benefit the GOP, but as California goes, so goes the country. If this move proved trendsetting, the presidential election would be brought closer to the people--and isn't that what being a progressive is all about? And might this not have won you 2000, had it started happening twenty years ago?

Barbara Boxer: "We need to beat this and will do whatever is necessary. Sure, it's expensive, but this is our democracy, this is the presidency."

It's amazing to me that she thinks the-believing-people's donations to her party could be better spent running an anti-populist campaign than actually promoting her party's candidate. But whatever. She's just my Senator. What do I care if she makes $165,200 per annum to spout nonsense?

I just can't help thinking that the timing of this proposal really sucks. The Democrats (big D) will paint this in an evil light and defeat it at the polls and it will be tainted and thus never come up again--all because the Big Election takes place five months after the vote on the proposal--if it even gets on the ballot.

If this weren't so near an important election, if we could talk about this without talking about Party, if we were just a weeeee bit more mature, could anyone really honestly ethically be against this idea?

Correct answer: No.

But the drive to find correct answers is weak in partisan politics.

Can you prove me wrong?

115 letters in favor of recognizing a joint Ainu/Kabyle state

.

Sure, they're kind of far apart geographically, but they both like dress-like traditional costumes and probably eat interesting food as well.

Not-so-Laborious

.

We spent hours at the park playing/reading/eating. This was nice.

We did not get any painting done and the dishes are piled up. This will not be nice tomorrow.

Starting September with a Svithe

.

When we first moved to Berkeley, I was thrilled nearly every week by the variety of thought and testimony on display. Whether the speaker used Japanese literature or economics to explain gospel principles, I was delighted to be around religious grad students. Lovely stuff.

Many weeks, I took notes to be turned into svithes, but we had no internet and had no internet and continued having no internet for some time, and most of those never made it online.

I recently found a quarter page of such notes and thought I might share it today. Who knows--the notes may even be a year old today.

"Holy God?" v. Humanism

His talk hit on Kierkergaard + Hamlet thrilling my shrivelled, intellectual soul. But his talk was on hope + in simple testimony and the sharing of testimony + personal experience (UofU) did the meeting become spiritual to me.

An accomplished organist and violinist the most [illegible] CCYS....

Did you get that? I think it's a pretty fine sentiment. And a good lesson to me. As a svither and just as a believing human being.

-end-





last week's svithe

Pow! Right in the kisser!

.

Über S has been sad these many days

.

And I can't say as I blame him that much--although why he waited for me to get sick and for school to start I can't say.

But I think it's time we write our senators and demand that Linus's proposal once more be brought to the table:

Don’t steal this svithe.

.

I'm totally stealing this svithe.

Before Melyngoch left for her mission, she left an incredible post behind that not only quoted everyone from They Might Be Giants to Heloïse, but explained the Atonement to me in a bright and new way that may well prove to be life-changing.

Then (for all those of you who've been trying to decide if Harry Potter's mild-mannered secret identity is Jesus Christ), my brother Schmetterling figured the whole thing out. At least well enough for us nonmagical types.

And I would really like to expound but, well, Uber S is ascreaming and I ought to try harder to comfort him. Just holding him and treating him to the sounds of the keyboard does not seem to be cutting it. Bad Daddy.





last week's svithe

Sick SickTheric is sick.

.

Sick Sick

Theric is sick


Sick sick

Theric is sick


Sick Sick

Theric is sick


Sick sick

Theric is sick


Sick Sick

Theric is sick


Sick sick

Theric is sick

DUMBLEDORE!