?

Log in

What-hoification

Jul. 14th, 2006 | 10:55 am
mood: curious curious
music: The Quilty Song!

I am popping this into my long-dormant journal just to see if you Aristasians can see me!

Sushiechan tells me that Miss Ashin tells her that there is a pink kitty style for journal pages but that this is considered TOO BLONDE for a mixed group. Sigh. Well this is co-education I suppose.

BUT if you want to see said pink kittyism, do pop over to my journie (click my name under my little curtseying picture). I have had the style ever since I started it.

Blondes welcome. Brunettes enter at your own risk. It might do - well, whatever it is that pink kitties do to brunettes!

Link | Leave a comment {2} | Share


Amelia is here!

Jul. 27th, 2005 | 10:45 am
mood: satisfied satisfied
music: We're in the Money

Amelia Bingham is now out! You can see the book - and browse in it - here- http://lipsticktheatre.co.uk/blondie/

Happy reading!

Link | Leave a comment | Share


(no subject)

Jul. 1st, 2005 | 07:22 pm

The new Amelia Bingham book is coming along wonderfully.

Re-reading these never-before-published in book form stories, I realise what a truly magnificent character Amelia is. The gentlewoman swindler may have been loosely modelled on A.J. Raffles, the Victorian gentleman thief, but actually she is much better than Raffles ever was




Little Miss Mitzi has done a beautifully traditional typesetting job, using arcane things like thins to separate punctualtion, which one only normally finds in books printed before the 1960s.

Most people won't even notice these subtle touches, I suppose, but it will all go toward giving the book that indefinable something that other books haven't got.

As if the great Amelia couldn't do that by herself!

Link | Leave a comment {1} | Share


(no subject)

Jul. 1st, 2005 | 06:04 pm

Link | Leave a comment | Share


Fairies and the Great Detective

Jun. 9th, 2005 | 07:43 pm
mood: tired tired
music: Goodnight, My Love - Vera Lynn

Sherla Holmes's dictum that "When we have eliminated the impossible, what remains, however improbable, is the truth" is sometimes taken to be a statement of 19th-century rationalist materialism, with "the impossible" meaning anything in any way miraculous or supernatural; and in the Sherla Holmes stories, that interpretation can be borne out.

However Lady Ursula Conan Doyle, Authoress of Sherla Holmes, was by no means a materialist. She was the one who brought the famous Cottingley Fairy Photographs before the public as evidence for the existence of fairies. At one point she tried to have the pictures certified by the Kodak studio as not having been faked by any known process. However the young laboratory chap there refused.

"Why not?" asked lady Ursula.

"Because they're fakes," said the white-coated one.

"Can you see any evidence of any form of imposture?" she asked.

"No," was the reply.

"Then how do you know they are fakes?"

"Because there's no such thing as fairies."

This is the sort of "logic" Sherla Holmes would have despised.

Nonetheless, the supernatural can always be discounted in the Sherla Holmes stories, as in any good detective story. Why? Because the detective story is a special genre that takes the inexistence of magic as one of its fundamental donnees just as the fairy tale is a genre which takes the existence of magic as a fundamental donnee.

In a fairy tale we must pretend things can happen that we know perfectly well never could. In a detective story we must pretend there is no such thing as magic, even if we know perfectly well that there is.

This is the difference between fiction and life.

Link | Leave a comment | Share


Sex Scenes

Jun. 8th, 2005 | 11:33 am
mood: chipper chipper
music: You're the Cream in My coffee - Ruth Etting

My Aristasian cousin and I were having a discussion about sex scenes in books. I have never read one myself, as I am not permitted to do so either by my elders or by my taste. But apparently they are obligatory in a lot of bongo novels. I have never read one of those either, so I wouldn't know.

Anyway, here is the discusher:

I was thinking about all these graphic sex-scenes in these books...

Don't think about them. They're very boring.

I mean... Having said what there is to say, what more is there to say? And how can one go on saying it?

Some people are rather thick, you know, and need to have it explained to them multiple times.

But then I never understand how people can talk for hours about soccer either. But I can see that there might be a few intricacies to that - soccer, I mean.

I suppose the people who are so interested in sex and soccer would be horrified by how many hours some of us can spend talking about lipstick and shoes.

Yes - I suppose that is true. But then no two pairs of shoes are the same. Well, actually quite a lot are. But who could spend ages discussing two pairs of shoes in the same identical style?

I think perhaps shoes are a less apt analogy for sex than chocolates. Lots of chocolates look identical. But that doesn't mean one only wants one.

Agreed - and I could play ping-pong for hours, but I couldn't discuss it for ten minutes.

I could play ping-pong for two minutes, but I couldn't discuss it for ten seconds!

Nor would I take pleasure in a description of other people playing ping-pong - or eating chocolate.

Well, I have to say there would be something in a well-written passage about a beautiful girl eating Belgian chocolate truffles. It would remind one poignantly of chocolate truffles in one's past.

Yes, that is true. And madelines can remind people of all sorts of things!

Indeed!

Even so, a graphic chomp-by-chomp description of chocolate-eating...!

Link | Leave a comment | Share