I started my crocheting with Wintuk acrylic yarn -- a standard, ordinary yarn that worked up into (I thought) soft material. From there it was on to cheap acrylics like Red Heart, and acrylics that had a little wool in them like Wool-Ease.
After years of knitting, though, and my decade-and-a-half-long love of all things sheep-related, I came to the conclusion that wool was the One True Fiber. I'm not sensitive to it (as I am to mohair, alpaca, and most other animal fibers), it's often inexpensive, it can be used for a variety of projects, and it has a lot of lovely stretch to it. Acrylic was something I'd use for the occasional crochet project, but nothing else.
Sometimes, though, you want to knit a project for a friend who's sensitive to wool. What to do then? You can saddle them with crappy acrylic... or you can go with cotton, which can be nice, but has no memory and tends to stretch...
Or you can give acrylic another shot, and surprise yourself by finding an acrylic (blend) that's actually nice.
Fantasy by Dark Horse Yarns is a 50% nylon/50% acrylic blend that's by far the nicest acrylic I've ever worked with. Put it in the hands of a fellow knitter who eschews acrylic and they, too, will say it's the nicest acrylic they've ever had their hands on. It's got stretch to it -- knitting with it doesn't feel like knitting with plastic at all. It's soft like a microfiber, but it doesn't split like some microspun yarns do. It is, all in all, a really lovely yarn to work with.
It's not cheap. In fact, it's more expensive than some kinds of wool I work with. But given the choice between a soft, cuddly, pleasant-to-work-with yarn that'll be warm and cuddly for a wool-sensitive friend, and a cheap, scratchy acrylic that makes me want to give up on knitting before I finish the project, it's an easy, easy choice.
So for those of you searching for synthetics for one reason or another, I really do recommend this one. It's not wool, but it's the next best thing.
Tags: acrylic yarns, knitting
I have, on and off, pondered what it would be like to have my own flock of cute, adorable, woolly sheep. I've always known it would be rather a more serious undertaking than having a dog or a cat (a herbivorous ruminant just isn't the kind of animal you can housebreak), but I never quite knew exactly what it would be like. This book gives amazing detail on the life of a beginning shepherd, going through the details of how to pick the breed of sheep, how to set up your pasture for sheep, what to do when sheep get sick, routine maintenance that can be done to keep sheep healthy, and big events like lambing, shearing, and (gulp) slaughter.
While I don't think I'll be getting my own sheep anytime soon, this is a great reference to have if you're even not-so-seriously pondering it -- or if you happen to love sheep (the book is FULL of cute, adorable, wonderful pictures of sheep). I definitely love sheep, and I'm very happy to have read this book!
Tags: reading, yay sheep!
JoJoElle, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways:
- I love the fact that you can order samples of pretty much everything on JJE's site.
- I love the 400+ scents available; there's really something for every imaginable mood.
- I love the variety of bath and body products available. I'm not a fan of perfume on its own, but I sometimes make bath fizzies using perfume oils. I've tested many of her different lotion varieties, and while I have an absolute favorite, I'm sure people with different skin than me (you know, everybody) has favorites there, too.
- I especially love the Ultra Luxe Lotion, the Hair Conditioner, the Whipped Bubble Scrubs, and the Summer Feet lotion.
And I love writing up teensy little reviews for things, and, after trying 35 scents with another 28 on deck, I'm not going to run out anytime soon! (And yes... yes, there are many other scents still on my "to try" list. (41 scents off the master list, 2 off the Valentine's list, and a whopping 14 off the winter list -- which may or may not be coming back next year!)
I am definitely figuring out what my favorites are, though. There are some scents that are so good I'd rather have more of them (in a different product, maybe) than try a new scent -- when that happens, it's time to stock up. (Well... it would be time to stock up if I didn't have nearly 100oz. of lotion stocked up already. At an average of 1oz. per day, that's over three months of lotion. I am afraid my collector tendencies have not been conquered yet. [Hey, it's better than the soap stash. {To say nothing of the yarn stash.}])
At any rate, here are the scents I've tried since my last post:
- Pink Cranberry Noel - signature - Sweet pink sugar and cranberry medley topped with vanilla noel frosting!
While I'm discovering more and more that cranberry scents on my body turn musky right away, some bath and body products are safe -- I've tried the awesome Cranberry Fig from BrambleBerry in bath fizzies, and I got Pink Cranberry Noel as a hair conditioner sampler. I went around smelling awesome for quite a while afterwards, and if the lotion smelled that good on me, I'd be all over it. I love cranberry -- I wish I could figure out why cranberry lotions and soaps = musk for me. Alas! Anyway, this one is an outstanding tart and fruity scent with just a hint of sweetness! Yum!
- Snowbunny Cake - signature - French Vanilla wedding cake, sugar coated almonds, marshmallow cream frosting, and amaretto laced ladyfingers!
I think it's funny that, despite the fact that cherry isn't mentioned anywhere in the list, what this most smelled like to me was a cherry cake with cherry frosting that my dad made for me when I was eight. :) It smelled wonderful; Grant and I both liked it. (The lotion, not the cake!) I'd order this one again in a heartbeat, and I hope it comes back next year!
- Raspberry Creme Cake - Top notes of fresh raspberries, Bartlett pears, and Fuji apples; followed by middle notes of Madagascar Vanilla, sugar cane, butter, and maple.
The raspberry in this one is quite sweet and dominates, but you can definitely smell the cake, too. It isn't my favorite of her cake scents so far (that honor goes to "Celebration Cake"), but I'm fond of this one for sure!
- Wild Strawberry - Juicy red strawberries! Realistic and perfect, no candy smell.
To me, this smells like a Bonnie Bell Lip Smacker in strawberry -- a scent that totally reminds me of my childhood. I think it needs a little bit of something tangy and sour in order to make it smell just like fresh strawberries -- maybe a strawberry and lime combination would be a good one! I'd certainly give it a shot if it were available. Strawberry margaritas, anyone?
- Amaretto Nog - A warm holiday blend of Amaretto, almond, vanilla, and eggnog!
When I read this description to Grant, he said "Ooh!" Unfortunately, it seems that eggnog is a scent that dissipates instantly on me, leaving a general scent of sweetness behind. I enjoyed it, but wouldn't order it again.
- Cranberry Mandarin - signature - Cranberries blended with juicy mandarin oranges! Festive and refreshing!
Boy, did I want this to work on me! But with such a heavy cranberry scent, it was really an orange/musk on me. Alas!
- Iced Eggnog Cupcakes - signature - Sweet and spicy eggnog folded into our signature cupcake blend. Topped with buttercream frosting, whipped cream and a dash of nutmeg!
I love that Iced Cupcakes base, but again, as an eggnog scent, this one turned to a general scent of sweetness right away. Darn!
- Iced Pear Cupcakes - Our sweet cupcake blend with a softly spiced pear frosting and sugared sprinkles!
Mostly cupcakes -- a tiny bit of pear that I couldn't smell as clearly as I might have liked. I'm not sure if it's me or the pear, but I'm willing to bet it was me again; I seem to have really strong reactions to many of the Christmas scents!
- Kona Coffee Ice Cream - Creamy vanilla bean ice cream blended with rich Kona coffee!
WOW COFFEE! For those of you who like your coffee strong and black, this is a scent made just for you! I love coffee scents, but this one was a little much for me. :D I wonder what my mom would make of it.
There are many, many more scents I can talk about, not just new ones, so I'll be doing more of these posts! And, of course, I definitely want to talk about the new ones as I try them. :)
Tags: jojoelle scents
Oh, wow, the failboat has arrived at the dock, and its pilot today is Christie Ridgway.
Christie Ridgway is the author of three books I thought were chock-full of potential: the "Malibu & Ewe" series, How To Knit A Wild Bikini, Unravel Me, and some upcoming book whose title I have already forgotten and don't care to look up again.
I got as far as page 11 of HTKAWB before I ran into this:
His last chef had worked out great. Sandy was businesslike, quiet, and a lesbian to boot. When she'd recommended her friend Nikki, Jay had assumed--which reminded him of one of his grandfather's favorite old saws, "Assume makes an ass out of u and me"--that she'd be of the same sexual persuasion.
But after studying the woman on his doorstep... well, to put it bluntly, this leggy darling was no dyke.
OH HELL NO. I'm not interested in continuing with this. I'm not interested in reading any story in which the leading man -- the so-called "romantic hero" -- would think this shit. I'm not interested in any author who thinks it's cool for her romantic heros to think this shit. Give me a '70s romance with a "no! don't! stop!... no, don't stop!" rape scene any day over this, because I do not read books to get in-your-face homophobia.
And what the hell does that mean, "this leggy darling was no dyke"? I'm sorry, I didn't realize that attractive, freckled women who wear their hair in pigtails and look younger than they are can't possibly be gay! (Has anyone told Willow Rosenberg?)
Near as I can tell, friend Sandy never shows up in the actual book. Gee, what a surprise! The author, who thinks homophobia is a cool trait for her hero, didn't want to actually include a "dyke" as a supporting character? Wow, color me shocked.
Amazon.com also has a review which points out that there is no knitting content in this book -- a passing mention of a knitting shop and that's it. The rest, the reviewer says, is explicit sex.
Hey, I'm totally up for explicit sex. I have no problem with explicit sex. But let me share a NSFW tidbit I found while thumbing through looking to see if Sandy ever showed up:
It takes a lot for me to stop reading a book mid-read, effectively declaring that I've wasted my time reading the first part of a book and am damned if I'm going to waste any more. This is the first one I've run into along those lines this year, and holy damn, it's bad.
The book in question is Slayer Slang: A Buffy The Vampire Slayer Lexicon by Michael Adams. Looking at the back cover flap, I am dismayed to discover that Mr. Adams is, or was at the time, a professor of English, the chair of the English department at his college, and a published author of other books on the English language.
What, were they really hard-up for professors over at Albright College? Do English professors who enter Reading, PA spontaneously combust 87% of the time? If the quality of his teaching is anything like the quality of his writing, and the quality of his syllabi approaches the organizational quality of his chapters, I can't imagine anybody matriculating from the English department at Albright College with better than a high-school reading equivalency.
I myself matriculated from Indiana University with a bachelor's degree in English, and apart from the occasional substitute professor, I have no complaints about any of the many fine faculty who oversaw my education there. I came away with extremely high standards for essay-grade writing (and let me be quick to point out that these reviews do not qualify as essay-grade or above), a tendency to outline my exam answers (the back pages of my college blue books are full of game plans for my writing), and a desire to see nonfiction writing actually advance a theory or narrative rather than simply vomiting up whatever random factoids occur to the author in whatever random order they may occur.
This book? Fails miserably on that last point, and perhaps even more importantly, rather than presenting an in-context view of Buffy's language and syntax based both on Joss Whedon's unique writing and speaking style and on the pop-culture references that surround and shape Buffy the Vampire Slayer, only points out pop-culture references that are too obvious to miss, or which the author clearly has some knowledge of. There's no hint that the author did even a half-second's research into other popular science fiction and fantasy literature, for instance, and apparently he somehow lived under a rock, completely missing out on such formative girl groups as the Marvelettes or the Ronettes (only able to come up with "majorette" as a reference Willow might have been drawing on when she attempted, unsuccessfully, to coin the term "Slayerette"). Adams is happy to point at Rush references or quote Lisa Loeb, but if the man's ever so much as heard of Motown, there's no evidence in this book.
I was willing to deal with the tunnel vision Adams brings to the pop culture of Buffy--it was a bit of a surprise to hear that J.K. Rowling had co-revived the term "bezoar" along with Buffy when a bezoar and its illustration featured prominently in an issue of the immensely popular comic/graphic novel collection Sandman, by Neil Gaiman, just a few years previous, for instance--but the crappy organization really started to wear then by page 30 or so. There's no sense that Adams is building to any kind of point, no suggestion that all his observations on Buffyspeak are in any kind of order. Quite frankly, most of the first 30 pages read like filler (there's even a page that's taken up almost entirely by a footnote comprised of, I am not kidding, the table of contents for not just one but two other books about Buffy), as if he'd written a Buffy dictionary but could only sell it if he included 120 pages of so-called linguistic analysis of Buffy The Vampire Slayer. Personally, I think he should have stuck with the dictionary. The 125 pages that precede the Buffy lexicon are meandering, random pieces of meaningless noise, with no insight toward what makes Buffyspeak interesting or important, and frequent failures, misses, and mistakes when it comes to pop culture references.
Don't waste your time on this. You're not going to learn anything from it. My only regret is that stabbing a stake into this book wouldn't dust it (and let's face it: if it did, I'd owe the library some change, which the book certainly isn't worth). I hope that if this book turned up in early-seasons Giles's library, he'd recognize it for the piece of crap it is and toss it in with the recycling.
Tags: buffyverse, reading, rejected
Grant and I are finished with Angel, which has left a bit of a vacuum in our nightly "watch something and cuddle" routine. (You can only watch the latest BSG so many times...) We've been catching up on Smallville, but I also turned on LotS to see what he'd think. So far it's basically the same impression I have: there's a bit of a quality cap, since you can only get so good with the source material. We're also both a little confused by some of the changes they've made to the universe -- as much as I keep repeating to myself "It's a re-imagining, not an adaptation", I also keep saying things like "Why the hell isn't Darken Rahl blond?!"
Individually, though, some episode reactions:
1x03 Bounty: In which we learn that random mapmakers can do magic stuff, and otherwise the episode is filler. It's interesting to see how many people in the Midlands are discontent with Darken Rahl; the only people in the Midlands we really met in Wizard's First Rule were people who were of direct, immediate use to Richard and Kahlan. It also feels strange to have "filler" episodes when the plot is so long and convoluted. I'm not going to be surprised at all when they cut out certain elements of the book (I suspect Du Chaillu and the Mud People are going to be completely left behind), but it surprises me that they'd rather make filler episodes than actually follow the plot.
1x04 Brennidon: This is another one of those episodes that makes me go "WTF?" Richard's entire family situation has changed; his mother was caught in a town but later escaped, what? He had an adoptive father and mother? I suppose this one does more to establish Richard as the best hope of the Midlands, but the family stuff is downright weird. Oh hey, and this is the episode where Richard Stands Up For A Town Who Then Stands Up For Him (something we see often in fantasy/sci-fi series). Nice to see they're still doing stock plots? I guess?
1x05 Listener: Wow, this is a kind of magic we never saw in the books. A kid who can read minds? (I also feel obliged to point out that this is the "magic kid" episode. Stock plots FTW! Or something.) Yet again it's a filler episode, the third in a row that does nothing to advance the main plot. I'm totally nonplussed by the suggestion that Kahlan's father a.) outlived her mother and b.) used Kahlan and her sister to do evil things -- wait, what? What? That just seems wrong, and giving Kahlan a tortured childhood seems unnecessary. Also, I note that the kid is trying to 'ship Richard and Kahlan. Ha! Don't worry, kid, they'll get there. They'll get there!
I think people who have read the books and know just how much is coming are doomed to be a little confused as we watch these episodes; we keep wondering why they're not getting on with it. Meanwhile, people just watching the series may realize that there's a plot, but aren't in any hurry to get along with it -- it's actually not standard for series to have a driving plot start-to-finish, with few to no filler episodes. Even shows that do have a driving plot are mostly episodic in their first few season, perhaps because they're not sure if they're going to be renewed and don't necessarily want to have a series cliffhanger by default.
Like last time, I'm really fond of Kahlan. I'm thrilled to see how competent and smart she is, and I love watching her fight. She makes good, solid, reasonable decisions, and she has her own reasons for following Richard (even if we're not 100% sure what they are yet; why Richard? Is it just prophecy, or is there more to it?). We also haven't seen her use her powers since the premiere, which I think is good -- we don't want to become too reliant on them, and I definitely want to hear more about them rather than picking everything up in bits and pieces from short-lived mind-controlled thugs. Also, Bridget Regan is both adorable and hot, and despite the horror of the series (and you know there's going to be more), she finds reasons to smile fairly often. This is a good thing. ^_^
Tags: fantasy, sword of truth, television
If some of my favorite books were made into TV shows, I'd probably go back and reread the books before watching them. In this case? Not so much. I did re-read the Sword of Truth series last year, as I'd not read the final, concluding book, and wanted to be done with the series. A quick summary of my thoughts:
- Wizard's First Rule: Not bad at all! Neat world!
- Stone of Tears: Wow, this is really violent. Okay. Neat world.
- Blood of the Fold: What is with all the violence? The world's still kind of cool. Oh, wow! That villain from the first book is awesome now! Yay!
- Temple of the Winds: Didn't we all think this was the coolest book ever when we first read it? Why was that again? Hello, violence against women. Wait, does every woman really get threatened with rape over the course of the series? Hmm. Okay, done now...
- Soul of the Fire: In which we discover that Terry Goodkind doesn't like the Clintons. Also, yeah, I guess his female characters are just kinda doomed to sexual harassment and assault. ALL OF THEM. O_O
- Faith of the Fallen: I *ow* already *OW* own *ow* a copy of *OW OW* Atlas Shrugged! I *ow* read it *ow* in college! *OW* You don't *ow* have to *ow* beat me over the *OW OW OW* head with it! OW! STOP THAT!
- The Pillars of Creation: Who are these people and why do I care? ...ow. Hey, sneak attack from Atlas Shrugged. PUT THAT DOWN.
- Naked Empire: In which it is explained to us why we have to go fight Iraq. Wait, were we still in the Sword of Truth series? Oh, we were? Really? Okay...
- Chainfire: WHOA. Okay. Cool concept.
- Phantom: I... think we just did this in the last book?
- Confessor: JESUS CHRIST WOULD YOU STOP WITH THE RAPE THREATS AND RAPE SCENES ALREADY. NO, REALLY. I GET THE POINT. The point being "bad guys rape women" and, apparently, "really heroic women don't get raped, because the bad guys can't bear to assault their heroic virtue". I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. (When you can learn a thing or two about treating women like human beings from the Mike Harmon books by John Ringo...) Also, OMGWTFBBQpolarbear ending? Huh?
So in all fairness to the TV series, I'm approaching it with some curiosity and some pretty low expectations. Working from the source material, it can only be so good. That said, it's more a revisioning of the story than an actual word-for-word translation, and it's interesting seeing what gets changed.
The guy they've cast to play Richard is Craig Horner, a guy who's 25 and seriously doesn't look it. On one hand, I keep looking at him thinking, "Oh, he's way too young..." On the other hand, he's older than Richard is really supposed to be in the series right now. QQ! Apparently I'm the old one.
The actress cast as Kahlan (Bridget Regan) is awesome. She can act, she's lovely, and she kicks all manner of ass. \o/ I am very pleased -- now I just hope the series as a whole is good to her, because she really needs to continue that level of asskickery and takecareofmyselfitude in order to have me not throw things at the TV.
Jury's still out on Zedd. I'm predisposed to like both Chase (Jay Laga'aia) and the guy who plays Darken Rahl (Craig Parker), though it's throwing me for a loop that he's not blond. Parker looks just fine blond! Didn't you guys cast him because of Lord of the Rings?
As for the show itself, a quick, spoilery rundown:
Tags: fantasy, sword of truth, television
Most diet books are full of crap. They tend to preach the idea that dieting is a difficult-to-impossible task one can only accomplish by following weird, random eating habits that make no sense and are miserable to carry out.
The Automatic Diet by Charles Platkin is the only book I've ever run across that actually works from the idea that dieting is not that complicated. The bedrock principle he's working with is "eat less, move more", and his book gives some guidance and suggestions about how to do it. Platkin's approach is empowerment-based, not willpower-based, which I also think is a step up from most diet books. He's big on taking responsibility for actions and taking control of eating habits rather than looking for a fad diet that promises a quick fix and an easy way to lose weight. I am in total agreement with him on this point, so I pretty much think he's on the right track.
The book is called The Automatic Diet because Platkin's goal is to get the reader to figure out what his or her eating habits are, followed by changes that make sense and are acceptable. There's no "If you're a Libra, you should eat nothing but melon," and thank God for that, because I'm a Libra and I hate melon. If I'd been starting the eat-less-move-more plan off all by myself, Platkin's book would have been really helpful, since there are all kinds of suggestions on how to save calories and a whole lot of eye-opening statistics on how many calories there are in common foods. There is never any sort of "you can never have butter again" in the book--for people who aren't willing to give up foods, or trade them in for lower-calorie versions of the same, Platkin suggests having less of them and having them less often, which is totally acceptable as far as I'm concerned.
All in all, it's the sanest diet book I've ever seen (and while I don't read many, I have checked them out at the library before), and I would definitely recommend it.
I don't have TV per se (we don't get broadcast television in the house), but we do have internet, and there's plenty of TV you can get that way. In fact, I find it a lot more convenient than just having a televisioin -- TV has schedules! With the Internet, you can get whatever you feel like watching and watch it whenever you feel like watching it.
I was tipped off to Leverage because it's Christian Kane's current show; Christian Kane was formerly a recurring character on Angel. What can I say? I'm a sucker for cute guys in the media. (You'll see a lot of that around here.) ^_^
Here's how I described it to Grant: It's about a bunch of thieves and con artists who get together with a former insurance investigator (think Rene Russo from The Thomas Crown Affair, only a guy and not hot) who end up pulling cons on bad guys and corrupt politicians/businesses in order to make lots of money for themselves and for social justice.
It's... kind of like a high-tech Robin Hood, sort of. I guess? But where is it going? I don't know how many caper episodes I can watch before I get bored. (This may have something to do with the fact that, after Prison Break, stupid capers get to me, and due to my innate fiction preferences, capers where you pull the answer out of your ass drive me nuts.)
Shamefully, I would probably be stuck to it like glue if Christian Kane weren't scraggly-haired and... no, I can handle the "shaving is a luxury I don't have when I'm so busy kicking this much ass" thing, but ugh, the man has the hairstyle Eddie Vedder did in 1992, and you know... uh... I'm not 14 anymore. I kind of like it when guys use shampoo and get regular haircuts.
So my totally shallow opinion is that, since I'm watching it for the hot, the hot needs to improve some if I'm gonna stick with it, or I need to be willing to lower my standards enough for a Guy Of The Month's primary appearance to include the '90s hairstyle that helped define the genre name "grunge". It's not awful (and it isn't Prison Break-level ridiculous), but it isn't great, either, and Christian Kane badly needs a haircut. I'll probably give it a few more episodes to see where it's going, but if it doesn't grab me, it's not one I'll miss much.
Tags: guy of the month, television