Sphere: Related Content50 years ago, an elderly couple lived next door to my parents. One day my mother told me that the woman had awoken that morning to discover her husband, lying next to her, had died during the night. “He died in his sleep.”
Some 20 years later, mother was in the last stages of Parkinson’s disease. Her breath was labored to the point that early one morning, around 3 a.m., my father was awoken by the silence which filled the room when she had stopped breathing. My father never, to my knowledge, said, “She died in her sleep.”
Interesting concept that, “died in sleep,” isn’t it?
How do we know that either my mother or her neighbor died without awakening? Surely the possibility of a last second awareness of the finality of the process exists? Surely the brain, responding to diminishing stimuli could/does/must trigger an alarm to itself that something major is amiss?
Surely there’s a good chance of a last “Ah,” “Oh,” “Hmm,” “No,” or “Yes, thank you.”
“He died in his sleep” is such a nice euphemism; it’s comforting. It allows an escape from dealing with the problem of final moments and how they should be—must be?—faced.
It would also be more accurate to say, as my father implied, “She died in my sleep,” and more realistic.
Friday, March 22, 2013
He died in my sleep
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Euphemisms
How can we not like euphemisms? Shoot! Fudge! Heck! Oedipus Rex!
A friend of mine came up with a new one recently.
He’s a person who loves to spend money, occasionally to the point of being unwise, occasionally needing a small boost from an acquaintance.
Here’s his latest: “On Friday, could we exchange checks for $200.00? Mine will be good next Wednesday.”
“Exchange checks.” Excellent.
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, June 04, 2012
To earn the right to give away
Wouldn’t it be nice if P Diddy’s son, Justin Combs, were to be taken aside and given a quiet lesson on class?
Someone in the organization might take the boy aside and tell him that he did, indeed, earn the sport scholarship to UCLA; and that he is justifiably proud of his accomplishment.
To torture the adage, though, the conversation might also remind Combs that much is expected from those to whom much is given. A gesture of humility at the time of his accomplishment is in order, and such a gesture could well consist of the young man donating an equal amount of money to another scholarship fund at UCLA—one which would benefit students of need, perhaps.
The Combs’ family fortune is, after all, derived from the pockets of many needy students and their families.
Such a gesture would go a long way to further enhancing the young man’s aura of success. And be a touch of class.
Sphere: Related ContentWednesday, October 12, 2011
Um…Not really
The Hank Williams, Jr./ESPN brouhaha is mildly diverting on a few levels, but it is also a sad commentary on one: understanding the Constitutional right to free speech.
Williams’ Constitutional rights were not affected by ESPN’s action. The Constitution is silent on the right of company censorship of employees’ speech.
“Congress shall make no laws…” is the way the First Amendment begins. There is nothing in it which limits any other instance of speech restrictions. Most states also limit “freedom on speech” similarly in their state constitutions.
Williams should know better. We all should know better.
Sorry, Mr. Williams, Jr., your Constitutional free speech rights were not offended, and you have none otherwise.
Sphere: Related ContentWednesday, August 24, 2011
Alas! A crisis of conscience!
From Box Turtle Bulletin:
Shocking, simply shocking! A new study has determined that some men are attracted to both male and female persons. Or, at least, sexually stimulated by watching them have sex.
This new finding contradicts and earlier one which denied evidence of existence of bisexuals, but was flawed in its population selection. (NY Times)
For many, many years, I’ve been skeptical about discussions I’ve had with certain serial-one-night-stands.
“How can you date/marry her? What’re you doing here if you’re going to be there?”
“I guess I just like you both.”
Skeptical. Mighty skeptical.
Now some researchers tell us that X and Y, and a couple of other less-frequent Alphabet Letters were correct about themselves after all?
Well, after the brachytherapy, it’s pretty much moot. Still, it does give pause.
Do I apologize?
Or do I wait for the next “study” to give us another way to look at ourselves?
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, July 24, 2011
Great Quip
From today’s New York Times we find this little nugget in a column by Frank Bruni which puts l’affaire Bachmann in its place:
I once tried to pray away the gay. But sometimes a houseguest just won’t leave.
Quel drole!
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, July 10, 2011
Thanks, Ms D
Much appreciation to Maureen Dowd for reminding us of a great line.
In an article about celebrities of yore, particularly Liz and Dick (Dick ‘n Liz?), La Dowd recalls:
As Liz Smith once observed, “Whenever somebody says, ‘So and so is a big star,’ I say, ‘Have they been condemned by the Vatican?’ ”
Is that a great humbler or not? (BTW, L&D were.)
Thanks, Les Dowd et Smith.
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, June 26, 2011
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Sheesh
Well, Dear Gentle Reader(s), we might not agree on this, but here goes.
From the local newspaper:
A woman praised as a community leader for her work running a police activities league for youth was arrested Monday for an alleged sexual relationship with a teenage boy.
[Ms X], 33, of Cathedral City was arrested at her home and booked into the Indio jail on multiple counts of statutory rape and oral copulation with a minor.
[X] is suspected of “having an ongoing sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male victim,” Cathedral City police Lt. Chuck Robinson said.
“…a 17-year-old male victim.”
Doesn’t anyone remember being 16, 17, 18?
One has to wonder if the youth thought of himself as a “victim,” at least before the story became public. Where does victimhood begin?
(I’ll bet he thought of himself as “lucky.”)
Sphere: Related ContentWednesday, February 09, 2011
Why not?
Here, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is an example of a mostly unnecessary sentence—one surely printed with tongue firmly in cheek: “This ruling is unlikely to impact the vast majority of the gay community.”
Here, too, is a link to a story you might find both appalling and amusing.
Generally, the story discusses the case of “Alan,” a man with an I.Q. of 48, who has been prohibited from any activity other than “masturbation in his bedroom or bathroom – and nothing more.”
The gay element? Alan had been engaging in sexual activity with another man.
It happened in England. (It’s happening in England?)
On second thought, the “sentence” above was surely done with a touch of cynicism, eh wot?
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, February 07, 2011
Best Headline of the Day!
Sphere: Related ContentFrom The Daily Beast: Man Killed by Chicken at Cockfight.
Who says God doesn’t have a sense of humor?
Thursday, February 03, 2011
Sunday, January 09, 2011
Wake up call?
Perspective: We Americans should remember, in this time of political tension and violence, that our neighbors to the south have been living through something quite similar, but worse, for the past several years, and collectively we bear some responsibility.
Mexico’s violence stems from 1) the U.S. drug habits; 2) the U.S. “war on drugs;” the proliferation of weapons manufacturing in the U.S.; the easy availability of guns which make their way to the Mexican drug cartels.
We do little to prevent violence in our own country; we do virtually nothing to help the Mexican authorities stop the violence there.
Everyone suffers; each democracy is threatened.
Sphere: Related ContentSaturday, December 11, 2010
Countdown Day
Have to love these early century dates.
December 12, 2010, will go down, on many checks and letters, as 12/11/10.
…twelve…eleven…ten…
Wonder how it would’ve ended.
Sphere: Related ContentFriday, November 26, 2010
the grunge factor
Anne Hathaway could well be in the running for an Academy Award for her work in Love & Other Drugs. At least she should get some sort of award for allowing herself to be photographed with dirty soles. It was definitely in keeping with the character, but what a surprise!
Sphere: Related ContentWednesday, October 27, 2010
Really?
One has to smile, Dear Gentle Reader(s).
Andrew Sullivan, he of the plummy English voice, wrote this while being slightly critical of MSNBC: “But the bias is pretty overwhelming nonetheless - and sometimes veers into suffocating smugness.”
When on his high horse, the nicest thing which can be said about Sullivan is his smugness.
Love him when he isn’t on a bender about some obscure item (Truly, isn’t Trig’s birth record so last year?!?), and refresh his page several times a day, but the last word he should use in criticizing anyone is any permutation of smug.
Ta.
Sphere: Related ContentTuesday, March 11, 2008
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
What's the dif?
Ah, Gentle Reader(s), what is the difference?
Although fatigued from pondering the fate of the world, my attention was piqued by this headline in the local newspaper, The Desert Sun: "City [Palm Springs] could shatter record on film shoots."
"So?" you say.
Well, this--the difference between "City could set new record on film shoots" and "City could shatter record on film shoots?"
Why don't we use more positive language whenever we are able to do so?
Actually, a record is an idea, and we simply cannot shatter an idea. We can enlarge an idea, we can debunk an idea, we can use an idea for a starting point to proceed to a new idea. There are many ways to say an idea's time has passed, if, indeed that be the case. The more positive we are in our diction, the more value the "old" idea retains, and the better we will feel about ourselves by using the positive language rather than negative language, which might very well erode our ability to see, objectively, our world.
Agape.
Monday, July 30, 2007
It can't be that easy. Can it?
My friend Nikki refuses to consider the importance of religion in the Iraqi misadventure or in the war against Islamic fundamentalists.
Nikki pishes, piffles, poshes and pshaws, "All we have to do is to drop a few million iPods over the Middle East, and it's over."
I, of course, Dear Reader, fulminate (I don't know what it means, but it looks good and sounds and feels delicious when spoken) "Boo! Organized religion! If Islam can be considered organized."
Events, however, have their way of confounding clarity. Listening to NPR's coverage and reading the print stories out of Iraq regarding yesterday's victory of the Iraqi soccer team against the Saudis, one has to concede that distraction is, indeed, a powerful tool for peace. One might also say that the religious leaders there might not be so powerful against the 21st century as I once thought.
Chagrin! And hope.
Huzzah, Lions of the Two Rivers!!! (One Kurd, one Sunni, one Shia--teamwork more important than theocracy or politics!)
Friday, July 27, 2007
Mad Men Revived
The AMC original show, Mad Men, returns us to the late 1950's, prior to Nixon's first presidential run. If you don't watch it, Dear Reader, may I humbly (moi?) suggest you do so. It will give you a theatrical look at certain attitudes driven by the testosterone of the day; those attitudes, well, vestiges of them, could very well be the ones with which we find ourselves at odds today.
Women in the office are treated with indifference, if not disrespect. The protagonist cheats on his wife, in a retrospective moment he muses to his mistress, "I don't know if you have everything...or nothing." Not even a twinge if the question also applies to himself.
Although Alpha Male is a relatively new word of the day, the series two openers reek of it.
As a late teenager during those years, I find the memories stirred by this series to be disturbing. I couldn't understand the concept of male superiority, and I didn't care if I didn't have it. Others cared very much that they have it.
The blinkered view of the world which the WASP evinces in this series is quite similar to the view which we see the Bush administration displaying. They are correct; they have unflinching faith in themselves; anyone who disagrees will be shunted aside or destroyed. "Maybe I should stop paying you," says the 1959 protagonist to an underling who dares to engage in a second round of debate.
The equivalent exchange of 2003: "We need 500,000 troops." "You're irrelevant."
And everyone smokes. The smoking pregnant, drinking women in Hairspray were funny. The WASP wife on the shrink's couch smoking isn't funny. It's tragic.
We survived the Eisenhower years. Surely we'll survive the Bush II years. In 40 years will there be a television show which exposes the foolishness of 2007?