I'm at my mother and stepfather's house for a few days over Christmas, though the religious aspect isn't really a part of things here. My stepfather is a Jewish atheist. My mother is Unitarian, of culturally Christian background and nonspecific belief. I'm more or less the same, but with a stronger tilt toward atheism. So which one of us went to church on Christmas Eve? My stepfather, to play Christmas carols with the band at my mom's Unitarian church, which she assured him was not Christian and probably wouldn't mention Jesus much. The hearth here currently displays foot-high statuettes of the Magi (at my request, because I always thought they were lovely) and three miniature poinsettias, which I brought in order to have some holiday-related plant life in the house, since my mother no longer puts up a tree. Three Wise Men, three plants, three people. The conversation tends to revolve around politics, the economy, and why children don't realize that there wouldn't be room in Santa's sleigh for toys for all the children in the world. (I argued for his sack being a Bag of Holding.) Overall, this is a great improvement over last year, when I spent Christmas alternating gory wound-cleaning procedures with crawling back to bed for heavy doses of painkiller.
For a family holiday movie, we went to see Milk. But before that we had to bake cookies.
We have a favorite cookie recipe taken from Betty Crocker's New Boys and Girls Cookbook. Specifically, from the 1970s edition shown at left, which was what passed for a guide in my very occasional culinary experiments as a child. I still have the cookbook, now battered and unbound, having carried it off in triumph to my first apartment many years ago.
The main difference between these cookies (in the book as "Paintbrush Cookies") and most other sugar cookies is that the main sweetener is honey. We had a bit of trouble with the dough this time, which we attributed to the fact that the recipe uses shortening, the chemical composition of which is different now (post-trans-fat-ban) than it was thirtyish years ago. The flavor is still good, but the texture was harder to work with. These are the roll-out sort of cookies, which gave me the opportunity to bring out my collection of old and new cookie cutters and continue our ongoing debate on their aesthetics:
On the characteristics of angels
Me: I'm going to make a gingerbread girl.
Mom: That's an angel.
Me: No, it's a gingerbread girl.
Mom: It has a skirt, so it's an angel.
Me: Wings are a necessary characteristic for an angel, not a skirt. No wings. Not an angel.
Mom: Well, don't make any more of that one; the heads will fall off.
The habits of wildlife
Me: Oops, the tail fell off the bunny cookie.
Mom: Well, lots of bunnies don't have tails. They get caught in traps or chewed off by dogs or something.
Me: (bemused silence)
Mom: Or maybe that's squirrels?
More on angels
Me: I think this one is an angel.
Mom: No, it's a Wise Man.
Me: It has wings, so it's an angel.
Mom: It has a crown and it's holding its hands out, so it's a Wise Man.
Me: So what is that thing on its back? A backpack to carry the frankincense and myrrh?
Mom: It's his robes. They're very bulky.
Multicultural cookie cutters
Me: I'm not sure what this one is.
Mom: It's a dreidel.
Me: It is definitely not a dreidel. These are Christmas cookie cutters.
Mom: (pointing toward the Star of David) No, they're holiday cookie cutters.
Me: Different set. The new ones came in a red and green box. That makes them Christmas cookie cutters.
(pause for consultation with my stepfather, who agrees that it is definitely not a dreidel)
Mom: Maybe it's a really fat icicle?
Me: No, it's a, a, a...a Christmas squiggle!
Mom: Well, it's a good cookie cutter. You can fit it in anywhere. Let's make lots of them.
The very opposite of angel
Me: I'm not sure what this one is.
Mom: It has wings; it's an angel!
Me: Wrong proportions, unless it's a double-amputee angel in a miniskirt.
Mom: (bemused silence)
Me: (doubtfully) Maybe it's a bird with a growth on its head?
Mom: (studying it carefully) I think it's a Nazi eagle.
Me: (horrified) MOTHER!!!
Mom: (defensively) I was reading a World War II spy thriller last night.
Me: I don't think they make Nazi eagle cookie cutters, Mom.
Mom: True. Maybe it's a dove.
Me: With a growth on its head.
The cookies turned out surprisingly well. And despite the gloom-filled predictions of my mother and stepfather about the fate of people who eat dough containing raw eggs, I haven't yet been hospitalized with salmonella.
May everyone's holidays be filled with cookies.
Edited 12/31:
Here are the pictures of the four cookies in question:
Left to right: gingerbread girl, Wise Man/angel, squiggle, bird with growth. (Click the images for somewhat blurry enlargements.)
Addendum:
Keira & I were watching the film of the Broadway musical version of The Producers this morning while sewing, and when Uma Thurman appeared in the outfit at left, Keira's comment was "There's your cookie cutter!" (Click the image to enlarge.)
Oh my god, we're laughing so hard. Thank you!
_Lara and Nancy
Posted by: Lara | December 25, 2008 at 08:32 PM
Mom wants me to add that when we showed one of the cookies formed from that last cookie cutter to my stepfather at dinner, he agreed that it did resemble a Nazi eagle. This then led to Mom leaving the dinner table to search for a book with a picture of one, and finally to us giving up on the table entirely to sit around my laptop while I Googled some up for comparison.
I'm still pushing the concept of a dove with a growth on its head, or maybe a fabulous (but small) hat, but now no one is listening to me.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 25, 2008 at 09:03 PM
Good grief, I had that same cookbook! I talked my mother into letting me try to make the castle cake one time. All the pieces fell apart and it didn't look nearly as good as the picture. (My introduction to the Martha Stewart rule - it's never as easy as the book says, and it never looks as good.)
The other recipes were easy and worked well, however. I remember we used to make the various flavored milks a lot.
Other than triggering my childhood memories, your Christmas sounds like fun. I hope you enjoy the rest of the season.
Posted by: Juli Thompson | December 26, 2008 at 06:21 AM
I always wanted to try the castle cake!
(So why haven't I tried it as an adult? Hmm.)
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 26, 2008 at 07:14 AM
You should post photos of the disputed cookie shapes, and then we can all weigh in.
Posted by: Paul A. | December 26, 2008 at 08:44 AM
I have to ask... Was your mom for real, or does she have a very silly streak in her? The idea of a cookie cutter possibly being a Nazi eagle sounds like it came out of Mel Brooks's mind.
As for the recipe book, I loved the girl's worshipful expression. Or maybe she's smiling because she switched te candle and is waiting for the big kaboom.
Posted by: Serge | December 26, 2008 at 09:22 AM
Serge,
She wasn't making a joke; she says it was just the first thing she thought of because it was in her mind from reading the book. Seriously.
I probably get my tendency to go off on weird free-associative tangents from her, and possibly my tendency to say exactly what I think without bothering to think how it will sound to others.
As far as the girl's worshipful expression, speaking as a mostly non-cooking person, I can see how she'd be impressed that someone actually could cook.
Paul,
I have my camera with me, but the little cable for transferring photos is at home. I'll take some pictures and upload them tonight.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 26, 2008 at 09:55 AM
I am also a mostly non-cooking person: I own exactly two cookbooks, both presents from relatives.
The first was given to me by my brother when I moved into my first apartment, and is the latest edition of one of our favourite cookbooks when we were children, the Golden Wattle Cookery Book. I immediately looked up our favourite recipe, Toad in the Hole; at first it seemed to be missing, but then it turned out to be present, but inexplicably retitled "Sausages in Batter". Pfui.
The second was a present from my mother this Christmas just past; she ought to know better by now, but hope springs eternal.
Posted by: Paul A. | December 26, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Could it be a non-Nazi eagle, specifically the eagle associated with St John the Evangelist? (Which might make you look to see if any of the others could be fit into man, ox, and lion?)
Posted by: joann | December 26, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Looking at the cover, it looks like the boy has followed my chocolate cake recipe. He might not because as I'm rubbish at icing I tend to cover them in melted chocolate which covers all kinds of cake wrongness. Also, the chocolate mixture has not quite got out of the bowl; following my recipe it should be on most of the kitchen surfaces.
I'm not quite sure what to say about Nazi cookies although I'd assume they were vegetarian. Also I'd expect to see more cookie cutters following whatever theme they had - either more Nazi symbols, or maybe you'd get a Russian Bear, a British Lion, a Belgian Lion, a Dutch Lion, a Luxembourg Lion, a Canadian Beaver, a French, um, Rooster, and an American Eagle.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | December 26, 2008 at 12:30 PM
joann,
The others in that set were a Christmas tree, a gingerbread man, a bell, a candy cane, and the squiggle. So definitely not the Evangelists. It would be more clearly a bird if its head were shown in profile. I expect it's intended to be an angel, but I still say the proportions are wrong.
Neil,
I think we must use the same recipe, except that I always end up with chocolate all over me as well.
No comment on your list of animals, as I am still pretending to be high-minded here.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 26, 2008 at 01:20 PM
Susan... I probably get my tendency to go off on weird free-associative tangents from her, and possibly my tendency to say exactly what I think
I used to be like that too. I have no idea where I got it. I also wonder where I got my curiosity, and my love of reading, because I sure didn't get either from my parents. I've been told that I used to 'read' the Friday Funnies even before I knew how to read.
That being said, I loved those transcripts of your familial exchanges. Of course, I had to post a link on my blog.
Posted by: Serge | December 26, 2008 at 01:37 PM
Hilarious! I can't wait to see the pictures of these mysterious cookies.
Posted by: AJ | December 26, 2008 at 03:31 PM
I'm looking forward to the pictures, but I bet the squiggle is meant to be an icicle. The only cookie cutter I saved when I gave away most of the kitchen stuff was a gingerbread girl!
Ah, I found this: "Woolworths do a pack of 6. Christmas tree, star, bell, candy cane, ginger bread man shape, and general cookie shape." Think the Nazi eagle is a star?
Or how about this set where the squiggle would be a holly leaf and the Nazi eagle an angel?
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | December 26, 2008 at 07:12 PM
Marilee:
That second set is it! So the squiggle is a holly leaf! I have to say, I would not have guessed this, and I have three holly in my yard that I planted myself (two girls and a boy).
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 26, 2008 at 08:09 PM
I guess the angel lost her legs in the war against the demons? Since she has wings, she doesn't need a wheelchair.
Posted by: AJ | December 26, 2008 at 08:32 PM
What looks like a pine tree's shape really is a lovecraftian trilobite.
Posted by: Serge | December 26, 2008 at 09:04 PM
AJ,
My dance practice group identified the holly leaf immediately, much to my chagrin. One person did guess "dove" on the angel, and another said it looked like a cherubim, as opposed to a regular sort of angel, because cherubim are small. They all agreed that there was definitely something to the eagle idea, though.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | December 31, 2008 at 08:52 PM
Okay, I've finally uploaded the pictures of the cookies, which were surprisingly difficult to photograph. I await everyone's opinions!
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 01, 2009 at 12:39 AM
That's a wise man/angel? It reminds me of Marty Feldman in Young Frankenstein.
Off topic... Tonight, we watched the DVD of 2006's The Fall. It's set in Hollywood in 1915. the main character is a stuntman who recently lost the use of his legs, and the other a little girl who's in because of a broken arm. To keep himself from committing suicide, he tells her a story about a masked bandit and his faithful companions, and a beautiful princess, and a little girl who just happens to look like her real-world counterpart. The first 30 minutes struck me as rather self-indulgent, but I finally got into it. And the costumes of the story within the story are gorgeous.
Posted by: Serge | January 01, 2009 at 01:45 AM
The second cookie looks like an angel kneeling in prayer. And the fourth one does still bear more resemblance to some sort of bird than to an angel. But they all look... delicious.
Serge, we spent the evening watching Mysterious Science Theater 3000 rip apart Laserblast. Good times, good times indeed.
Posted by: AJ | January 01, 2009 at 02:39 AM
AJ... A few evenings ago, we watched, as is our winter tradition, MST3K's The Day the Earth Froze. As for yesterday, we watched many episodes of Twilight Zone on the SciFi Channel. (I know, you don'thave cable.) I got a laugh out of catching an ad for Clint Eastwood's Gran Torrino. I mean, there you have his front lawn upon which stand a few unproductive and young members of society, and Clint tells them "Get off my lawn" while pointing a shotgun at them.
Posted by: Serge | January 01, 2009 at 08:40 AM
AJ,
I was somewhat tempted to send out care packages of cookies to anyone who wanted them. Instead, being sick, I ate most of them myself and took the rest to my dance practice. I suppose I could make another batch using my non-holiday cookie cutters sometime. I was meaning to experiment with the recipe a little anyway to see whether I can fix the texture problems. Anyone want some cookies?
The kneeling thing makes sense on cookie #2, and I was on the angel side of the debate on that one, but what is the thing on its head? It really does look like a crown. It has points! I was not aware that angels wore crowns. The small cookie of dubious species also has something on its head, though it's harder to see in that size (the pictures are proportionate to the actual cookies).
Also, I should mention that red and green sprinkles applied in random places and quantities are traditional with us as well.
Serge,
re. The Fall: I am not surprised that I haven't seen it, but it's another I don't recall even hearing about.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 01, 2009 at 09:06 AM
That crown has me stumped, too. Reading the description I thought maybe it could be a halo, but now that I can see it, it's definitely a crown. At this point, I'm leaning toward "Wise Man wearing a jetpack".
The fourth one seems to me to be fairly clearly an angel, though. (The growth on its head probably is a halo this time.) I don't understand what you meant about the amputation and the miniskirt at all.
Posted by: Paul A. | January 03, 2009 at 06:42 AM
Paul,
The proportions looked off to me; the angel is too short and the wings too wide. It looks more like an angel to me now, but I'm influenced by knowing what it's supposed to be.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 03, 2009 at 07:38 AM
Susan... The fourth cookie reminds me of a manta ray with its tail chopped off. As for The Fall... I had never heard about it it either, but my wife somehow had, and put it on our NetFlix queue. Here is its coming attraction.
Posted by: Serge | January 03, 2009 at 08:09 AM
Susan,
How wide are an angel's wings supposed to be, then?
Posted by: Paul A. | January 03, 2009 at 08:11 AM
The Angel wingspan question appears to be open at Yahoo Answers. So far the consensus seems to be that they don't have a wingspan either because a. they don't exist, b. they don't have wings; they're just representative of their travelling or c. angels are pure spirit and don't have body parts.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 03, 2009 at 09:28 AM
Neil... they're just representative of their travelling or c. angels are pure spirit and don't have body parts
That reminds me of the movie Prophecy when the angel played by Eric Stoltz gets killed by angel Christopher Walken and when his body is examined by the coroner, he notices that some things are missing.
Posted by: Serge | January 03, 2009 at 01:10 PM
Susan, I think the Wise Man is kneeling with a backpack (which was not an unusual way to carry things back then). Otherwise the height is wrong.
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 03, 2009 at 08:01 PM
At this point, I'm leaning toward "Wise Man wearing a jetpack".
I giggled so hard at this that it freaked my dog out a little bit.
(not sure how I lost track of this thread for 2 days, must have been all the comments on other threads, so now I shall hastily catch up)
Serge: I don't think Netflix has that MST3K episode. They're annoyingly spotty on what episodes they do have, but at least they have my favorite: Space Mutiny.
Susan: Do I ever NOT want cookies? Nevermind that I received approximately two or three pounds of chocolate for New Year's Day (our family tradition is to give gifts on NYD, and part of that tradition is that my parents buy a TON of candy at the after Christmas sales and split it up between my brother, my husband and I). I would happily trade some delicious egg-free chocolate cookies that taste like brownies for some of your cookies!
Posted by: AJ | January 04, 2009 at 12:03 AM
AJ... I know. I try not to think of the day when my VCR will chew up the tape, which is now 16 years old. As for Space Mutiny, I don't think I ever saw that one. We do have Fugitive Alien, in which Japanese warriors from outer space attack Earth while wearing red wigs and being led by a kabuki actor.
(Darn. It looks like I messed up this thread into being italicized. That'll teach me to talk about Christopher Walken as an evil angel.)
Posted by: Serge | January 04, 2009 at 12:56 AM
Agh! Even the text outside of the comments is italicized. How did you break it?
Space Mutiny is great. The protagonist is this beefy guy, and so they spend the entire time coming up with ridiculously macho names for him, which is what makes me laugh so much. I haven't seen Fugitive Alien, either. They really need to get the rest of the eps on DVD and onto Netflix (Amazon has some that Netflix does not).
My brother-in-law is an even bigger fan of MST3K than we are, so Chris stood in a very long line at Comic-Con to get a poster signed for him, by the guys who did the bots and either Joel or Mike. I can't remember which, because I was not the one waiting in the line (I got bored and did something else, which I also can't remember).
Posted by: AJ | January 04, 2009 at 02:21 AM
AJ... How do you break it?
I think that our Rixosous Hostess has to go into the edit mode and add the end-of-italics html right after the word "Prophecy".
As for "Space Mutiny"... I just checked on IMDB and it sounds like one of the MST3K movies that I missed during the 3-year period when we lived in an area where MST3K's channel was unavailable. At first, its reference to an invading space fungus made me think it might be "Green Slime", but the latter is a Japanese-American co-production, while "Space Mutiny" is an Italian-American one.
One MST3K movie I rather like because it could be enjoyed straight was "First Spaceship to Venus". It was based on a Stanislaw Lem novel. Primitive SFX by modern standards, but still a neat exploration of the Unknown.
Posted by: Serge | January 04, 2009 at 07:36 AM
I went in and fixed the html to remove the italics. Sorry; there's only one of me here and I was too tired after theater last night to look at my comments!
Marilee,
All the pictures I have of the Wise Men (and my mother's statues, which are almost a foot high and which are the definitive image of them from my childhood) show them processing along in robes with their gifts carried in their hands. I thus had the impression that they marched solemnly over hill and dale and desert in this stately fashion, perhaps with servants in backpacks behind them doing the real hauling.
The jetpack idea might resolve this issue, however, since if they traveled by jetpack they could do it as a day trip and wouldn't need to bring luggage.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 04, 2009 at 08:22 AM
Serge,
some things are missing
Um...like what?
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 04, 2009 at 08:24 AM
Paul,
After some thought, I think the width from wing to wing with wings folded ought to be about 2/3 the length of the body. On the cookie, they're almost equal in size. Thus either the wings are too wide or the angel is too short. I could test this by measuring my own wings when I get home; they were full-sized ones which gave me about a 15' wingspan when open. I recall them extending only a foot or so beyond each shoulder when folded.
Also, a lot of angels in art do not seem to have full-length wings, presumably because they fly via spiritual purity rather than by actually, um, flapping. Look at Gabriel, here.
When I showed the cookie to my dance friends, the same person who immediately said "holly" on cookie number three also immediately said "dove" to number four, so my mother is not the only one seeing a bird there.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 04, 2009 at 08:37 AM
AJ,
Too late! All the cookies from that batch have been consumed. But I might be convinced to make more cookies. Check Rixo on Tuesday, which is Epiphany, and therefore (for half my family heritage) the proper time for gift-giving.
If I made non-Christmas cookies using that recipe, we could address the burning question of whether one of my other cookie cutters is meant to be a mushroom or some sort of sex toy or something else entirely. I've been stumped on that one for years.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 04, 2009 at 08:44 AM
Susan... like what?
For one, reproductive organs. For another, an anal orifice.
Posted by: Serge | January 04, 2009 at 09:57 AM
See that's where the pure spirit theory is much more respectable. In addition it would make an autopsy much more interesting. "Hmm - this body is made of pure spirit... well at least 150 proof".
...whether one of my other cookie cutters is meant to be a mushroom or some sort of sex toy or something else entirely. I've been stumped on that one for years.
Once again we run into a situation where the experimental method will just get us into trouble. I sometimes describe my relationship with the experimental method as a love affair, but the analogy can be taken too far.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 04, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Susan... I might be convinced to make more cookies
I wonder if the Canadian Border officials would give you a hard time if you brought some to the worldcon. They probably haven't forgotten your attempts at smuggling wood in.
Posted by: Serge | January 04, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Serge: "First Spaceship to Venus" is already in my Netflix queue :D
Susan: I've been utterly distracted from thoughts of cookies by thoughts of wings. Are there pictures?
Posted by: AJ | January 04, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Serge, I have a VCR/DVD that will record from one to the other. Care to trust the tape to the post office? (I tried it with the test disc they sent and it worked for the few minutes I tried.)
Susan, if they traveled over hill and vale, desert and river, with gifts in their outstretched hands, they're not actually wise men.
AJ, show her your faery wings!
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 04, 2009 at 07:14 PM
Marilee, I think she's already seen them, because I'm wearing them in my bio picture on my blog :D
Posted by: AJ | January 04, 2009 at 08:28 PM
Marilee... I may take you up on your offer.
Posted by: Serge | January 05, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Regarding the proper wingspan for an angel... This is the proper one, for me. I couldn't find one of Tilda Swinton fromt he movie Constantine, but this one will do.
Posted by: Serge | January 05, 2009 at 11:20 AM
I certainly hope Gabriel isn't going to try to fly with those wings; assuming he can beat them arbitarily fast he can probably get off the ground somewhat like a hummingbird or maybe a bumblebee, but his legs would dangle which would be both unaerodynamic and silly looking.
I've ...er... acquired a couple of low-res pictures of Tilda Swinton as Gabriel. Both she and Angel seem to have their wings attached mainly at the shoulders, but connected all down the back, which may help prevent quite so much leg-dangle.
All of them need bigger chests though.
(They need huge pectoral muscles and an enormous breastbone to anchor them on)
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 05, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Susan... All of them need bigger chests
It's a good thing that my best-behavior subroutine is engaged.
As for the anatomical problems of angels, well, that's one of those cases where we have to refrain from looking too close so that we can enjoy how magnificent an image they present.
Posted by: Serge | January 05, 2009 at 01:17 PM
Serge, that was Neil proposing bigger chests!
I think wings have to be considered a failure on humans. We're just not built for them.
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 05, 2009 at 08:20 PM
Marilee... Oops. Still, I will refrain from the obvious comments.
Posted by: Serge | January 05, 2009 at 10:08 PM
I seem to recall that the guy who wrote The Physics of Superheroes said that it would be pretty impossible for a human to fly with wings. It was one of the audience questions at his panel at Comic Con (which was great), but it might also be in his book (I bought said book for my husband Chris, and he loved it, which is why we went to the panel).
Posted by: AJ | January 06, 2009 at 01:34 AM
AJ... I think that one of Poul Anderson's van Rijn stories dealt with how humanoid aliens could fly. One problem was how much oxygen they needed to take in to be able to fly, compared to how much oxygen they could actually take in. The aliens had to look physically quite differnt from Tilda Swinton.
Posted by: Serge | January 06, 2009 at 06:29 AM
Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not into bigger chests. Just saying. Spent a lot of effort fixing this problem on a personal level.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 06, 2009 at 06:35 AM
Susan... I know that. I guess my concerns over my work situation made me slip a few cogs. My apologies.
Posted by: Serge | January 06, 2009 at 08:39 AM
I'd vaguely remembered that there was some scripture or something that had angels with multiple wings. A swift google lead me to Isaiah 6:2 : Above him were seraphs, each with six wings: With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying
So six wings, but only two used for flying! Being pure spirit, they can probably get round the mechanical requirements of needing a large breastbone and muscles and even how you co-ordinate 6 wings (as well as arms and legs). Isaiah 6 seems to be a vision so they're metaphorical even in context.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 06, 2009 at 09:00 AM
Yes, please blame all large chest related commentary on me. Enough body parts. I will now concentrate on pure spirit. Hope the situation improves Serge.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 06, 2009 at 09:10 AM
Neil... My mind has been hopelessly corrupted. Before I started hanging around Rixo, only pure and innocent thoughts ever populated my mind.
As for many-winged angels... I think Sharon Shinn wrote a novel that featured them. If I remember correctly, it gave the main character headaches, just to look at the wings vibrating very fast.
Posted by: Serge | January 06, 2009 at 09:38 AM
It's often suggested that faeries can fly because they're purely spiritual beings, so I'd imagine it's the same for angels, whether or not they are played by Tilda Swinton.
Angel in X-Men however, has no such excuse to be able to fly... but I'll forgive him because he's just so pretty.
(I have a wing obsession, yes I do)
Posted by: AJ | January 06, 2009 at 02:43 PM
Susan, Kaiser surgeons repeatedly say they'd fix mine if I could have general anesthesia again. (It's limited to surgery that would fix something that would otherwise definitely kill me, rather than just really inconvenient things.)
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 06, 2009 at 07:31 PM
AJ... Ever seen Dogma? Not only does he have Matt Damon and Ben Affleck as Fallen Angels, but it has Alan Rickman as angel Metatron who bemoans that God made it impossible for angels to get drunk, and God is played by Alannis Morrissette.
Posted by: Serge | January 06, 2009 at 09:34 PM
AJ... Here is Metatron. To say that the film is disrespectful is an understatement.
Posted by: Serge | January 06, 2009 at 09:55 PM
Serge, I have seen Dogma. It's one of those movies that I sit there, watching it, and I feel like I should feel guilty, but I really don't. Not all of the humor was up my alley, but it was a fun experience.
Posted by: AJ | January 07, 2009 at 03:47 AM
AJ... Not all of the humor was up my alley, but it was a fun experience.
That's pretty much the way I feel too. A lot of the humor is jejeune, but there IS Rickman to make up for it.
Posted by: Serge | January 07, 2009 at 06:17 AM
Speaking of wingspans... Susan's, in this case. I just received my DVD of Denvention's masquerade. Of course, I skimmed thru to the end, to see Interplanet Janet" come on stage. Yay!
Posted by: Serge | January 07, 2009 at 07:52 PM
Well, if anyone wants to see a very small me on video and hear my distinctive voice, there's a video of a ball I called back in November on YouTube here. I'm all the way down at one end (lavender dress, black shawl, microphone) so you can't see me very well, but my voice comes through very clearly.
This is the sort of video I don't object to, since it's useful professional advertising. I'm going to ask them to put my name on it, in fact.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 07, 2009 at 11:57 PM
with two they covered their feet
I am reminded that somebody once told me that many of the references to "feet" in the Old Testament are actually a euphemism. This is one of the few places where I'm inclined to find it plausible.
Posted by: Paul A. | January 08, 2009 at 06:25 AM
Paul A...
"Say, are those shoes, or are you just glad to see me?"
This reminds me of the movie Dark Angel, in which a young she-devil falls in love with a human. More than once people make comments about how big her feet are. Me, I never quite understood what the big deal is about women and big feet. A few months ago, TCM was showing Sabrina and my wife suddenly exclaimed how big Audrey Hepburn's pedal extremities were.
Posted by: Serge | January 08, 2009 at 08:50 AM
I have large feet for a woman -- size 11. I never realized it signified anything except that shopping for shoes was difficult, though less difficult than when I was a 10 1/2.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 08, 2009 at 08:54 AM
Susan... I was a 10 1/2
You're in good company, or rather fellowship.
Posted by: Serge | January 08, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Cookies at Worldcon: Clearly what you need to do is this:
1. Go to Canada.
2. Collect ingredients from Canadian shops.
3. Find a kitchen by, I don't know, going to a kitchen showroom and asking for a test drive? Can you do that? I've not really thought this bit through.
4. Cook all Canadian cookies made from real Canadian ingredients.
5. Hand out cookies to cheers, applause and great hurrahing.
As for the wings covering the "feet" rather than the feet, that makes some sense. There aren't any obvious clues in the chapter to tell which is meant.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 08, 2009 at 12:45 PM
When I gained all this weight, I was hoping my feet would get wider, but no, they got a size longer. I'm now a 10AAAA, 7A heel, and that's just about impossible to buy.
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 08, 2009 at 06:26 PM
Marilee, that's may be even worse than my mother's. She's a 10.5AA, with a 5A heel. She does have the added problem that 10.5 often doesn't exist in women's shoes; most styles are half sizes up to 10, then jump to 11.
Posted by: Mary Aileen | January 08, 2009 at 08:10 PM
I'm a 7.5. The only bad thing about being a 7.5 is that apparently half the other women in the world are also a 7.5, so whenever I find the perfect steampunk boots on clearance sale, the only sizes left are 5s and 10s.
I know, I'm not going to get any sympathy here ;)
Posted by: AJ | January 09, 2009 at 02:26 AM
AJ... Out! You, you normal!
Posted by: Serge | January 09, 2009 at 06:45 AM
Perhaps someone who lives in Canada could be persuaded to bake some made-in-Canada cookies to make up for the lack of made-outside-Canada cookies, should that someone manage to get to Worldcon.
Posted by: Carol Witt | January 09, 2009 at 04:26 PM
I've worked it out! Angel's wings are only a secondary mutation which he uses for propulsion and steering. His primary mutation is some sort of anti-gravity or levitation thing. (Note that one or other X-Men comic book probably explicitly disagrees with me*)
Hold on, Stan Lee has just turned up. What's that you say? I win a No-Prize?
* If an X-Men comic disagrees with me, then in addition there is a 30% chance of a different X-Men comic agreeing with me)
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 09, 2009 at 05:04 PM
Carol... Someone? Someone who lives in Toronto?
Posted by: Serge | January 09, 2009 at 05:37 PM
Neil... Let's ask Professor Logan what he thinks.
Posted by: Serge | January 09, 2009 at 05:38 PM
Neil, there's certainly precedent for your idea, given the fact that there are gazillions of mutants who fly without wings.
Except that I think there were several comics where he'd lost his wings and couldn't fly.
Then again, that might have been psychosomatic.
(My shoe size may be normal, but my willingness to discuss the possibility of the fictional powers of fictional characters shows that I am not, in fact, normal, and do not need to leave. So take that, Serge!)
Posted by: AJ | January 09, 2009 at 05:57 PM
AJ... My shoe size may be normal, but my willingness to discuss the possibility of the fictional powers of fictional characters shows that I am not, in fact, normal
Shoepergirl?
Posted by: Serge | January 09, 2009 at 06:39 PM
(I've found the "intelligent hats from the future" movie I was trying to remember in the Starcross thread!)
Posted by: Paul A. | January 09, 2009 at 08:50 PM
Serge: Someone who lives in Scarborough. I didn't vote for amalgamation with Toronto!
(Although, to be fair, a lot of the services really did need to be amalgamated.)
Posted by: Carol Witt | January 09, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Carol... That's where I lived too. Up Courcelette Road, but not far from the water treatment plant that has been used in at least two TV shows as the HQ of mysterious and nefarious organizations.
Posted by: Serge | January 10, 2009 at 12:14 AM
My immediate free-association for "Scarborough" is "rapist," as in Paul Bernardo.
Sorry...
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 10, 2009 at 01:17 AM
Maybe it's a generational thing, but this is the other association I make with "Scarborough".
Posted by: Serge | January 10, 2009 at 01:27 AM
Serge,
Well, yes, and that's a waltz, too. But that's "Scarborough Fair" rather than "Scarborough, Ontario."
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 10, 2009 at 02:04 AM
A waltz? That's where it comes from? Holy...
Posted by: Serge | January 10, 2009 at 02:29 AM
I don't know about "comes from," but it's a waltz.
Posted by: Susan de Guardiola | January 10, 2009 at 02:44 AM
Here's what I found on wikipedia:
Posted by: Serge | January 10, 2009 at 08:09 AM
I have relatives in Northumberland. If you take the scenic coastal route north, you pass through Scarborough (no, the original one, the one named after a viking rather than after a town in Yorkshire). My family did this once, perhaps as a result of my parents listening to this song non-stop for 15 years*. I remember it as a nice place to stop for an hour (did we have fish and chips? I think we did), but unfortunately we were 200 years late for the fair.
We also passed through Whitby, but we didn't stop. I think this was before I was read Dracula or was interested in Captain Cook, and maybe even before I liked Pterosaurs, or at least associated Whitby with any of them.
I wonder if Scarborough Fair is where my fascination of impossible tasks in folktales comes from.
* I exaggerate.
Posted by: Neil Willcox | January 10, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Serge: I spent most of my life living a few minutes walk from the bluffs, south of Kingston by McCowan.
There are plenty of fair places in Scarborough, Ontario (such as said bluffs, or Rouge Park).
I got into trouble when I was little for rearranging my mother's spice rack: I thought I was helping, since most of them were in alphabetical order, but a couple were mixed up! I must admit that the spices in my rack are slightly out of order as well.
Susan: No need to be sorry. I was doing a work semester in the newsroom of the local paper at the time, and then taking a night course. One night I was waiting at a bus stop in order to get home. The next morning I read that there had been another rape only a couple of blocks from where I was waiting, around the time I had been there. I still remember the sickening feeling that came over me when I read the news. It was not a good time to be a young woman in Scarborough.
Posted by: Carol Witt | January 10, 2009 at 02:30 PM
Okay, that does it. After the news, I'm listening to my Simon & Garfunkel collection.
Posted by: Marilee J. Layman | January 10, 2009 at 05:28 PM
Carol... I don't remember Rouge Park, but, yes, there were nice places in Scarborough. Toronto too. I enjoyed the boardwalk that started at the very east end of Queen Street and ended at the Marina. (I was quite amused when I saw that one of the sailboats was named "Theodan".)
Posted by: Serge | January 11, 2009 at 03:34 PM