Good omens sought.

It's Sunday night, and I know I owe you guys a post. It's not really where my brain is at tonight, though -- prefiling of bills for the new legislative session ended at 5:00 p.m. Friday, so work was nuts all week, and of course we have the craziness in DC looming tomorrow. (I'm trying to gin up some sympathy for the Trump supporters who spent thousands of dollars on a trip to DC to attend the inauguration, only to be told it's been moved to a much smaller indoor venue because of the cold and their tickets are now commemorative. Trying to gin up sympathy, I said. It's not working very well.) 

So we could be forgiven for feeling like fate is breathing down our necks. Although it might just be Tigs. 

Lynne Cantwell 2025

Anyway, here are a couple more pictures from this past week.

We finally got into our newly renovated office space at work this week. It was supposed to be turned over to us in early November, but construction was delayed because reasons. You know how it goes. 

Anyhow, we proofreaders have been given cubicles adjoining the word processors (who used to have a big office with actual desks) and the bill clerks (who used to have the whole space that our three departments are now shoehorned into). I personally think our department got the best end of the deal. Our previous space was a weirdly configured bullpen with extremely non-ergonomic counters for our computers. Trust me when I say that the cubes are an improvement. My cube is on the far end in a corner, and for some reason, I have been given windows atop a partition that's bang up against a wall. 

Some view, huh? | Lynne Cantwell 2025

I'm taking suggestions for what to do with this setup. I could go wild with gel clings, but if you've got a better idea, lay it on me.

Speaking of views, though: On Monday, I had an appointment with my endocrinologist in Los Alamos (just a checkup, no biggie), and of course I hit a blizzard on the way up. I was worried about driving home in snow after seeing the doctor, but I needn't have worried -- the storm had passed, the streets were already clear and mostly dry, and the Jemez Mountains were stunning in their fresh dusting of snow. 

Lynne Cantwell 2025

Here's hoping that's a good omen.

***

Anyway, who knows? The second Trump administration may blow itself up before it half starts, and all of our angst will be for naught. Vivek Ramaswamy already plans to quit the DOGE thing to run for governor of Ohio, and Elon Musk, the other half of the DOGE brain trust, reportedly couldn't be happier. All I want to know is how many Scaramuccis ol' Vivek lasted.

Then there's the shock-and-awe immigration crackdown that Trump's team had planned for Tuesday in Chicago. I've seen unconfirmed reports that the plans are off because word about it got out. It's tough to create chaos when the "enemy" has time to prepare.

And best of luck to House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson; he'll need it to keep his teeny tiny majority from splintering. This Congress could end up being even less effective than the last one.

We live in hope.

***

I won't be watching the inauguration tomorrow because I have to work. If the election had gone differently, I might have stolen a few minutes out of the day to see the swearing in. But now, I'm sure I'll be far too busy to get away.

***

These moments of not-too-ominous blogginess have been brought to you, as a public service, by Lynne Cantwell. Stay safe and warm!

Why I hate the word "deserved".

As I mentioned last week, we're heading into our busy season at work. This year, it's coinciding with Trump's second inauguration and all the crazy-making stuff that we know will go with his return to power. During the first go-round, I was working in an office building two blocks from the White House; I am not the most empathic empath, but to me, the dysfunction and insanity seemed to seep from the White House and permeate the air around it. One of the reasons I decided to retire when I did, in mid 2020, was to escape that madness.

Now the madness is returning to power, and I'm hoping I'm far enough away from it that I won't feel that same ol' anxiety creeping back. 

Here on the blog, I don't plan to comment a lot on the day-to-day craziness. Instead, I'll probably write about peripheral or tangential stuff, which is what I did last time with my several posts on gaslighting. 

Today's post is in that vein. It's not about gaslighting; instead, it's about this idea that people get what they deserve.

***

lightsource | Deposit Photos

I have two problems with the word "deserve". First, it's often deployed as a way to part you from your money. Marketers bait the hook with "You deserve this!" to convince you to spend money on things you don't need. I put it right up there with "pamper yourself" (which always brings to mind an image of swaddling one's bottom with a disposable diaper, but maybe that's just me). We can all think up justifications for impulse buys and impulsive actions: we had a hard day/week/month/lifetime, we need to complete the set, just one more won't hurt, whatever. But the shiny thing we're convincing ourselves that we need might have hidden within it a painful hook in the form of a price we won't want to pay.

That brings me to my second problem with the word "deserve", and it's wrapped up in being judgy.

Every morning for several years, I was sprinkling Penzey's Justice seasoning on my morning eggs and chanting three times, "Trump in prison." It wasn't much, as spells go, and the fact that I was asking for something that I had no direct effect on made it unlikely to succeed. But spellwork sometimes acts as a nudge to make a thing happen. And it seemed for a while like Trump going to prison really could happen; he was facing dozens of criminal counts, after all -- surely some of them would make it through to a conviction. 

Then one by one, each of the four cases bogged down in legal challenges. When Trump won re-election in November, I stopped casting my little daily spell; the chances that he'd face any sort of penalty for his actions, I figured, had pretty much evaporated.

But then, at the eleventh hour, Justice Juan Merchan of the New York Supreme Court came through. As a practical matter, he couldn't sentence Trump to jail time, house arrest, or even community service. But he made damn sure it was on the record: Trump was a convicted felon.

It's not the perp walk and orange jumpsuit I was hoping for, but I'll take what I can get. I'd given up on getting any results. Oh, me of little faith.

But did he get what he deserved? 

The temptation is to say no, right? He should have gone to prison. Others guilty of far less have done time. Our system of justice is skewed to favor those who can afford high-priced lawyers and who can buy, one way or another, their own Supreme Court justices. And so on.

But that way lies bitterness and anger. Is that any way to live? 

Or would it be healthier to acknowledge that the outcome was the best one possible, given the circumstances? Especially since I had no control about any of it from the beginning. I don't work for a prosecutor; I don't work for any court system; I wasn't on the jury. All I had was a jar of Justice seasoning.

***

I've said before, although maybe not here on the blog, that I don't see any point in seeking revenge because people do themselves in by their own actions, and sometimes the Universe even lets you watch. That last part is kind of tongue-in-cheek; I've come to believe that "the Universe" is as much a construct of Western thought as Jehovah or the Force. I'm not a Buddhist, but my ideas may actually be closer to the Buddhist concept of karma, which has less to do with "you get what you deserve" and more to do with the results of the choices you've made in this life and the actions you've taken in response to those choices. Karma also speaks to the intent behind your actions. There's no Sky God of any sort judging you as Good or Evil; whatever happens is just the consequences of your intent.

Donald Trump is a convicted felon. He'll have to live with that for the rest of his life. 

Did he get what he deserved? I can't say. For one thing, it's not my place to judge. 

For another, his life isn't over yet. He won the blue ribbon he was after, but he's still on that hook.

***

These moments of karmic blogginess have been brought to you, as a public service, by Lynne Cantwell. Pace yourselves, guys -- it's gonna be a long four years. 

"Wicked" defies gravity.

 

Stolen from https://www.brit.co/wicked-movie/

I realize I'm about a million years late to the party -- the movie version of Wicked has been out in theaters since Thanksgiving weekend -- but my bottom line still holds: If you haven't seen it already, you should.

It's still playing in theaters, but I chose to pony up $20 to see it on my TV at home. It was definitely worth the cost. 

The story, in one form or another, has been with me for most of my life. When I was a kid, I watched the original movie, The Wizard of Oz, every year when it ran on TV. I also read L. Frank Baum's novel that started everything off (plus a couple of the sequels). Pretty sure I saw The Wiz at some point, too.

Then Gregory Maguire's version of the Wicked Witch's story was published in 1995, and turned the whole thing on its head. One of my daughters read the novel first, then loaned it to me. After decades of rooting for Dorothy, reading the ending of that book seriously messed with my head.

We saw a touring production of Wicked the musical at the Kennedy Center in 2011. So of course I wanted to watch the screen version to see if it matched up. It did not disappoint. Cynthia Erivo is terrific as Elphaba, and Ariana Grande is perfect as Galinda/Glinda. Michelle Yeoh seems to be everywhere these days (Star Trek: Section 31 starts in just a couple of weeks), and she is as wonderful as always as Madame Morrible, both before and after her true nature is revealed. Jeff Goldblum is sorta typecast as the Wizard. Jonathan Bailey does a great job as Fiyero, the bad boy who turns the heads of both Glinda and Elphaba. (I couldn't remember where I'd seen him before; it turns out he plays Anthony on Bridgerton.) 

It will come as no surprise to anyone that the movie has whizbang special effects -- much more so, of course, than the stage version, where Elphaba just flying, live on stage, was impressive. 

Speaking of the casting, there have been some complaints among certain factions, particularly in regard to Erivo as Elphaba -- because Erivo is Black, and there has been no effort to make her appear less so. I think it's important to note that "woke" casting goes way back for this show; the original scriptwriters were Jewish, and Idina Menzel, who is also Jewish, originated the role of Elphaba on Broadway. Elphaba's whole thing is not just her magical ability, but that she's green. She's clearly used to getting a lot of flak for her skin color, and it seems like it would be a no-brainer to cast someone in the role who has lived experience as an "other" throughout her life. Plus Erivo does a great job in the role. So, y'know, whatever.

Grande has also been the target of criticism for being cast as Glinda, but she's not just a pop singer -- she got her start on Broadway.

I'm a bit bummed that the movie only covers the first part of Elphaba's story, although it shouldn't have been unexpected; it seems like Hollywood has lost the ability to wrap up a story in under two hours.  But I get that "Defying Gravity" was written to send the theater audience to intermission on a high, and it would be asking a lot of a movie audience to just pivot to the next scene without some time to catch a breath.

I'll be interested to see how they handle the second half of the story. The material is a lot darker than in the first half; the ending should be absolutely wrenching. I can't help but think of a comment I overheard from someone leaving the movie version of Into the Woods: "They should have stopped it at intermission," or words to that effect. Guaranteed there will be viewers of Wicked: For Good who will feel the same way. Here's hoping they take time to read the book between now and November, so they have some sense of whether to see it at all.

***

I may be taking some time off from blogging here shortly. I'm heading into the busy season at work -- the state legislature starts a 60-day session January 21, and we're gearing up for it now. On top of that, I've signed myself up for two online classes. One is a five-session class on the Celtic god Cernunnos offered by John Beckett and Jason Mankey, which starts the week after next. The other one is a seven-week course in beginning Irish that starts next Sunday. Yeah, I'm gonna try learning that blasted language again. I won a contest for a free course from Let's Learn Irish, and I could hardly turn it down. 

Anyway, the point being that it's gonna be a busy winter here at La Casa Cantwell. Something may have to give. If blogging ends up being that something, I'll try to let you know in advance.

I may go mad by mid February. But I might come out the other side with some ideas for another book. Weirder things have happened.

***

These moments of musical blogginess have been brought to you, as a public service, by Lynne Cantwell. Stay safe!

Why chasing an hourglass figure is a fool's errand.

 

ursus@zdeneksasek.com | Deposit Photos

It's close enough to New Year's that we can talk about resolutions, right? And people still automatically write "I will lose weight this year" as one of their resolutions, right?

Perhaps capitalizing on this trend, BBC Science Focus magazine has an article in its latest issue called, "Key weight-loss mystery solved: New research suggests fat cells have a 'memory'". (I would love to give y'all a link to this article, but it looks like you have to subscribe to see the articles in the latest issue. I have access through Apple News+, which I have found to be a decent news aggregator.)

The article quotes Dr. Ferdinand von Meyenn, assistant professor at ETH Zurich's Department of Health Sciences and Technology, on a recent study conducted by him and his team. They looked at a group of people, some of whom were "living with obesity" (their phrase) and some who weren't, who had lost 25 percent of their body mass index, and compared the differences in DNA sequences in their fat tissue before and after the weight loss. What they discovered -- brace yourselves -- is this: "The body really fights against [weight loss] and wantes to return to its original weight. The adipose tissue is programmed to want to regain that weight." 

As a reformed yo-yo dieter, I am here to say: No shit.

He goes on to say that people who lose weight and can't keep it off aren't weak: "There really is an underlying molecular mechanism driving gaining the weight back."

As the same reformed yo-yo dieter: Also no shit. 

We have discussed this several times here on hearth/myth. To save you from trawling through years of posts, I will give you the link once again to Wikipedia's article about the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, which was conducted toward the end of World War II. The idea was to find the best diet for people who endured starvation during the war to make them healthy again. But first, the researchers had to create starving people. So they recruited a bunch of guys and put them on a starvation diet. Long-term dieters would recognize the result: many of the experiment subjects quit, many others cheated, and a significant number developed mental illnesses ranging from depression to hysteria: "Participants exhibited a preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation."

The point being that yeah, fat cells want to be fat again. Duh.

You would think that could be circumvented by getting rid of the excess fat cells. That procedure is called liposuction, and it was all the rage in, oh, the '80s or '90s. It sounded great 'til people started getting infections from having it done in sketchy clinics. Nowadays, it's recognized as plastic surgery and not a weight loss option, and patients are advised that if they don't watch their diet, the weight can come back -- because as it happens, it's not just the fat cells themselves that remember how big and robust they used to be. Our bodies have developed a system over centuries to survive famine -- it's called adaptive thermogenesis -- and they interpret diets as just another famine. Which is why all those guys in the starvation experiment went kinda crazy. Also, vacuuming out some fat cells doesn't do away with your body's ability to make more fat cells to replace them.

Dr. von Meyenn says we should be focusing on obesity prevention instead of trying to cure it after it has already happened. That's not much help for those of us for whom prevention is too late.

Here is the one thing I know for sure to be true, after decades of dieting: Diets don't work. And chasing that hourglass figure will probably just leave you disappointed, depressed, and thinking about food all the time. And that's no way to live.

***

These moments of anti-dieting blogginess have been brought to you, as a public service, by Lynne Cantwell. Stay safe!