I’ve found a new use for those occasion flags you can buy at the grocery store.  I bought a large one and didn’t quite know what to do with it, since I don’t have a flag pole, until I realized it was just the right size to cover a kitchen window I always keep covered.  The flag has nice bright colors, yellow, orange and deep green, and says, “Welcome.”  Really brightens up my kitchen. 

I’m getting weary of those decorator colors you find in stores everywhere: beige, dull blue, and gray-green.  I need bold colors in my home.  I’ll pick out a colorful towel, curtain or flag.  But the interior walls are still white.  I haven’t gotten around to doing anything about that.

Do some colors have universal significance?  I doubt it.  In China, red and various shades of red including pink, mean good luck and are worn by the bride on her wedding day.  In the West, brides wear white to signify purity, or at least that’s what it used to signify.  Now a white dress is worn the second time around. 

Some colors are often associated with certain things, at least locally.  Red is often the color of restaurant tablecloths because it is thought to stimulate the appetite.  Christian churches often have their doors painted red and have red carpets to symbolize the blood of Christ. 

Here in the US, pink is generally recognized as the color signifying a girl or the feminine.  While I recall some pink dress shirts sold for men, I guess that fad didn’t last long.  

Will men ever tire of the gray suit, symbolizing power and membership in the established order?  At least a man’s tie is colorful.  These fashions not only reflect the stratification of society; they reinforce it.  I do recall some ties sold for women but I guess that fad didn’t last long.

Green and blue stand for nature, environmentalism, and stewardship of the Earth, but maybe not in countries with few trees and little water.

School buses are school-bus-yellow.  I wonder what color they are in other countries?  What about those countries that can barely afford to put up schoolhouses – do they even have school buses?

Red, white and blue are the colors of my country’s flag and by my count, the exclusive colors of the flags of about two dozen countries.  (Did you know the Russian flag is now white, blue and red?)  These colors stir patriotic feelings of love of country, but not necessarily pride in the actions of government.

Maybe there is a color with universal significance – I suppose sky-blue reminds people everywhere of the color of the sky.

How do you feel about the neutral colors of houses in subdivisions – row upon row of houses all the same color scheme?  In my experience, people rebel by painting the front door a non-regulation color.  If I were going to pick a new color for my house, what would I pick?  I don’t know.  It would not be stark white.  Something a bit wild I think; not neutral, not pastel, but a deep, rich color that was not dark.  By the way, I believe I have never seen the exterior of a residence or front door painted black, the color of mourning. 

I try to pick towels that are a deep or dark color to hide stains; likewise shirts.  But I pick out light-colored pants for summertime so I will be able to spot any ticks.

From time to time I read or hear that if you favor certain colors then you have a certain type of personality.  Can that be true?

I’ve read that certain colors can have an effect on the mind, that hot pink is soothing and sedating, and blue helps you concentrate.  Can that be true?

Blogs should have bold, bright colors.  I actually don’t consider black to be a color; rather just the absence of color on the screen, so I wouldn’t pick it.  With black or navy blue I sense only emptiness; the foreboding emptiness of a night sky devoid of stars.  However, a dark chocolate brown is very welcoming.

I don’t really favor white as a color for a Web page even though I have a lot of white.  I believe it is easier for my visitors to see the lettering that way.  I have a large font in my blog posts, also, for that reason.  I certainly prefer Spaces that have lettering large enough to be viewed by someone over 50.

On my Web site, I have colors that are resurrection colors and coincidently, regal colors – purple and gold.  I have a bit of feminine pink.  I have a silver-gray background for the serious side of my posts, and for my status as a wise and mature person (heh, heh).

What colors are on your Web site and why?

“Sign up for alerts” on my main page.  E-mail alerts are free.

-2007-

Some text is from a post on my Web site COOKIES AND TEA January 30, 2007.

WHAT’S TAKING SO LONG?

“Beam me up Scotty.  There’s no intelligent life down here.”   So says a bumper sticker.

Why is it taking so long for us to do something about global warming and the climate crisis?  The scientific literature on this subject goes back 50 years.  Isn’t 50 years enough time to act?

There’s a simple solution, people.  Just stop putting so much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the air.  Why can’t we stop?  What is this incredible lethargy and indifference?  It is puzzling to me that so much of the populace seems so complacent about the prospect of the death of life as we know it.  It’s business-as-usual despite a clear and present danger.   

Should we assume that if enough people know the facts, the Earth as we know it will be saved?  There are plenty of people who know the environment is in big trouble.  However, most just sit around, waiting for someone else to take the lead and solve the climate crisis, the most important issue of all time.  Thank goodness Al Gore doesn’t have that attitude.  (Hey, give that guy an Oscar!)

Consumerism rules our lives:  we’re just like so many ants picking up crumbs at a picnic, here in our consumerist-capitalist-militarist-industrialized-global culture, planning our next trip to the mall to get another toy or trinket, unaware of, or inattentive to, the ongoing collapse of the environmental systems that sustain our “nest.”

In our privileged society, so many of us are very “spoiled” from having every possible luxury and convenience.  I don’t even need to know how to spell correctly – my spell checker automatically finishes a word if I get enough of it right.  At the deepest level of our thinking, we believe that we don’t have to lift a finger to solve this problem of global warming.  Somebody, somewhere, will take care of it for us.

I feel sorry for the kids today, with this monumental mess hanging over their heads; a mess for which my generation is accountable.  It’s already too late to avoid global warming and climate change (it’s already here), and the longer we procrastinate, the worse it will get.

Here is a history of global warming that outlines who knew what and when over the past 50 years and longer.  It discusses the perceptions of the public on this subject; the public being the great majority of people whose attention is usually elsewhere.   

There are plenty of people who just don’t get it.  An acquaintance told me there is no such thing as global warming and climate change; that it is all a lie, a plot by the Chinese to make us believe that we need to curb our economy, so they can surge ahead of us.  This man is not dimwitted.   He is clever enough to be building his own house.  But despite his fine new house, he lives in a ghetto; an intellectual ghetto.  I guess he gets all his information from talk radio.  He’s not interested in expanding his horizons.  He knows nothing of 50 years of scientific research on global warming and climate change.  For all he knows, it never happened.

Last winter, when we were having summery days in January, I asked the bagger at the grocery store if he thought it might be global warming.  He said it was “the man up there” who brought the strange weather because of evil in the world.  I said, “What man?”  He said, “Jesus.”  Apparently, he had never even heard of global warming. 

I have to wonder how well our high schools have been teaching basic environmental principles.  I have to wonder why climate scientists, for so many decades, have generally been content to stay in their ivory towers, analyzing and pondering the fate of the Planet, but apparently completely uninterested in devising communication strategies to explain their findings to the rest of humanity, so much of it still in the dark.  The consequence of this lack of education and lack of communication is evident in the comments pages of major news outlets online – so many people, so uninformed.

It is with definite sadness that I take down a certain old book from my bookshelf and read it:  About thirty-six years ago, in his landmark textbook Fundamentals of Ecology (1971, third edition), Eugene P. Odum wrote about the “greenhouse effect” on the climate and warned of catastrophe (page 33), and referred to earlier works by Roger Revelle in the 50’s and 60’s.  Unfortunately, his warnings went unheeded.

You might object and tell me that while scientists had many of the basic facts long ago, there was some uncertainty about the details.  Well of course, the body of knowledge has been building slowly over the decades.  But how many details did we need to know before we could act?  Sometimes you don’t have all the details you want before action becomes imperative.  Now that the situation is pretty much crystal clear, and with so much at risk, what are we waiting for?

Are governments ever going to act?  Are politicians who are beholden to “campaign contributions” from special interests ever going to be responsive to anything but special interests?  Are they ever going to find the political will to act?  Is an electorate so easily swept along by slogans and half-truths ever going to be capable of real democracy and governing themselves?  Whenever I read about a nation or a city that does something exemplary, or I read about someone working to help save the environment, it renews my faith in humanity.

One bright spot is the hundreds of scientists working under the auspices of the United Nations IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and their reports detailing the deterioration of our Planet as a result of global warming and the climate crisis.  The scientists issued these summary reports in 2007:  (1) The Physical Science Basis, (2) Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, and (3) Mitigation of Climate Change.  The forthcoming assessment report will be the work product of hundreds of scientists and thousands of reviewers from more than 130 countries! 

However, these scientists have no authority to fix this problem of global warming.  There are steps that individuals can take to make a difference, such as driving less often, driving a hybrid car, and using energy-efficient light bulbs.  But a complete solution will require the combined efforts of many nations.  In fact, it will require unprecedented cooperation among nations.  Yes, unprecedented.  If national self-interest is the only interest, then the Earth doesn’t have a chance.  Are we capable enough to do it?  Are we capable enough to do it now before the situation gets worse?   

Maybe it will take another 50 years.

What’s your prediction for the future?

“Sign up for alerts” on my main page.  E-mail alerts are free.

-2007-

ESCAPING THAT PREDICAMENT

“Quagmire.” 

I started this post thinking about the word quagmire, a word much used these days.  It reminds me of the word “quicksand.”  I looked up both words in Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, to see how they compare.  I believe that generally, a quagmire is a type of land, and quicksand is rather a mixture of sand and water.  Anyway, both can be “entrapping,” and the words are linked in my mind.

When I think of quicksand, I think of a scene with quicksand near Mont Saint Michel, France in one of my travel videos.  In this Globe Trekker video, narrator Justine Shapiro is jumping up and down on quicksand.  It undulates like a waterbed.  “It’s like a trampoline,” she shouts gleefully.  Then she plunges her bare legs ever deeper into the quicksand as a stunt for the camera, laughing and grinning with a running commentary, even after it becomes evident from her struggling that she really is stuck; stuck up to her shorts.  By the way, quicksand can change instantly from being a benign substance you can walk on, to being soft, yielding, miry, gooey, and dangerously entrapping.

Other members of the tour group cannot pull her out or exert any significant pressure or they, too, could start to sink. 

Then we hear a woman giving instructions in rapid-fire French.  Her voice is gentle, but firm and in control, (a leader of the tour?).  Maybe she is used to silly tourists trying this stunt.  She and a man stand on either side of Justine holding her arms; just to reassure her and keep her from flopping face forward into the muck I guess, since they cannot pull her out. 

Fortunately, Justine is bi-lingual and she slowly makes progress by positioning herself just so, carefully following their instructions.  She is told to wiggle her legs side-to-side.  She gets one leg free and then takes a very wide step, propelling herself forward (not directly upward) by pushing on the woman rescuer who is now kneeling.  She takes the brunt of Justine’s push and crumples into a ball on the quicksand.  As the camera moves away, Justine is breaking free and the rescue woman is still plopped on the quicksand.  But I have confidence that the rescuer is all right because she did seem to know what she was doing.  It really is impossible for me to tell from the video exactly how Justine escapes.

During all this, other members of the tour group were milling about, all barefoot, many with bright colored slickers on because it was raining.  Some were also experimenting with sinking in, but just a little bit.  They quickly learned their limitations and didn’t get in trouble, except for one chap who maybe had to be rescued also.  When Justine finally is freed, they applaud, evidently appreciating her theatrics.

The video is cut so her ordeal seems to last just moments, but I’ll bet this is something she will never, never do again.  It all raises the question in my mind why someone would risk her life for no good reason.

The tour group of about two dozen people is on a two hour hike across sand flats to Mont Saint Michel, off the northwest coast of France.  The sand flats become covered with ocean when the tidewater sweeps in.  Hikes take place between tides.  Obviously, timing is of paramount importance.

Out of curiosity I phoned a tour organization there to find out more about the hikes and I was told that the guides are trained to help people get out of quicksand, but people are not supposed to get into the quicksand.  Evidently, the hikes are nature appreciation walks.  I think that would be delightful as long as one did not get too close to quicksand.

The moral of the story

## When you’re stuck in quicksand, continuing to struggle is futile, and staying the course, doing more of the same, gets you nowhere except deeper in goo.

## Sending in more tourists will only result in more tourists getting stuck.

## Some results are as predictable and inevitable as the return of high tide.

## If the name of the game is clever maneuvering, and brute force is your only strategy, you’ll be stuck for a long time.  People might be shocked, but they won’t be awed.

## If you’re stuck in one of life’s difficulties, you need special knowledge and special skills to get out.  You need to be able to work cooperatively with others.  You definitely have to learn to think outside the box.

What’s your recipe for getting out of a tight spot?

“Sign up for alerts” on my main page.  E-mail alerts are free.

-2007-

Someone asked me recently what I like about the Book of Judith in the Bible.  I like it because it tells of a woman making a speech.

The Book of Judith is a favorable portrayal of a woman:  Judith is beautiful, clever, daring, courageous, and heroic.  Also, she is evidently a person of some wealth (she has a servant), and perhaps, as a widow, she has more freedom to make her own choices.  When she returns from her journey to the enemy camp, all the people of the city gather to welcome her.  Then she makes a speech telling about her shocking deed and she gives instructions to the troops.  When she finishes, the people cheer loudly, and their city resounds with shouts of joy (Judith chapters 13 and 14 New American Bible). 

I think it would be a fascinating research project someday to go through the Bible and find instances when women not only speak to someone (rare enough), but speak to someone in the presence of others, or even speak to more than one person, that is, make a speech or address a group or crowd in a leadership role; for example, Mary Magdalene announcing the resurrection to the other disciples.

Protestant Bibles (some or all?) don’t have the Book of Judith.  Is it because Judith is too assertive?  Did the compilers see nothing of value in a book that was written around the life of a woman?  Certainly, she is not more violent than many other characters found in the Bible.  The Catholics’ New American Bible retains the Book of Judith.  I admit I don’t have a clue why the book is included or not included.

The New American Bible seems to bring Judith into sharper focus than the older Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible where she is portrayed larger than life.  I did a side-by-side comparison of these two versions of chapters 13 and 14 (not easy to do because the numbering of verses is different), trying to guess where each translator was coming from.  In the older version, someone tells Judith, “in every nation which shall hear thy name, the God of Israel shall be magnified on occasion of thee.”  The new renders it as, “in every foreign nation, all who hear of you will be struck with terror.”  Quite a different flavor! 

In Exodus in the Bible, we hear the voice of Miriam.  She is called “the prophet,” so I assume she often had a lot to say.  She sings a song about how the army of the Egyptians drowned in the Red Sea, allowing her people to escape to freedom.  She takes a musical instrument and leads all the women as they play their tambourines and dance.  So obviously this is a good example of a woman leading (Exodus 15:20–21 New Living Translation).  It’s interesting that some other versions do not say she led; rather that the other women “followed,” or simply “went out after her.”  There are also differences as to whether she “sang to them,” or “led them in the refrain,” or just “responded to them,” or in the case of the NLT, merely “sang.”  A translator can certainly shape the role of a woman in the Bible!

It is interesting to ponder who gets to decide which books to include and why, and who gets to decide how texts are translated.  Until I started drafting this post, I didn’t fully appreciate how different translations could change the scene being portrayed.  In fact, I completely underestimated the complexity of this subject – I thought it would take almost no time at all to finish this post (sigh).

Queen Jezebel is a powerful authority figure in the Bible.  She not only has a speaking role, but evidently knows how to write – quite extraordinary for someone in the ninth century BCE.  The author of The First Book of Kings accuses Jezebel of writing letters to arrange a murder so her husband can acquire some property.  The letters go to some civil leaders in that area (1 Kings 21:8–11 New International Version).

In the Bible, Jezebel is accused of idolatry (2 Kings 9:22 NIV).  Well, history is written by the victors.  Likely she did not worship an idol (image or statue), but the deity that it represented.  She was a follower of the Great Goddess (the goddess Ashtoreth and her escort Baal), a far more ancient tradition than the Hebrews’ worship of their male deity Yahweh.  Merlin Stone, in her book When God Was a Woman (1993), writes, “The murder of Jezebel, who had reigned alongside Ahab as queen in the northern kingdom of Israel, was actually a political assault upon the religion of the Goddess.” 

I think we are very fortunate to have the voices of these ancient women, Judith, Mary Magdalene, Miriam, Jezebel and others.  Some writings have barely survived:  The Christian Church tried to utterly destroy “heretical” Gnostic Gospels, including the Gospel of Mary, in which Mary Magdalene is portrayed teaching Peter and others, and Peter disputes her teaching.  Some Gnostic Gospels (including this one and others such as the Nag Hammadi collection) were lost for many centuries.  I’d guess this scene of a woman teaching a group of men was not real palatable to the all-male hierarchy that determined what was orthodox, especially when one of the students was their founder Peter!

I was musing on all this when I found an editorial in the June 22 National Catholic Reporter, an independent newsweekly, entitled, “Erasing Women from History” – it’s well worth reading.

Who is your most memorable woman from the Bible or from history?

“Sign up for alerts” on my main page.  E-mail alerts are free.

-2007-