|
|
Tuesday, November 10th, 2009
| |
9:40 am - another dream
|
dreamt last night that i was best friends with leighton meester (mind you, leighton meester - not blair waldorf), and we were out to coffee somewhere and the table of girls next to us, they were all just plotzing, "oh my god is it?" "look who it is" "no way" and me n' leighton just giggled and ran off.
and no, she does not know when the eleanor character might be returning to the series.
in other news, cuz there's always other news, i'm being very patient waiting for the new lady gaga video ("bad romance", introduced to me by ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) jermo (who i actually see now! once a month, sure, but it's more than the every-year-or-two that we'd been averaging!)) to premiere on the lady gaga website.
i'm not a huge gaga fan. despite her affinity for avant-garde couture, i don't like her all that much as a person. her videos have gotten better (compare, from a visual standpoint, "just dance" to "paparazzi"), but her music, for the most part, is blah (and that "disco stick" song is irredeemably awful), however. what i like of hers, i love, because when she's good? she's amazing. and "bad romance" might be her most amazing song yet.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009
| |
7:23 pm - wherein umass brings the dramz. again. some more.
|
y'all ready for some shit? file this one away with the rapidly- and ever-growing collection of things that only happen to me.
so there's a crapload of backstory involving inadvertantly withdrawing and re-enrolling and work schedules and the like, but that's all just leading up to this next thing. so there are two elements at play here. first, all of the high-level english classes have two prerequisites. one of them i got equivalency credit for from the BAC, and i was waived out of the other.
for some reason, despite these credits being in the system, there is a glitch that happens where, any time i try to register for a high-level class, i get an error saying that i am missing pre-reqs, so someone in the english department has to do a manual hold override and enroll me for me. the people in the english department are the only ones who have the authority to do the override of the pre-req block.
now, i was also, as you'll recall, on academic suspension last semester. because of that, i have an academic hold on my account (which will be automatically lifted once my gpa goes back up, which it should at the end of this semester), and so to register for classes, i have to go through a woman in the undergrad education office, and she signs me up for the classes i want. she is the only one who has the authority to override the academic hold.
so where we stand now is, the people in the english department can't enroll me because of the academic hold, but the woman in the undergrad education office can't enroll me because of the pre-req block. now, logically what should happen is that the woman in the undergrad education office would temporarily lift the academic hold so that the people in the english office could do the pre-req override and enroll me in my class, after which the woman in the UE office would reinstate the academic hold.
i've been told to give them a week to figure this out. i'll be surprised if it happens in that short amount of time.
on the upside, and since people have been asking, if everything goes as it ought with the registrations, after spring 2010 i'll only have three, possibly four classes total (two for the major, one spanish and the science credit i'm still fighting to have transferred over)left till i can graduate! so, you know, that's pretty great.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, October 20th, 2009
| |
6:25 pm - feed overload
|
i'm sorry, did ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif) goodbandnames get written up in an article somewhere or something? mostly silent for at least a year and then suddenly in the last day and a half it's exploding.
in other news, cuz there's always other news (huh. haven't said that in a while), the surgery went as planned. my vision is near perfect now, and though my eyes get tired if i stare at something (see: computer screen) for too long, i'm all good! i have to put drops in four times a day for the next week and for the same duration i have to tape protective plastic guards over my eyes to keep from rubbing my eyes in my sleep and *shudder* loosening my flaps, but the covers are surprisingly non-invasive in terms of comfort - it's just that the tape leaves gluey residue on your face that does not come off.
not so fun.
but again, it's only for a week, i'll survive. woot!
|
|
(6 comments | comment on this)
|
| Sunday, October 18th, 2009
| |
8:30 pm - my untroubled childhood
|
i'm not better or more special than anyone, and god knows i'm not saying that other people haven't had it worse, much worse than i did, but when i think about my pre-teen years (and when i imagine what i can't remember before that), it has to be a miracle of some sort that i didn't turn to self-medication. sure there's the obvious issue of the lack of access in our suburban bubble (and if there was, i'd have had no idea how to seek it out), but more than that was probably latent fear of "letting people down", but knowing me, that idea could have pushed me even further out over the edge in a "you can't tell me what to do" pissing match rebellion.
and yet i turned out, for the most part, okay. sure i had my first cigarette when i was 13, but i didn't smoke habitually till, and save that one time when i was 12 i didn't touch alcohol till, college.
you'd think it'd have happened a lot sooner. go figure.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| |
9:50 am - it's sunday. i'm updating. hey-oh!
|
am i really never here anymore? this is crazy - i used to have something to say three or four times a day, and now i'm lucky if i get in here to post once every two weeks or so. with the advent of facebook and then twitter, i swore i'd still have things to say beyond the status updates and character limits, but then i just... stopped.
and i'm not okay with that, but i'm not sure how to fix it because i don't want to force it. but i suppose that's my issue to contend with.
anyway.
catch-up time. you know i didn't buy, and in the near future at any rate will not be buying, a house. i am, however, getting LASIK surgery. tomorrow. and i'm not nervous exactly, so much as... a little ooked out. like, i'm fine with things touching my eyes. mom couldn't deal with anything coming near her eyes, but i'm cool with drops and things, and hell, even during the pre-op consultation they had to test my eyeball pressure (or something) by lightly pressing a blunt point to my eyeball, and sure i got a huge rush of adrenaline followed by a lengthy bout of nervous giggles (i was apologetic because i'm sure the doctor found it creepy, but she just said that, as long as i wasn't running to puke, she was cool with it), but i wasn't horrified.
no, what i'm heebed by is the flap. do you know about this? well, i know danielspice does, cuz he's had the procedure. but for anyone else, it goes like this: they put clamps in to keep your eyes open (like 'clockwork orange', but more sanitary), and then put a round ring thing around your cornea. somehow the ring thing causes suction and it raises up your cornea. at this time, your vision goes grey, which really freaks me out. so then they take the laser and cut most of the way around the ring, creating a "corneal flap."
ladies and gentlemen, i have a new Least Favorite Term Ever. my friend ari told me that i should tell the doctor to please be gentle because i'm afraid my flap will be sensitive, which is funny because it's moderately dirty-sounding, but i'm actually sort of afraid that it will be sensitive! all the material assures me that it will be almost entirely healed back over within five minutes after surgery, but still. freaky-fucking-deaky.
so that's tomorrow. yesterday saw me reading all day to get through the densest book f. scott fitzgerald ever wrote, which i did because i'm awesome, and then i did final revisions for the paper due for my wednesday class and put together the powerpoint presentation for thursday (teaching myself to use powerpoint in the process because woot), finding time in all of that to watch "sorority wars" on lifetime because i have a straight boy crush on lucy hale.
today sees me all day in western mass for OH MY GOD KEELY'S BABY SHOWER ("joyous occasions" are really so much more joyous when she'd been trying to get pregnant for as long as she has and it finally worked! and not that i suddenly like babies (despite being, as some can attest, oddly good with them), but you guys, i'm sorry, baby clothes are so fucking cute)!!!!! then i'm blind for a day and a half, after which i have work on wednesday and then after handing in one paper will come home and write the paper that goes with the book and presentation, after which i'll probably pass out, and now we're up to speed!
hello.
|
|
(17 comments | comment on this)
|
| Thursday, October 8th, 2009
| |
12:45 pm - spam of late
|
i've noticed recently that the porn spam in my inbox has been a lot more... descriptive, lately. and in an oddly proper way too. a few days ago, i got one that said "teenage spanking leads to hot teenage sex" (which, do they need to include the second 'teenage'? what other kind of hot sex could teenage spanking lead to?). just now, i got "forced entrance into mom's anus."
it's fun, but it also sorta makes me miss the good ol' days of "hott jzz kocksluuts handbag", you know?
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, September 29th, 2009
| |
7:46 pm - gay marriage
|
so can i just posit an observation here? what? it's my journal so i can do whatever i want? man, that's tit.
*************no offense intended to any married or engaged gays or to gays who wish they had the option but don't - my journal, my thoughts.****************
so i've been noticing lately that, among the gays i know, a fairly large number of them are engaged, but only three are actually married. and of those three, two are married to each other.
and not only that, but it seems to me that, of the engaged-but-not-married gays, the engagement is happening really quickly after the relationship starts, and maybe it's a case of being too jaded to believe that that many people are just, BAM!, finding true love like a misplaced glove, but i'm starting to feel like it's a status thing more than a love thing. so many other things have been commodified, does this have to be included too?
and yes, you can easily turn around and tell me about the heterosexual weddings that cost more than i'll ever hope to make in my lifetime, and i get that, yes, those sorts of over-the-top weddings can be a status/social thing as much as a love thing, but i'm speaking strictly of the 'engaged' part - it's like the marriage laws were passed, a couple middle-aged gays got married, and then suddenly all the younger guys were just getting engaged.
but never actually getting married. not breaking up, mind you (although some have), but not ever getting married either. or even talking about getting married. i never thought engagement was the stopping place, you know? and maybe this is from the luxury of my blue state that i say this, but it just makes marriage, gay marriage that is, feel a bit cheap. if i get married, i want it to be because i love the guy and want to spend the rest of my life with him - not because it's the new Thing.
hey look - 90210 is on!
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, September 21st, 2009
| |
3:03 pm - so that's a No then.
|
so i got my pre-approval notice, and the verdict is... no.
which is fine, my fingers haven't been crossed in a few days. i mean, i was approved for a rather decent amount, but y'all were quite right: in the end, it was the taxes that put it over the top. the upside is, of course, now i know how much i really do need to make (because while i would use the trusts for the downpayment, the monthly payments would come from my paycheck) at my job for this to become a reality.
and i'm still a bit more than a few years off.
so now i know, no harm no foul, as they say, and we move on! i called my agent to let her know the situation and also to apologize for taking her time on what was to end up a null venture, and she was understanding and i promised to recommend her to anyone i knew who might be in the market (seriously, you guys, she was awesome, and once i'm eventually back in the market (because it's the end of a chapter, not the book), i'm looking her up without hesitation), and... that's that!
anyone have any good (local) LASIK specialist recommendations?
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, September 15th, 2009
| |
6:16 pm - putting my future to the people. also, i want to buy a house.
|
so i've hinted at it a little bit in my day-to-day life (which, by and large, is where i focus when i'm not on facebook and twitter - i feel like i legit barely update anymore!), but i'm in the process of buying property.
i'd initially fallen in love with a magnificent mid-century modern bi-level (or quad-level, depending on where you're from) deep in the woods in concord, but having only seen pictures of the living room, dining room and yard, i went to the brokers' office (well, a branch - i think the listing agent is actually based out of concord) in cambridge to ask if, before i got my daydream hopes up too high, there were any pictures available of the kitchen, bathrooms or bedrooms. i found out that it didn't matter because not only did the house have a septic tank that'd failed inspection and wasn't up to code and would need to be replaced (hello, expensive and pain in the god damn ass), but even that didn't matter because it'd sold. in the meantime though, i sat down with the agent and we began chatting. i told her all what i was looking for and the like, and before i knew it, she was handing me paperwork with contact info for mortgage agents and the like.
well.
the thing is, and i told her (the agent) as much, if i'm buying a house, i'ma be very specific in my wants, those being: single-family, mid-century modern, walking distance to transportation. not even thinking about my price range, that automatically means i'm in the suburbs somewhere, because what i'm looking for, specifically the mid-century modern bit, simply does not exist in the immediate boston area. i told her that, if nothing is available right now, that's fine - i'm in no hurry to get out of my apartment, so i'll take my time and see what's what, and i'm not going to settle for something i don't actually want.
well.
i got to thinking. i love cambridge. i adore my neighborhood, and much as i may romanticize the rural ideal, i am in school fulltime in dorchester. i work downtown. i can't have an hour commuter rail ride each way every single day. and if there's something going on socially, i want to be able to just get there, not have to worry about train schedules and then take however much longer to actually get there and, if i'm done once the trains stop running, worry about a huge amount of money spent on a cab ride home. so i amended: condo. again i'm being specific because i have the luxury of time: cambridgeport or riverside (the latter of which seems to elicit raised eyebrows - for those familiar with the boston area, it's the section of cambridge between central square and harvard square, on the river side of mass ave) only unless the place is mindbogglingly amazing, it's gotta be rough, funky, have that DIY feel with odd windows and rough-hewn beams and the like, and i know these places do exist because i've seen them, so it's really just a matter of waiting for something to come on the market.
i've spoken to a mortgage broker, and have begun assembling the sundry requisite papers to send off for my pre-approval. talking to the broker though, despite the trusts, the fact remains that i make less than $40k a year, and i very well may not be able to be approved for more than $200k. which, even with a considerable downpayment, is still not enough for a two-bedroom (right, that's the other condition) condo in cambridgeport or riverside.
so i got to thinking some more. it's been a while since i'd last, so i'd like to do something nice for myself. and if i get turned down for a mortgage or offered less than would actually be useful, i may well get LASIK.
but i'm feeling insecure about honestly torn on which would be the better option, so here i am, looking for your thoughts. hello.
Poll #1458057 for the love of public opinion
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 9which is a better investment?
|
|
(23 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, September 11th, 2009
| |
10:42 am - another book question
|
okay, here's another book question. emilytheslayer and swirlychick, i'm looking at you, but anyone else too is welcome to play along.
does anyone remember the name, or maybe any other details of a book... god, okay, so the main character is a guy, but not (i don't think) an adult, and i don't remember what it is that he's trying to do exactly, but he's got some sort of self-help book that is telling him to do all these things that aren't making sense to him, and he tries to closely study the picture of the author on the back of the self-help-ish book for answers, but in the picture the author is eating a giant chilidog that obscures almost all of his face.
stop looking at me like that, i swear this is a real book. sound familiar? anyone? i would try google, but honestly? searching for "author obscured face chilidog" really doesn't get anyone anywhere.
thanks!
|
|
(6 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, September 4th, 2009
| |
9:19 am - outbound
|
right, so i'm off to a super-secret destination* for nana edith's 90th birthdaypalooza (not the official title). internetless all weekend, back monday.
catch ya.
*totally not a secret if you look at my icon. cuz really.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009
| |
7:35 pm - 3x cheeks AGAIN???
|
oh.
my.
god.
Dear Guy With Cheeks Three Times the Size of His Head,
FUCKING GIVE IT UP ALREADY!!!!! i wasn't attracted to you when you e-stalked me the first few times a couple years back, i wasn't attracted to you when you e-stalked me a few times again a year later, nor the times two years ago when you told me that, based solely on my glasses alone, you essentially judged my whole character, nor the times last year, and guess what, in case you weren't sure, I'M STILL NOT ATTRACTED TO YOU AND I DO NOT WANT TO GO ON A DATE WITH YOU!!!!!!
as they say, gah!
relegate thyself,
unappropriate
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, August 31st, 2009
| |
8:25 am - books
|
i was thinking about books i used to love when i was younger, and i realized i have absolutely no idea what happened to my copies. and the problem is, i remember the titles of "the phantom tollbooth" and "jacob two-two meets the hooded fang" (though for the life of me i cannot tell you what the latter might have been about), but there were others and the titles are just... gone.
there was a series, and if i recalled the name i might jump for joy, about two girls who were either best friends or sisters, and they were detectives and they had a bassett hound whose markings looked like a map of the united states. and then there was another book (that might have actually been part of 'jacob two-two', but i'm not sure) that involved some sort of mystery to be solved, where someone met a designer whose name was a riff on 'gloria vanderbilt', but she may or may not have been a spider, and i remember something about her pants being so tight you couldn't tell if she was in them and trying to get out, or out and trying to get in.
this is the problem with blocking out your childhood - the good goes away along with the bad. that said, should anyone have any idea what these two books are/were, your voice would be most welcome.
aww, now i'm thinking about childrens' picturebooks. remember "island of the skog"? i still heart that book too. same with "the day jimmy's boa constrictor ate the wash". there were a couple other stephen kellog-illustrated books that i loved, but suddenly all titles are evaporating from my head.
just the way it goes.
|
|
(21 comments | comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, August 26th, 2009
| |
7:11 pm - hey steve?
|
|
| Saturday, August 22nd, 2009
| |
4:59 pm - new desk
|
i'd not mentioned it, i don't think, but ever since i rearranged my room, i've been thinking on the subject of my desk. because while it's a very nice desk, it's also fairly huge (no joke - compare the placement of the piece of tape on the floor in these pics and the ones at the end of the post. effin' huge). and the despite the surface area and three drawers of credenza space, it's pretty much to capacity (obviously i cleaned off the top for the pictures).
so it became clear that i needed a new desk. i'd given it some thought, and when i eventually have my dark-stained wood-clad mid-century modern bungalow, i want to combine more modern lines with heavier antique pieces with real character and signs of living, so i settled on a secretary desk - it's only two thirds as deep as a full desk because the writing surface folds out, it's not as expensive as a roll-top and still has secret cubbies, and hello, storage! the problem was that i can't have something that tall - not only would i then have nowhere to put the painting that john gave me (which is currently hanging on the wall over the desk space), but there's a radiator along the base of that wall, and to have a full-height piece like that not be flush against the wall just wouldn't look good.
so i went about the various places (ebay and craigslist), but couldn't find anything i really liked. plus, when it comes to things like furniture, i like to be able to examine them, test them out, look for issues to make sure i'm not overspending. so online searches, i decided, wouldn't really do - i needed an antique store, but a cursory google search yielded results where merchandise by and large started around a thousand dollars, which is almost three times my budget.
and then a miracle happened. a flash of light and a great hosana and lo, a link for cambridge antique market! just what i needed! it's close enough to the T that, despite this insane humidity, i was able to walk over after work with limited sweating, and there amid the five floors of furniture, I FOUND IT!!! the perfect desk, well within my budget and exactly what i needed!
...okay, so it wasn't that much of a search - yes, the place is five floors, but i read a few reviews online and a couple of them said that the majority of furniture is in the basement, so i went down there first, which is where i found the desk. but whatever, i totally looked on the upper floors too just in case, so there! blah. anyway.
my original plan was to pick it up on thursday, but by the time i got out of work, got to the car and got through rush hour traffic to east cambridge, they were closing. they still let me reserve the piece though, so today i went over, and sha-zam, it's mine!
*sigh* pretty.
and between the inside (replete with secret cubbies that i only even found today) and the drawers, there is way more than enough room for all my stuff!
you guys? i think i'm in love.
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, August 17th, 2009
| |
5:47 pm - still chugging along
|
so i just counted it out, and i'm in week 8 as far as the non-smoking goes. seven full weeks completed on chantix, the last five of which have been cigarette-free (you're supposed to smoke still in the first week. i continued to have one or two a day through the second week), and while by and large i've been perfectly fine, today the cravings have kicked back in some.
which is perfectly normal - after a few weeks, your brain starts saying "hey, you should have one! no, it's cool, you won't get addicted again, you've been away too long!", so it's just getting through that. the upside is that chantix blocks the receptors in your brain that respond to nicotine, so basically even if i did have one, it wouldn't do anything for me. like, yeah, there'd be nicotine back in my bloodstream, but it wouldn't be pleasurable at all - just like breathing thick, noxious air. which, gross.
also, on the bus today i was sitting... god, i don't know if i was near someone or if it was the last person on the seat or what, but there was a smell in the air like an ashtray. but, like, an ashtray that'd been buried with a corpse in a swamp filled with sewer overflow and it smelled positively revolting is the feeling i'm trying to get across, but for all the nastiness the central element was the smell of cigarettes, and by the time i got to the station it'd thoroughly filled my mouth and nostrils such that it took a good minute or two (which is longer than you tend to think) to not smell and taste it anymore.
and i have no need for that.
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, August 11th, 2009
| |
7:30 pm - advection
|
ladies and gentlemen, we are foggy!
no, but, like, really fucking foggy. walking across government center to park street after work, i noticed the strangest thing. the sky was very clear and blue, a few high clouds scattered there and there, but a strange thin layer of fog encircling the financial district. not even fog though, because fog tends to be a darker color, this was white. it looked like strange low small clouds wafting about downtown.
when i got home, the sky had darkened some over the city, but it didn't look like much beyond that. i changed, got on my bike, and headed down mass ave toward the river. by the time i got to memorial drive, the fog looked like it'd overtaken most of the north and west ends. by the time i got to the longfellow bridge, it appeared to be making its way over the far side of beacon hill.
at that point i started breathing heavier and my thighs were a-burnin', so i concentrated on biking for a while, and when i crossed back over the river on north harvard square and looked back toward the city, all tall buildings were vanished, the blue i'd seen after work gone entirely.
now it's not foggy at my house, but still quite grey and stormy-looking. when i was heading up memorial drive toward the museum of science, the wind was blowing straight at my face. that never happens, you guys, and then fog coming in from the water? i know that happens in san francisco and even in newport, but here, weather blows across the city and then out to sea. so i don't know what's going on, but a quarter and a coke says something is going on. and being new england in the summer, i'm waging that whatever it is, it's gonna be big.
it's so exciting!!!
in other news, cuz there's always other news, i was going for a virtual walk around detroit, and i found my new dreamhouse (minus the "detroit" part). i only wish it were for sale. ah, to dream...
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, August 7th, 2009
| |
8:58 pm - VGL GAY BOYS!!!!!!!!
|
okay, so me with my basic cable, i don't get the logo channel. i know there are a few of you who do get it, so you have to watch and tell me if this still happens!!!!:
secondly, their newest video! i love that they're still making videos.
|
|
(9 comments | comment on this)
|
| |
9:00 am - celebrity vs. john hughes
|
so it's no secret by this point that john hughes died. i keep thinking back to reaction when michael jackson died, and at that point people were shocked, and some were saddened, but most of the reaction was coming from celebrities.
because michael jackson was a celebrity, and so we looked to the glitterati to respond. there were letters via publicists from everyone from elton john to elizabeth taylor to madonna to julia roberts, aretha (fucking) franklin and brooke shields, all these people whom his life had touched in some way, but none of them really represented us, the people.
and then john hughes (and how terrible that i keep accidentally typing 'waters'. ugh, god forbid.) passed, and i've yet to read one celebrity (even molly ringwald, which, baited breath. same for michael schoeffling, but moreso, and that should be no shock to anyone by this point) response, but instead am confronted with Real People things, with things like this, which gets me more emotional than any diana ross eulogy ever could.
michael jackson, in death, shocked as he did in life. the difference then, is that john hughes, in his death, touched us as his work did in life. i think that really says something about a person, about their memory.
and i think it's just fantastic.
|
|
(11 comments | comment on this)
|
| Thursday, August 6th, 2009
| |
5:44 pm - childhood nearly dead
|
jabberwukie just posted this on facebook.
what the fuck??? i mean, seriously, first there was michael jackson, now this. when madonna and cyndi lauper suddenly kick it, i'm gonna cut my own head off.
in the meantime, i'm wondering what molly ringwald has to say about this. and more than that, if (hope of hopes, god in heaven) it might bring michael schoeffling out of his self-imposed furniture-building-in-pennsylvania exile...
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
|
|
|
|
4 (44.4%)
