Feb. 17th, 2005

windelina: (Firefly)
What's with this Minneapolitan fetish for "No turn on Red"? WTF is that about??

Now, don't get me wrong - when used at truly dangerous intersections, I am all for it. But there are few that are so marked that I would consider to be dangerous.

And then there are the truly dangerous intersections that DON'T have them. These drive me crazy from both directions. (or this one stop-sign I regularly encounter that is on a busy street. And they let the cars park all the way to the corner, so you have NO visibility for oncoming traffic! Especially if you drive a sensible car like I do - a Tercel - and an SUV is parked on the corner. You end up playing the peek-a-boo game with your car. YIKE!)

No, what we have here in Minneapolis is fund-raising. Especially South Minneapolis. At plain-jane intersections that have good visibility in all directions, you still have these "no turn on red" signs.

I read a study about new traffic concepts where some places are trying out "mixed use" traffic areas. Sidewalks aren't there, the road isn't clearly marked - since there is no clear definition, people slow down and PAY ATTENTION.

Because much of our driving problems today have to do with everybody knowing the rules and therefore ceasing to pay attention. If I'm driving on the road, you should be on the sidewalk and when you're not on the sidewalk - I'm not prepared to adjust and accidents happen.

Of course, much of the problems in the world today are due to people not paying attention...

[Have you seen the latest? States wanting to pass legislation barring universities teaching "unacceptable" things. Barring political statements, etc. Freedom of Speech? Old-fashioned apparently.]
windelina: (dori)
So, rehearsal last night seemed to be productive. I must admit that it was reassuring to see that all these problem spots can be fixed. It's not insurmountable. Of course, since we were working piecemeal, I have concerns about the "sticking power" of these fixes - will they remember the changes, the motivations, the emotional component when they're in the middle of a full run-through?

Still, even if they don't, I now have a place to refer them back to.

Of course, my biggest challenge wasn't there last night - Mrs. Putnam. She sounds great - her delivery (when she is on the proper emotional beat) is great. She's got a grating, whiny voice and the right physical look. But she won't get physically invested in the character. I give her acting notes, trying new metaphors for what might get her to read a line a different way - no luck. So, tonight I'm hoping to achieve a break-through. If it doesn't work, I'll have to resort to line readings and the frustration of watching her just stand there instead of being involved in the scene.

I'm mostly happy with it, all things considered. There are challenges and things I'm not sure I can fix. (John Proctor doesn't seem to be able to vary his gait. He does other physical things well, but he tends to walk in a very measured way when sometimes I need a quick stride. Ah, well.)

The set is pretty much on schedule. Amazing! The dry tech won't quite be on schedule because of the huge thing in the theatre tomorrow for Black History Month. We're going to need to refocus the lights after it and there won't be time before Dry Tech. But we're still so far ahead of where we were for the other two shows!

I can't seem to get motivated to sew. Bad Windy. It's a sign of burn out, I know, but knowing that doesn't make me any more motivated. *sigh* Well, let's be fair - I get up early to cut things out and do a bit of sewing (like 5:30am). I go to work. I run to the school. And this week, I've been out till 11pm at rehearsals for other side projects. I get home and instead of sewing - I want to go to sleep. How terribly slothful of me! *rolls eyes*

I'm not a perfectionist. Shut up.

Tonight after rehearsal, I sing with Judith for a ladies group which will be enjoyable. And then go home and sew and pack up for the board retreat. And then a short day tomorrow, Dry Tech, publicity photos, and then to the Sheraton.
windelina: (Gir's oh face)
Why is okay to say "I don't like children" but not okay to say "I don't like black people"?

My thought was thus:

Well, it's generally okay to say "I don't like annoying people." Or "I don't like people who speak loudly." Or "I don't like spending time with people who need constant attention."

All of which could be a valid viewpoint towards children as a class.

Comparing children to blacks (class of people with distinct characteristics versus race of people with no distinct social characteristics [subnote that black CULTURE might be annoying, or the attitudes that poor blacks - ECONOMICS - display might be annoying]) is apples to oranges.

IMHO.

Having said that, I still think it's short-sighted to lump all children into a class based on your preferences for interaction because not ALL children will behave that way. But then again, we all resort to conversational short-hand, now don't we?
windelina: (Incredibles)
I know - in much the same way I know I'll feel better and have more energy if I exercise -

I know that I will feel better if I get caught up on my work.

It's so easy to procrastinate because there's nothing with a high urgency or a due date. It just needs to get done.

Well, I may not be able to get motivated to sew. But here at worky-work, I've been oddly productive for the past few days.

And my desk is now close to reasonable again. I've got stuff to do, but it's either really long term stuff, stuff I'm waiting for a response on, or stuff that I'll be doing next week.

And on top of that, of my three lawyers...one isn't in on Fridays and Mondays, and another just left for over a week on vacation.

Tomorrow I might do...filing.

Profile

windelina: (Default)
windelina

April 2008

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
1314 1516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2017 08:50 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios