{"@attributes":{"version":"2.0"},"channel":{"title":"O mask of iron","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/","description":"O mask of iron - LiveJournal.com","lastBuildDate":"Tue, 09 Jul 2019 08:28:30 GMT","generator":"LiveJournal \/ LiveJournal.com","copyright":"NOINDEX","image":{"url":"https:\/\/l-userpic.livejournal.com\/36893154\/568709","title":"O mask of iron","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/","width":"100","height":"68"},"item":[{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292185.html","pubDate":"Tue, 09 Jul 2019 08:28:30 GMT","title":"Whispering in the conch.","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292185.html","description":"I might write here again. It seems private, even if it isn't. Off the map, behind the tire under the deck where the clover grows.

How many of you, returning here, grieve something that slipped, like a receipt from a shopping bag, since you last wrote here with commitment? How many of you feel tired?

I feel tired. Lustreless. Did that suspicion begin when I was fourteen?

My dog. Can I tell you about her? She was nine weeks old exactly two years, six months, and some change ago. Brindled; Boston Terrier mixed with Pomeranian. Small, but mighty. And smart, god damn. This photo is her at her most ridiculous.

This is a quiet place. Say hello, if you like.

\"\"\"\"\"\"
.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292185.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292074.html","pubDate":"Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:17:36 GMT","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292074.html","description":"Is anyone here?","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/292074.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/289466.html","pubDate":"Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:44:23 GMT","title":"Mais c'est salissant","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/289466.html","description":"Si tu veux savoir mon impression,
Notre amour c'est comme un peu d' blanc.
C'est beau l' blanc, mais c'est salissant,
Aussi j'y fais tr\u00e8s attention.

from L'effet Qu' Tu M' Fais<\/i>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/289466.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/288819.html","pubDate":"Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:28:08 GMT","title":"The Student Loan Scam","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/288819.html","description":"The latest post from Beacon Broadside: http:\/\/www.beacon.org<\/a>

The Economic Downturn and Student Loans: Some Practical Advice for Borrowers<\/b>

Posted: 13 Jan 2009 10:47 AM CST

Today's post is from Alan Michael Collinge, author of The Student Loan
Scam: The Most Oppressive Debt in U.S. History\u2014and How We Can Fight
Back and founder of StudentLoanJustice.Org, a grassroots organization,
and political action committee.

Student loan companies will soon be lined up at the Federal Treasury,
seeking loans against bundles of high interest, private loans that
they made to students, often with their parents as co-signors.
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of students and their families see
their livelihoods wracked by student loans in ways worse, even, than
defaulting home mortgage borrowers. As we progress through this
economic downturn, there is a strong potential for increased predatory
activities by the student lending industry, and borrowers need to be
prepared to take extra steps to protect themselves.

A bit of history: federally guaranteed student loans have been largely
impossible to discharge in bankruptcy for the past decade. The federal
guarantee on these loans was used as the reason for removing this
basic protection. It was a very weak argument\u2014no other loans,
federally guaranteed or not, have special exemptions from bankruptcy
protections. In practice, this unique lack of bankruptcy protection
has given the green light to lenders to attach penalties and fees onto
debt without fear of the borrower. The largest lender in the country,
Sallie Mae, saw its fee income increase by 228% between 2000-2005 (its
loan portfolio grew by only 87% during this time), and their CEO
bragged to shareholders in their 2003 annual report that their record
earnings that year were attributable to collections on defaulted
loans. So, no bankruptcy protection for the borrower means free money
for the lenders, and lots of it!

Removing bankruptcy and other protections from federal loans wasn't
enough for the student loan industry, however: in 2005, student loan
giants Sallie Mae, Citibank, and others lobbied Congress successfully
to remove bankruptcy protections, as part of the 2005 Bankruptcy Bill,
for private student loans as well. No one seems to be able to find out
who inserted this language into the bill\u2014no Congressman can be found
who is willing to claim credit. Nonetheless, it happened. That the
student loan companies were able to get this passed was shocking to
unbiased experts and analysts of this industry.

The student loan companies claimed at the time that by eliminating
bankruptcy options for borrowers, the industry would be able to make
loans to people with lower credit scores. After passage of the bill,
however, it was shown conclusively that lenders did not follow through
on their promise. Students with low or marginal credit scores received
loans at roughly the same rate as before the legislation was passed.

What the industry did do was pile as much of this private loan debt on
the students as possible, often with credit card-like interest rates,
and at hugely unfavorable terms (Bethany McLean at Fortune Magazine,
for example, found a student who had been stuck with a 28% annual
percentage rate).

Unlike home mortgage borrowers, who at least have standard bankruptcy
protections on their side as a worst, last option, student loan
debtors are stuck with principal, interest, and massive penalties and
fees. Students across the country are discovering, typically after the
fact, that they've been paralyzed by an insurmountable debt, often
with interest that exceeds their monthly earnings. Co-signing parents
and other relatives forced to step in sometimes must liquidate the
equity in their homes in order to pay.

The Student Loan lobbying machine has been very successful in putting
down attempts to reverse this ridiculous legislation, most notably
efforts led by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL).
In a leaked Sallie Mae strategy memo from 2006, the second priority
listed was to \"protect private credit economics (including
bankruptcy).\" Even with a new Congress in 2007, the industry was
somehow able to convince the Blue Dog Democrats to kill the Davis
legislation.

Academia has been largely unwilling to speak out for the borrowers on
the bankruptcy issue, as their financial interests lie with the
lenders. Student loans are again being called upon to make up for
budget shortfalls\u2014this time, owing to large endowment losses. Tuition
at our nation's colleges continues to increase dramatically, even as
the economy slows.

The Fed's bailout action potentially lays the groundwork for the
promulgation of bad lending onto a new generation of borrowers unless
Congress acts swiftly to protect them. Come January 20, President
Obama should work with the new Congress to immediately reinstate
bankruptcy protections for private student loans. The bailout loans
will be given \"haircuts\" that will serve to mitigate taxpayer losses
on these assets, and the lending industry will have to make do with
this basic consumer protection. Of equal importance is the need for
the next Congress and presidential administration to work towards the
reinstatement of a much broader set of consumer protections for
federally guaranteed loans.

I urge those now in repayment on their loans to be very vigilant. The
name of the game in the student loan industry is in attaching every
penalty and fee possible onto delinquent and defaulted debt, and we
can expect this trend to only intensify during times of economic
uncertainty. For federal loans, the industry actually has a perverse
incentive to default loans in many instances, and borrowers should
guard against this at all costs. For example, don't assume that
deferment and forbearance requests will be acknowledged by the lenders
without contacting them personally to verify receipt. Also, make sure
that your payments are posted in a timely fashion by your lender, and
that you aren't hit with late fees that can persist for months after a
later payment (another clever ploy by the industry). We may be hopeful
for change in the form of meaningful legislative action, but in the
meantime, students, former students, and their co-signors will have to
fend for themselves.

You might also be interested in Nan Mooney's post about weathering the
financial storm or Victor Tan Chen's post on Obamanomics for the
missing class. You can also join the Student Loan Scam Facebook group.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/288819.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/287096.html","pubDate":"Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:26:24 GMT","title":"More from Atwood","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/287096.html","description":"Atwood takes questions from Canadian voters.<\/i>
The see the whole interview, go here:
http:\/\/www.theglobeandmail.com\/servlet\/story\/RTGAM.20081006.watwoodlive1007\/BNStory\/specialComment\/home\/?pageRequested=1<\/a>



Globe and Mail Update:<\/b> More from Margaret Atwood.
October 6, 2008 at 8:27 PM EDT

One of Stephen Harper's most vocal critics this election campaign has been author Margaret Atwood, who took the Conservative Leader to task for his government's cuts to arts funding.

Brad Reddekopp from Hazelton, British Columbia Canada writes:<\/b> Muzzling the artist is not the same as declining to fund the artist. Why should art be dependent on my tax dollars? Are the artists not good enough to survive without my being coerced to pay for their efforts?

Margaret Atwood:<\/b> Dear Brad: Why should tax dollars be used as a prime-the-pump stratagem for the arts? (Because that's what happens -- a little in, a lot out.) Good question. Why do we fund education? Partly to create future earners. The arts brings 84-5-6-7 billion to the economy -- I've heard all these numbers -- and creates 1.1 million jobs. So your tax dollars are used to create more wealth in the economy. Like -- for instance -- subsidies and tax breaks for oil and for businesses of other kinds.

\"Good enough?\" Alas -- quality and dollar quantity, in art, are not joined at the hip. There's good art that makes money, bad art that makes money, good that doesn't, bad that doesn't. Van Gogh? Never made a dime in his life. Made multiple millions afterwards.

Dead artists -- the gift that keeps on giving!

...

Ron White from Calgary Canada writes:<\/b> Ms. Atwood, will all due respect, I don't think you have done your math homework. The cuts have been made to some programs so that funds could be allocated elsewhere and overall Arts funding has increased, not decreased. The math just does not support your questionable decision to support a separatist. Arts are important, but in my household they are a luxury, after the bills are paid; the same with sports. I expect my government to operate the same way...why don't you?

Margaret Atwood:<\/b> Dear Ron: Yes, I know that's what we're being told -- that \"overall funding\" has been increased, and that money has been \"re-allocated.\" But to where? Which shell is the pea actually under, in the shell game? Why has ALL support for artists travelling abroad to play Team World been cut? I'll say it again -- the arts generate 84-87 billion for the economy, and 1.1 million jobs. All those job-holders pay taxes. What I expect my government to do is to recognize the importance of that sector, the way it would if those were jobs in manufacturing -- not sneer and dismiss and portray these risk-taking and hard-working and mostly underpaid people as rich whiners who don't contribute anything. That just is not true.

What I really expect from my government is that they do their own math, accord due respect, and recognize where the tax dollars I pay to them actually come from. I agree that my supporting of a separatist in a swing riding that would otherwise go to a Harper Conservative is questionable. That's why I did it -- so people would question. They would realize that if I did this, I must feel very strongly about the danger of a Harper majority to democratic values. I'm not supporting the separatism part, but the respect for values I share. NB as a voter I'm a freelance -- I've voted for all 4 of the parties in my time, including Dief. And I thought Mr. Manning had some good ideas about accountability and openness and transparency. Too bad they are not embodied in the Harper government.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/287096.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286574.html","pubDate":"Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:57:33 GMT","title":"Atwood in the Globe and Mail","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286574.html","description":"Maggie Atwood explains it all for you<\/b>
Friday, September 26, 2008 at 11:12am
MARGARET ATWOOD
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
September 24, 2008

What sort of country do we want to live in? What sort of country do we already live in? What do we like? Who are we?

At present, we are a very creative country. For decades, we've been punching above our weight on the world stage - in writing, in popular music and in many other fields. Canada was once a cultural void on the world map, now it's a force. In addition, the arts are a large segment of our economy: The Conference Board estimates Canada's cultural sector generated $46-billion, or 3.8 per cent of Canada's GDP, in 2007. And, according to the Canada Council, in 2003-2004, the sector accounted for an \"estimated 600,000 jobs (roughly the same as agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, oil & gas and utilities combined).\"

But we've just been sent a signal by Prime Minister Stephen Harper that he gives not a toss for these facts. Tuesday, he told us that some group called \"ordinary people\" didn't care about something called \"the arts.\" His idea of \"the arts\" is a bunch of rich people gathering at galas whining about their grants. Well, I can count the number of moderately rich writers who live in Canada on the fingers of one hand: I'm one of them, and I'm no Warren Buffett. I don't whine about my grants because I don't get any grants. I whine about other grants - grants for young people, that may help them to turn into me, and thus pay to the federal and provincial governments the kinds of taxes I pay, and cover off the salaries of such as Mr. Harper. In fact, less than 10 per cent of writers actually make a living by their writing, however modest that living may be. They have other jobs. But people write, and want to write, and pack into creative writing classes, because they love this activity \u2013 not because they think they'll be millionaires.

Every single one of those people is an \"ordinary person.\" Mr. Harper's idea of an ordinary person is that of an envious hater without a scrap of artistic talent or creativity or curiosity, and no appreciation for anything that's attractive or beautiful. My idea of an ordinary person is quite different. Human beings are creative by nature. For millenniums we have been putting our creativity into our cultures - cultures with unique languages, architecture, religious ceremonies, dances, music, furnishings, textiles, clothing and special cuisines. \"Ordinary people\" pack into the cheap seats at concerts and fill theatres where operas are brought to them live. The total attendance for \"the arts\" in Canada in fact exceeds that for sports events. \"The arts\" are not a \"niche interest.\" They are part of being human.

Moreover, \"ordinary people\" are participants. They form book clubs and join classes of all kinds - painting, dancing, drawing, pottery, photography - for the sheer joy of it. They sing in choirs, church and other, and play in marching bands. Kids start garage bands and make their own videos and web art, and put their music on the Net, and draw their own graphic novels. \"Ordinary people\" have other outlets for their creativity, as well: Knitting and quilting have made comebacks; gardening is taken very seriously; the home woodworking shop is active. Add origami, costume design, egg decorating, flower arranging, and on and on ... Canadians, it seems, like making things, and they like appreciating things that are made.

They show their appreciation by contributing. Canadians of all ages volunteer in vast numbers for local and city museums, for their art galleries and for countless cultural festivals - I think immediately of the Chinese New Year and the Caribana festival in Toronto, but there are so many others. Literary festivals have sprung up all over the country - volunteers set them up and provide the food, and \"ordinary people\" will drag their lawn chairs into a field - as in Nova Scotia's Read by the Sea - in order to listen to writers both local and national read and discuss their work. Mr. Harper has signalled that as far as he is concerned, those millions of hours of volunteer activity are a waste of time. He holds them in contempt.

I suggest that considering the huge amount of energy we spend on creative activity, to be creative is \"ordinary.\" It is an age-long and normal human characteristic: All children are born creative. It's the lack of any appreciation of these activities that is not ordinary. Mr. Harper has demonstrated that he has no knowledge of, or respect for, the capacities and interests of \"ordinary people.\" He's the \"niche interest.\" Not us.

It's been suggested that Mr. Harper's disdain for the arts is not merely a result of ignorance or a tin ear - that it is \"ideologically motivated.\" Now, I wonder what could be meant by that? Mr. Harper has said quite rightly that people understand we ought to keep within a budget. But his own contribution to that budget has been to heave the Liberal-generated surplus overboard so we have nothing left for a rainy day, and now, in addition, he wants to jeopardize those 600,000 arts jobs and those billions of dollars they generate for Canadians. What's the idea here? That arts jobs should not exist because artists are naughty and might not vote for Mr. Harper? That Canadians ought not to make money from the wicked arts, but only from virtuous oil? That artists don't all live in one constituency, so who cares? Or is it that the majority of those arts jobs are located in Ontario and Quebec, and Mr. Harper is peeved at those provinces, and wants to increase his ongoing gutting of Ontario - $20-billion a year of Ontario taxpayers' money going out, a dribble grudgingly allowed back in - and spank Quebec for being so disobedient as not to appreciate his magnificence? He likes punishing, so maybe the arts-squashing is part of that: Whack the Heartland.

Or is it even worse? Every budding dictatorship begins by muzzling the artists, because they're a mouthy lot and they don't line up and salute very easily. Of course, you can always get some tame artists to design the uniforms and flags and the documentary about you, and so forth - the only kind of art you might need - but individual voices must be silenced, because there shall be only One Voice: Our Master's Voice. Maybe that's why Mr. Harper began by shutting down funding for our artists abroad. He didn't like the competition for media space.

The Conservative caucus has already learned that lesson. Rumour has it that Mr. Harper's idea of what sort of art you should hang on your wall was signalled by his removal of all pictures of previous Conservative prime ministers from their lobby room - including John A. and Dief the Chief - and their replacement by pictures of none other than Mr. Harper himself. History, it seems, is to begin with him. In communist countries, this used to be called the Cult of Personality. Mr. Harper is a guy who - rumour has it, again - tried to disband the student union in high school and then tried the same thing in college. Destiny is calling him, the way it called Qin Shi Huang, the Chinese emperor who burnt all records of the rulers before himself. It's an impulse that's been repeated many times since, the list is very long. Tear it down and level it flat, is the common motto. Then build a big statue of yourself. Now that would be Art!","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286574.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286068.html","pubDate":"Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:47:22 GMT","title":"The Republican Energy Drill","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286068.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/286068.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/284394.html","pubDate":"Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:04:46 GMT","title":"Death of Solzhenitsyn","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/284394.html","description":"Alexander Solzhenitsyn dies at 89<\/b>

Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who exposed Stalin's prison system in his novels and spent 20 years in exile, has died near Moscow at the age of 89.

Link: http:\/\/news.bbc.co.uk\/2\/hi\/europe\/7540038.stm<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/284394.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/281878.html","pubDate":"Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:51:08 GMT","title":"Hughes","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/281878.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/281878.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/274074.html","pubDate":"Wed, 26 Mar 2008 05:13:36 GMT","title":"MOM! [Comix]","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/274074.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/274074.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/271546.html","pubDate":"Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:30:27 GMT","title":"Temp Work","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/271546.html","description":"On Monday I start work for 30 days at the Ministry of Environment.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/271546.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/268711.html","pubDate":"Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:51:18 GMT","title":"Comic: !GO!","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/268711.html","description":"\"oh<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/268711.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/266437.html","pubDate":"Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:15:58 GMT","title":"Oh my goodness...","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/266437.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/266437.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261664.html","pubDate":"Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:56:26 GMT","title":"Why Do It: An Essay on Book Reviewing","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261664.html","description":"The battle, of course, is whether a critic should be evaluative in his criticism, or if she should be descriptive. I've fought this battle (pom-pom colour for my side: black, as in villain) with several journals over the years (you know who you are.) There are several critics out there (In the Canadian annals, Carmine Starnino comes to mind, David O'Meara is another. But two who write for the international press are Stephen Henighan and Lorna Jackson) who are able to give us what is given to them, who are able to interpret, who evaluate -- is the damn thing any good? Who cares if it 'ably describes a polar bear expedition in Alert'? -- who can be counted on to tell us their opinion, unvarnished. But there are a host more who have 'bought in' on the descriptive pyramid scheme, who can't separate the good from the bad because separation is unimportant, only documentation is important. It's a game of favours.<\/i>

from Shane Neilson's \"Why Do It: An Essay on Book Reviewing\":
http:\/\/www.northernpoetryreview.com\/essays\/shane-neilson\/why-do-it.html<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261664.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261244.html","pubDate":"Sat, 17 Nov 2007 08:30:09 GMT","title":"An Al Purdy poem on Bravo.","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261244.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/261244.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255808.html","pubDate":"Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:38:24 GMT","title":"Globe & Mail Article on Hyphens","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255808.html","description":"\"Bye-bye (or is it byebye?) to 16,000 silly hyphens\"
RUSSELL SMITH
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
October 11, 2007 at 1:35 AM EDT

In my position of great privilege, hyphens are one thing I never have to worry about. Oh, I have the explanatory pages marked in reference books, and there are many of them. My Editing Canadian English devotes 12 solid pages to compounds and how they are made, to the difference between a hyphen and an n-dash and a solidus (that's what commoners call a forward slash). My Oxford Dictionary for Writers And Editors has a separate entry for each compound, one for crossbill (a passerine bird) and one for cross-bill (a promissory note), one for cross-link (hyphen), crossmatch (one word) and cross section (two words). I don't have to learn all these words and exceptional cases; I don't even have to read them.

Why? Because this is one element of grammar I don't really consider to be grammar. It's not a question of grammar or even usage, it's a question of the rules created for the sake of consistency by individual organs and publishing houses, and each of these organs has a guide that tells you what to do in each case.

These rules are called, in publishing, strangely, \u201cstyle,\u201d as opposed to grammar. Different journals or institutions use different style guides, so it is pointless to try to stick to one. There is a person at each institution called a copy editor whose job it is to have this guide by his or her side and to change each writer's texts so that they conform to the rules. So I don't have to worry about them. It's like picking a typeface or a point size. Not my job.

And now I \u2013 and you, and all the copy editors \u2013 have to worry about these vagaries even less. That's because the new edition of The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary has done away with about 16,000 hyphens. The editors of the dictionary have decided, in an awesome display of ruthless language modification, that the conventions of hyphenation were arbitrary and needed simplification. They changed most of the hyphenated words \u2013 such as leap-frog and ice-cream \u2013 by turning them into one word (leapfrog) or two distinct words (ice cream).

There are many reasons for this, one of them being that the rules of hyphenation were just silly. The other is, of course, the slow elimination of punctuation that the digital age is necessitating. Electronic communication tends to be more streamlined: We use punctuation less, generally, in e-mails and text messages, and in advertising slogans.

Furthermore, as the editor of the dictionary admitted to a Reuters reporter, the world of letters is increasingly ruled by designers. Type looks so much prettier, so much slicker, when it is not prickly with hyphens. It's easier to lay out words in narrow columns, too, when they are easily separable.

Here are some examples of new compounds created by the editors: Pigeon-hole became pigeonhole, water-borne became waterborne and chick-pea became chickpea. And these words, formerly hyphenated, are now split in two: test tube, water bed, hobby horse. In many of these cases, the Oxford was merely catching up with usage: Waterborne, for example, is probably used by the majority of newspapers anyway. (But as if to prove how arbitrary this all is, the old Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors has long given waterbed as one word. Aren't these books published by the same company?)

Of course, the Shorter Oxford retained some hyphenated phrases to avoid ambiguity: They will permit the phrase \u201ctwenty-odd,\u201d meaning \u201capproximately twenty,\u201d because to say \u201ctwenty odd people\u201d has a somewhat different meaning. Copy editors love to give examples of the ways in which missing hyphens can cause confusion; perhaps the best-known example is \u201cused car salesman,\u201d which can be read in two ways unless you make a hyphenated compound out of \u201cused-car.\u201d The phrase \u201c50 year old kittens\u201d will also need a hyphen somewhere if it is to make any sense.

Okay, so what's the big deal? Will this mass cull of redundant hyphens affect the language in any way? Well, only by making it easier and a little more logical. It's an eminently sensible idea. The thing is \u2013 and it's been niggling at my mind since I read this \u2013 there are implications to this kind of top-down language ruling. Imagine if the Oxford had decided to simplify English spelling, or any of the other irrational aspects of English. People have been suggesting that dictionaries rationalize the language since the invention of dictionaries, and recently they have been steadfastly refusing to do so. Does this mean that dictionaries are taking a more interventionist role?

Actually, I don't think so; I think they're just realizing they were behind the times on this one. As the Oxford University Press style guide once said, \u201cIf you take hyphens seriously, you will surely go mad.\u201d (Or should that be styleguide?)


http:\/\/www.theglobeandmail.com\/servlet\/story\/RTGAM.20071011.wrussell1011\/BNStory\/Entertainment<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255808.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255296.html","pubDate":"Mon, 08 Oct 2007 01:58:17 GMT","title":"video","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255296.html","description":"

","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/255296.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/250928.html","pubDate":"Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:15:36 GMT","title":"Song of the Volga Boatmen","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/250928.html","description":"The Song of the Volga Boatmen is a traditional Russian piece. I love the tune. My favourite rendition, not available online, is Ivan Rebroff's version--complete with the dense sound of horses distantly approaching. Here are three versions in video.

Vibrant, varied voice:



The tune, done more simply, by a young pianist:



Done with great pomp by the Red Army Choir:



<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/250928.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/248651.html","pubDate":"Mon, 27 Aug 2007 01:47:58 GMT","title":"Dancing Videos","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/248651.html","description":"I have joined the Victoria group of Morris Border Dancers--this group is from Bowen Island, not too far:



I formerly did Old Time dancing. Here is a clip of two excellent dancers--the woman has ravishing, um.... carriage.



Points below for hall, music, technique, and personality:



And lastly, this endearing look at the folk dancing of a remote European people:
http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=McNl027LeZk<\/a>","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/248651.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/245524.html","pubDate":"Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:41:41 GMT","title":"Why Eating Organic Is Good","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/245524.html","description":"http:\/\/news.bbc.co.uk\/2\/hi\/science\/nature\/6904249.stm<\/a>

Sent by my friend Elliot.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/245524.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/243074.html","pubDate":"Wed, 06 Jun 2007 05:35:22 GMT","title":"IMPORTANT: changes for the Canada Arts Council","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/243074.html","description":"The Canada Council for the Arts will be experiencing some major changes. Many of these changes may be a result of pressure from the federal government. That is, from my perspective, destructive pressure. Please, even if you aren't an 'artist', consider reviewing the materials and responding to the survey. Note: the survey requires that you've read the Strategic Plan 2007.


---------------------------------

REMINDER

There are only two weeks left to complete the online survey for the Canada Council 2008-2011 strategic plan! To access Creating our future . . . An invitation to contribute to our strategic plan visit the Canada Council\u2019s web site at

http:\/\/www.50.canadacouncil.ca\/en\/consultation<\/a>

We would appreciate your reading the discussion paper and sending us your ideas and suggestions by June 15. Your opinion \u2013 and especially your responses to the questions in this paper \u2013 will inform and enrich the strategic plan and provide ideas and inspiration for the long-term development of the Council. The input from this survey will be compiled into a report by Hill Strategies Research and made available later this summer.

We also would like to request that you circulate this information. We would like to hear from anyone interested in the arts.

The Council\u2019s strategic plan will be developed over the summer and early fall, and will be reviewed by the board of the Canada Council during its 50th anniversary meeting in Montreal in October 2007. Once approved by the board, it will be released to the public and posted on the Council\u2019s web site.

We look forward to hearing from you.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/243074.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242726.html","pubDate":"Mon, 04 Jun 2007 05:42:34 GMT","title":"Entertainment","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242726.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242726.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242475.html","pubDate":"Tue, 29 May 2007 02:06:51 GMT","title":"Graphic! Work Safe!","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242475.html","description":"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/242475.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241739.html","pubDate":"Sat, 26 May 2007 00:00:52 GMT","title":"Note to Self:","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241739.html","description":"\"Buy a ticket for a seat on the clue train.\"","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241739.html?view=comments#comments"},{"guid":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241571.html","pubDate":"Tue, 22 May 2007 22:52:01 GMT","title":"Mort aux Chats, by Peter Porter","author":"ghareth_3","link":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241571.html","description":"Mort aux Chats<\/b>

There will be no more cats.
Cats spread infection,
Cats pollute the air,
Cats consume seven times
their own weight in food a week,
Cats were worshipped in
decadent societies (Egypt
and Ancient Rome); the Greeks
had no use for cats. Cats
sit down to pee (our scientists
have proved it). The copulation
of cats is harrowing; they
are unbearably fond of the moon.
Perhaps they are all right in
their own country but their
traditions are alien to ours.
Cats smell, they can't help it,
you notice it going upstairs.
Cats watch too much television,
they can sleep through storms,
they stabbed us in the back
last time. There have never been
any great artists who were cats.
They don't deserve a capital C
except at the beginning of a sentence.
I blame my headaches and my
plants dying on cats.
Our district is full of them,
property values are falling.
When I dream of God I see
a Massacre of Cats. Why
should they insist on their own
language and religion, who
needs to purr to make his point?
Death to all cats! The Rule
of Dogs shall last a thousand years!

-- Peter Porter

The rhetoric heard in Germany before WWII is an obvious source.","comments":"https:\/\/ghareth-3.livejournal.com\/241571.html?view=comments#comments"}]}}