That sly old red fox

Archaeologists recently found a red fox curled up with a human at a burial site in Jordon dated to some 16,000 years ago. According to the story, this demonstrates an emotional attachment between humans and foxes, and that "...several millennia before any animals were domesticated, humans may have been making an early attempt to keep pets. Red foxes, to be precise."

So where did the pet red fox become that archenemy of gingerbread everywhere, the "Sly Old Red Fox?" Wolves, I understand. They have teeth big enough to eat red-hooded girls. But foxes?

I took a gander at my trusty Webster's 9th. After describing the mammal, the second definition is " a clever crafty person." The verb form begins with "to trick by ingenuity or cunning, to outwit." If the fox was so trusted by humans, and according to the article, are among the easiest mammal to train, how did the red fox acquire such a devious reputation? And when did it become the "sly old red fox?"

More to come.

Pirates and Holmes?

Laurie R King, of whom I've already declared my undying love, has written a new book, The Pirate King, due out September, 2011. I could hardly contain my excitement. The Pirates of Penzance is quite a nice Guilbert & Sullivan operetta; combine this with a heretofore serious heroine, and the intrigue that follows her, and there is one amazing little number.

But I digress. More from the author herself (perhaps I should write 'the literary agent') is here. It is quite interesting how serious this 'literary agent' farce has been thus far; here, the story itself finally catches up.

Challenger Anniversary

Today, in 1986, the Challenger space shuttle exploded, with social studies teacher Christa McAuliffe on board. All because of the "o-ring." Do you remember hearing for weeks about an o-ring? I'm still not sure exactly what it is.

Our gym teacher had been a finalist, a fact that she had kept silent until the school assembly later that day. We watched the explosion on TV, although it took a few days to really understand what this all meant. A summary done by one better than I can be found here.

Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.

--Dwight D. Eisenhower

The New Deal hit the ground running, only to stumble under the fear that the financial burden was too great, and once put in the check the critics stepped aside and let the New Dealer work his job-creating-crisis-averting magic. Unlike today's critics, those critical of FDR wouldn't have dared to call Roosevelt unconstitutional. (See: "Criticism of Obama Mirrors That of FDR," by Elizabeth Tandy Shermer)

When did our elected officials forsake class for talking points?

Now what?

The new Congressional session about to begin, we are reminded about those seats lost because of the changes in counted populations. The 2010 census, which determine where the numbers necessitated more or fewer representatives, was not exactly representative. Not at all, in fact, when taking into account Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann's call to forget to be counted. Linking census to Japanese internment camps and the FBI? Really?

One must ask, if the Census helps represent the people, giving us power, those elected officials who called for people to ignore filling out their forms, well...whom do they really wish to represent? In another ten years, are we going to have to go through the same debate, to be counted or to refuse proper repsentation?

Just a thought.

Yes, but does it really make up for stealing?

This morning, whilst enjoying a (sadly) burnt espresso, I leafed through a copy of Cook's Source Magazine. You might remember this publication from the Great Internet Plagiarism Case of '10. Inside the front cover, where circulation information should be, there was an apology, declaration that the editors are changing their ways, and what appeared to be a rectification of the matter. An apple a day indeed.

This brings to mind the question of where intellectual property protection ends, and whether such protections exist once something has been put "out there." Did you hear the one about the American woman whose family photo ended up, unbeknownst to (and unauthorized by) them, as a supermarket window display in Prague. The woman, Danielle Smith, of Missouri, posted the photo on a blog (uh oh) and attached it to holiday e-mails. Ms Smith explains that it that had her friend not happened upon the ad whilst living in the Czech Republic capital, she would have had no idea that her family's image was being used.

They say publish or perish. I guess these days, it's possible to simultaneously do both.

My new love

Laurie R King, author extraordinaire, has done it again. Mind you, I read her books out of order, and out of sequence, but it doesn't matter. She's that good.

I just finished Folly, a stand alone novel, and A Grave Talent, and With Child, both of which feature Detective Kate Martinelli. In a week. I'm not an extremely fast reader, but her writing reels me in, letting me come up for air only after at least 2 hours have vanished into the abyss.

Those who know me well know of my decades-long love affair with Sherlock Holmes. (That it one-sided is of no consequence.) It was that very infatuation that got me hooked. Ms King's Mary Russell series was all I could think about until I devoured all 10 of the books. Sherlock Holmes is not an easy character to incorporate without overpowering any other main characters. Ms King does it so well. In looking at her site for this blog, I espied an 11th book. If ever a question arose about a gift, let it rise no further!