Toot, toot! Splash.

I’m currently reading Sea of Tranquility, by Emily St. John Mandel. I really enjoyed her book Station Eleven, which preceded Covid by over five years. The pandemic in Station Eleven, however, resulted in almost total devastation of civilization. Aren’t you glad she wasn’t more prescient? I wonder how nervous she got in 2020 when things started heating up.

A pandemic makes a cameo appearance in Sea of Tranquility, but primarily it’s a time travel novel. I tend to love time travel plots, and this one is shaping up to be really good.

But I have a bone to pick. A pretty big bone.

In the first section, one of our characters, a second-born son from Britain who’s a troublemaker with an allowance (“remittance”)—but no hopes of an inheritance—emigrates to Canada in 1912. After spending time in Halifax and Saskatchewan, he decides to take the train farther west.

Much farther west. All the way west to Victoria, in fact. Which is on an island. And cannot be reached by train.

The Professor and I have taken three ferries to Victoria. The Washington State ferry from Port Angeles, the high-speed Clipper from Seattle, and a BC Ferry from Vancouver.

We must have missed the bridge.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

I’ve missed me

I used to write a blog. I really enjoyed it, but then life got in the way. Even though the last post on it was eight and a half years ago, I never had the heart to take it down. I always intended to get back to it. And so I have, apparently.

In 2015, I was partway through a 10-year career as a private investigator, doing mostly criminal defense investigations, in the Seattle area.

In 2024, I am retired and living in New Mexico.

The Professor is still the same. The dogs, or at least two out of three, are different.

I still love to write. So I think it’s time.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hurry, while there’s still time

Yesterday, I got an email from my beloved alma mater, the University of Wisconsin. Subject line: “Hurry, while there’s still time.” I thought to myself, “Well, if there’s still time, why do I have to hurry?” Maybe the better statement would be

Relax. There’s still time.

We get near constant messages that we don’t do enough, that we need to pick up the pace. Go the speed limit, I just dare you—you’ll be taking your life into your own hands.

I don’t accept this mindset. Or I should say, to the extent I find myself able, I attempt to reject this mindset. I choose unlikely moments to luxuriate in having plenty of time. I come to a truly complete stop at a stop sign and breathe in and out before I start back up. (I know, it’s practically un-American!) I let someone go ahead of me in line at the grocery store. When a harried restaurant server apologizes that my meal is taking a long time, I say, “That’s ok. I’m in no hurry.”

I must confess my own shortcomings, however. If not, the Professor might point out that I am often in a hurry, because I wasn’t in a hurry. I have a way of dawdling until I’m almost late. My ex once said, “Are you listening to yourself?” after I had uttered the sentence, “Hurry up so we don’t have to rush.”

Last Saturday, the Professor and I toured the Georgetown Steam Plant in Seattle. It’s an electricity-generating facility that was built in 1906. I’m interested too, but the Professor especially likes what she calls “industrial tourism.” We’ve done the county waste treatment facility tour. We’ve been to the Hanford nuclear facility. We’ve done three electricity plants, the last two (believe it or not) in the past six weeks! The other was the Museu da Electricidade in Lisbon.

The reason I bring it up is that the plant was designed by Frank Gilbreth, best known for his time and motion studies. These studies broke down tasks into minute movements, then attempted to discover the most efficient way possible to perform those tasks by using the fewest movements and standardizing each worker’s performance of them. To many, though, his method’s greatest accomplishment was, rather than efficiency, the grinding down of workers in body and spirit, and the creation of a great deal of stress and injury caused by repetitive motion.

Which brings us to Doris Day, 1957. The Pajama Game was a movie adaptation of a popular Broadway play of the same name. We performed the show when I was a junior in high school. One of the songs, “Racing with the Clock,” is about this very topic—only much more entertaining than the studies themselves. (Also, I’m relatively certain that adding choreography to a task cuts down on efficiency considerably.)

So breathe, relax, refuse to hurry, and opt not to race with the clock. But first, hurry—watch this clip! Only 1:41, less than two minutes. I’m sure you have time.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments


It is not very likely that you should be who you are. Say you were born at 2:42 p.m. on March 20th, 1958, to a plumber dad and a stay-at-home mom, in Tallahassee. How likely is that? Not very. It is equally unlikely that you might have been anyone else in the universe. Infinitesimally unlikely, in fact. Because how likely is it that you might have been born at 11:18 a.m. on July 21st, 1983, to a stay-at-home dad and a surgeon mom, in Stockholm? Not very.

By Stuart Miles at

Still, it is highly likely that SOMEONE would have ended up being you, or approximately you. It just happened to be you.

So go with it. Occupy that slot you got slid into. Squirm and wiggle. Fight. Turn that slot into something less narrow, deeper, more your shape. Some call this blooming where you are planted. I think maybe it’s just choosing to be.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

A review of Broken For You, by Stephanie Kallos

I wrote this rant for goodreads, but The Professor tells me it should also be a blog post. (She bosses me around. I like it.)

If you aren’t familiar with the book, this bookrags synopsis will give you enough context.

About halfway into this book, I thought it was a 4-star heading for 5. I liked the characters and thought the plot structure was coming together nicely. It was downhill from there. Things sort of unraveled and were only resolved by, as another goodreads reviewer wrote, a series of ridiculous coincidences. Deus ex machina, but more annoying.

SPOILERS – avert your eyes.
But what just ruined this book completely for me was the uber-unbelievable premise. I understand that as a young woman in 1946 Margaret might have been overwhelmed by the revelation of the nasty provenance of her collection. But it’s 50 years later! With her background and her knowledge and her apparently almost unlimited financial resources, it never occurred to her until a taxi happens by Paris’ Jewish archive and she looks out at it in a near-death haze, that there might be sufficient records to find the owners of at least some of those items? And even though the collection has been written about in arts and antiques journals–the Parisians were already familiar with it–no one has ever given her a jingle to suggest she might want to look into it, or to offer to look into it for her? And her best idea of how to deal with it is to smash it all up? And the local B’nai B’rith thinks this is a swell idea?

Years ago, I had a terrible falling out with a friend (we’ll call her Amy) (though her name was Jillian) who never spoke to me again. Our last communication came by way of a paper letter she sent me, full of meanness and invective. As a way of letting go, I burned it up, then used the ashes to write “I Love Amy” on a piece of paper. I don’t remember specifically, but I probably decorated it in some way as well. What I’m saying is, I understand the impulse to crush pain and to heal it by turning it into beauty. The difference? THE LETTER WAS MINE TO BURN. The very first instance–her wedding china–had Margaret breaking her own things. After that, it was all someone else’s.

Or let’s say nothing–not one piece!–could be identified through research. How about a little sale, with the proceeds going to a Holocaust museum, or hey, I know–the Paris Jewish archive! Or seeing whether any Jewish or Holocaust organizations might want the collection as a whole–it would make an incredible juxtaposition to the shoe display–can you imagine the power of that? Margaret’s character does not seem to have contemplated any of these ways of resolving the moral conundrum she was so unfairly strapped with. I know she has a brain tumor NOW, but what has she been thinking the last 50 years?

On her website, Stephanie Kallos mentions a local organization that has as one of its emphases, the idea of healing in the way described in the novel. Sounds great, as long as you’re breaking your own stuff. Read about them here:

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on A review of Broken For You, by Stephanie Kallos