The official site of Kelly Sedinger: Reader, writer, photographer, and dreamer
It’s basically American Idol with food, which is fine, because Hell’s Kitchen is basically The Apprentice with food.
Oh, and another quick thought: I’d like to go on this show, if only because when I got in there to cook, I’d whack that bald bearded dork with a frying pan and then say, “Sorry, fellas, that’s all I got. I just wanted to clock this guy with a pan.”
I loathe people who act as though they’ve just descended from Mt. Olympus.
Notes on Hell’s Kitchen. Spoilers, so highlight to read:
:: Ahhh, the “taste it and make it” challenge.
:: I didn’t think I could loathe Benjamin any more than I already did going into this episode, but damned if he didn’t manage to sink below that bar for the ninth or tenth consecutive week! I cannot stand this guy. Hate him. His constant baby-act “I shoulda won! I’m a better cook and I have passion and that person doesn’t and wah wah waahhhhh!!!” is the most grating thing I’ve seen on a reality teevee program in…I can’t actually remember one.
:: I don’t believe his back injury. I think it’s a tantrum. I also think he senses that he is not going to win Hell’s Kitchen, so he is trying to set it up so that if he gets eliminated, he can point to his back injury. And believe me, I know that cooking in a kitchen is hard work, but there’s no way that what Ben does is physically harder than what I do for a living, and I’ve had to carry around ten-foot ladders and work power tools and hoist heavy items all over the place after I’ve thrown my back out before. You pop a bunch of ibuprofens and get right on working.
Last season’s winner, Dave, worked the entire season after breaking his wrist in the first week or two. Man up, Ben. Lose the way you deserve to.
:: Jay is irritating to me as well. He just is. On the one hand he’s head-over-heels for Holli, but then he cuts her down when he’s talking to Ben. What a putz. He’s a good cook and probably the most deserving chef there right now overall, but I just don’t like him all that much.
:: Oh look, Ben is suddenly OK to work. I’m going with my “passive-aggressive temper tantrum” and “excuse for almost-certain failure” hypotheses.
:: The chefs run the pass tonight. This is always fascinating, especially when he has the sous chefs sabotage them to see if they catch the stunts.
:: Jay did the best up there; Holli recovered quickly from early jitters and only missed one of her quality checks, which came from an erroneous ticket put in by Jean-Philippe. Ben missed two. But Ben is a genius! He’s the only cook who can beat Jay! Asshole. And Autumn? God in Heaven, is she annoying.
:: Ben was sure quick on his feet. As noted above, I’ve hurt my back before, and while you can move around with effort if you’re determined, you are not that quick. I’m still thinking “Liar liar, Ramsay’s gonna set your portrait on fire”.
:: Please…eliminate Ben…eliminate Ben…eliminate Ben….
:: Autumn finally goes. About time. I think she managed to get this far by never being as bad as someone else. (I liked her little dig at Ben: “I never quit.”)
:: Second one…please give Ben the boot. Please oh please oh please.
:: YAY!!! At long, long last! Benjamin’s an arrogant, sexist douche. And I love the look on his face as he hands in his jacket.
:: Go Holli!!!
There’s something I’m seeing linked all over the place called the “Modesty Survey”, in which (as I understand it) Christian boys are presented with statements regarding how women should dress, and doing the agree-disagree thing. As in, “Any shorts that are shorter than mid-thigh are immodest” and “Fishnet stockings are a stumbling block”. It’s all, I dunno, kind of odd, but there really is a population of folks out there who think that women should dress as cast extras on Little House on the Prairie or in Witness, and it’s always interesting to see their thoughts.
But of particular interest to me was — you guessed it! — the survey thoughts on this statement: Overalls are modest as long as a modest shirt is worn underneath.
That cracks me up. It really does. The survey results actually fell on the “Agreement” side by a wide margin, so if you’re looking to be “Modest”, ladies, just put on your modest shirt under your modest overalls and go forth and be modest!
The text comments on this statement, though, cracked me up:
Overalls are usually very modest and if a modest shirt is underneath then it’s not a problem for me.
Apparently a 13-year-old wrote that one. I’m glad we’ve established what women can wear so as not to give a 13-year-old certain needs, if you know what I mean.
From an 18-year-old: I agree, however, be sure the overalls come up past your chest, rather than sitting on top. For a girl who has a large bust, overalls are a bad idea, even with a modest shirt.
Now that’s just sheer nonsense, to the extent that I can even understand it. They should “come up past your chest”? Is this kid suggesting that the bib should scratch a woman’s chin?
And then there’s this 23-year-old, who is putting a tad too much thought into this: And as long as they’re not baggy, leaving a large, “horizontal” gap between the overalls and the shirt on the side at the waist, and as long as the bib terminates above the middle of the bust.
Good Lord. For proper wearing of overalls, a woman must calculate her ideal Bib Termination Point.
A 21-year-old opines: It would depend on the situation, but in public, a girl is overalls is looking for attention.
Oh, go have a beer, will you? You’re old enough now. It’s always such a treat to see the “But she was asking for it! Why else would she dress that way!” line of thought in action.
A not-unreasonable 18-year-old adds: Yes. Overalls are not tight, so that helps. The only thing I’d add is that they generally aren’t very feminine.
Yeah…so? What makes them feminine is what’s underneath, and their shape.
Here’s a 19-year-old who apparently has trouble looking upon a woman’s bust: Actually, if the straps come down too far, they can be pretty provocative by drawing attention to the bust.
A 25-year-old thinks: From a front profile they are fine. From the side profile, however, they are very suggestive especially if the shirt worn underneath is quite tight, which accent the curves of the bust.
I can see this guy on a date with a girl who is wearing overalls: “Oh Johnny, I’m having a good time, but why do you insist on facing me directly every place we go? Can’t we walk beside each other?”
“Sorry, Susie, but no. When I am beside you, I can see the curvature of your bust. And then I get a strange feeling, you know.”
Of course, this fellow is actually entirely correct, in a way; one thing I love about overalls on women is the way they obscure body features from certain angles and are more revealing from others. But that’s a feature, man! Not a bug!
Feature!
A 16-year-old gets the final word: Overalls still tend to show a girl’s figure, no matter how loose-fitting. However, they are more modest than regular jeans and having a modest shirt underneath is definitely helpful.
Well, thank God for that. A “modest” shirt is helpful. Helpful to whom, you ask? Why, all those men who might behold that lovely girl in overalls, see her figure, and be driven to a life of indulging sexual appetites. And we just can’t have that, now can we!
Oh, how I wish we’d get beyond all this “modesty” crap and see the human body for the source of beauty that it really is!
Linkage! To return to an older MO of mine for these posts, all of these links are from blogs on Roger‘s blogroll. Enjoy!
:: My powers are to mime out stuff and make bad guys go away. I have a motorbike and a plane.
:: So it’s a replica…of the Sonic Screwdriver…that’s actually a screwdriver. Whoaaaa…far out, man.
More next week.
As always, via Sunday Stealing:
1. Was your dad named after anyone?
His own father. To differentiate, his parents called him at home by his middle name (Thomas, or Tom). So my grandmother would occasionally brag, as mothers do, about her son, Tom. Which meant that when my father (first name Harry) misbehaved in school, the teachers would say, “Why can’t you be like your brother Tom?”
2. What do you think is the minimal age to get married?
I think that we need to decide what the minimum age is for all the same stuff: voting, drinking, driving, marriage, military service, et cetera. I tend to favor 18, but that’s just me.
3. What’s the longest time that you‘ve been involved with the same person?
The Wife. Nineteen-and-a-half years and counting.
4. What actor/actress do you consider hot at the moment?
Stana Katic (Detective Kate Beckett on Castle). Also Robin Tunney (Agent Teresa Lisbon on The Mentalist).
5. What is your favorite album by a band?
Can’t name just one, so here’s a random one I like: Brothers In Arms by Dire Straits.
6. What is your favorite album by an individual artist?
Frank Sinatra Sings for Only the Lonely.
7. What is something that you‘d rather be a bit dirty?
Little House on the Prairie. Did it ever traumatize Mary and Laura and Carrie when they realized what those sounds were? The ones that came from Pa and Ma’s bed, which was right down that six-foot stepladder from their own?
8. What was the last TV show that you watched?
The Simpsons is on as I write this, although I’m not paying a lot of attention.
9. How many people have you met from the blogosphere? Who are they?
A dozen or so, maybe a few more. All of them are Buffalo locals. (There are others I knew in person before Blogistan.)
10. What’s your philosophy on life?
“Keep smiling, because you never know what life will throw in your face next!”
That, and: “Boldly go.”
Oh, and: “Never go in with a Sicilian when Death is on the line!”
11. Do you think prescription drugs are over prescribed?
Maybe? I don’t really have an educated view to offer on this, actually. I know people who are one lots of meds, but I have no confident basis as to whether I think they’re on too many meds.
12. Would you keep a secret from me if you thought it was in my best interest?
Sure, unless I don’t like you much, in which case I’d reveal the secret and watch the carnage!
13. What is your favorite memory in the last year?
Good times with The Wife and The Daughter.
14. What is your favorite guilty pleasure?
Watching movies with a big bowl of popcorn (from the popper, mind you).
15. Tell me one odd/interesting fact about you:
I can’t roll my R‘s. Never been able to. (Which meant that I couldn’t flutter-tongue on my trumpet, either. That inability occasionally proved inconvenient.)
16. You can have three wishes (for yourself, so forget all the ‘world peace etc’ malarky) – what are they?
Enough money to comfortably live for life, a house with an enormous room for books and a big shed for a workshop, and for a nice large car that still gets at least 40 mph, if not more.
17. Who would you want to get together with and make a cake?
Is “make a cake” some kind of dirty euphemism? I like cooking things with The Wife.
18. Which country is your spiritual home?
This one.
19. What is your big weakness?
My sweet tooth.
20. Do you think Judd Corizan is a good person?
Who?
21. What was your best/favorite subject at school?
Music, history, and English.
22. Describe your accent:
It lulls you into a false sense of security.
23. If you could change anything about yourself, would you?
I’d take off some weight.
24. What do you wear to sleep?
Errr….
25. What is your favorite casual outfit to wear?
Bib overalls, of course.
26. Do you use cigarettes or alcohol?
Cigarettes, no. Alcohol, yes. (I’ve never even tried a cigarette; the only smoking I’ve ever done was two cigars that were given to me years ago by co-workers who had babies.)
27. If I only had one day to live, what would we do together? (If you have no idea, just say something crazy, it’ll entertain me!)
Well, we’d get a tub of Cool-Whip, and then we’d….
28. Rate the memes that you play generally. Use any scale or just in order.
I only check ’em out and see if I want to do them, so no ranking here. I do find Sunday Stealing the most consistent, though; others tend to have quizzes that make me think, “Yeesh, who came up with that….”
I wasn’t online much the last few days, so I didn’t see anything myself that seemed utterly weird and goofy, but rather than just leave this post empty of content (any moreso than usual), I’ll simply cull a few links from Neatorama.
:: High school sweethearts reunite after 62 years apart.
:: Excellent Comic-Con costumes.
Oh, and I found this someplace else (but I don’t remember where). It’s the destruction of a front-loading washing machine. Make sure to watch until the end:
More next week!
We all know that newspapers are slowly dying away, their readership and functions taken over by new modes of media and news propagation. But it’s always interesting to behold the physical manifestation of newspaper decay. Case in point: the front page of today’s Buffalo News. Here it is:
What’s wrong with this? Well, here’s a list of stuff I spotted off the top of my head when I opened up the paper this morning:
1. The upper half of the above-the-fold section is taken up by the paper’s logo, a giant banner indicating the locations of other stories, and the self-congratulatory “Paper of Distinction” thing at the top.
2. Below the fold, we have an Index to the paper’s sections that takes up, oh, one-fifth of the front page’s entire space. Below that, we have an enormous footer ad for a local health insurance company. I haven’t measured things out, but I’d say that there is almost one-half of the entire front page devoted to stuff that isn’t the news.
3. There are only four stories on the front page. Two deal with the same topic — an important local topic, to be sure, but do both related stories require front page real estate? Of the other two stories present on our front page, one covers some shenanigans by a local politician, and the other previews a book soon to come out by a prominent local citizen (who is only prominent because of who she is married to — Jim Kelly, the guy who retired thirteen years ago as the quarterback of our football team).
Four stories on the front page. That’s it. Four stories, covering three topics. Each topic is of local concern only, and one of those is a human interest story, not news.
National or world stories on the front page today? Zero.
(I am not saying that the News shouldn’t be covering those stories. I’m saying that not one of these seems to me important enough to be a front page story.)
4. Above the fold, we have just a single story. It’s pushed over to the right by a surprisingly large photograph which is almost certainly the first thing you’re looking at when you pick up the paper.
5. That photograph? Well, if you’re paying attention to current events, you know that’s Chelsea Clinton getting married. And you’d have to be paying attention to current events to know that, because the photo is not captioned. At all.
I could probably gripe some more — I find the News‘s regular habit of putting the total dollar amount of the coupons enclosed in all the advertising, right up there above the banner, highly odd — but that all is pretty illustrative, I think. We have a paper that focuses on pretty graphics, lots of colors, white space galore, and not a whole lot of news.
How fare your papers, readers?
A “future history” of a reboot of Star Wars:
April 2011 – George Lucas announces plans to reboot the Star Wars franchise with a new version of A New Hope.
Lucas promises that this will be a new vision recognising the enormous strides made in technology: 3D, extensive use of synthespians and a host of old and new characters.
The Internet immediately goes into meltdown, with Twitter’s fail whale on active duty. Meanwhile new website dontrapeourchildhoodagain.com goes live with remarkable speed.
Yeah, after the initial “George Lucas sucks” stuff, the feature takes us through a timeline of the making of the Star Wars reboot, which is written by…JJ Abrams.
That’s where I start to throw up a little in my mouth. I actually wouldn’t be totally opposed to Abrams directing a Star Wars movie, but I sure as hell don’t want him writing one. Ugh!
(Of course it’s all an entertaining hypothetical exercise…but I don’t want a reboot of Star Wars any more than I want the once-conceived sequel to Casablanca.)
The official site of Kelly Sedinger: Reader, writer, photographer, and dreamer
