(no subject)
1. Met with supervisor for the first time in six months, since I've been avoiding her to establish what we might call a home stretch timeline. If all goes to plan, I shall be Dr. pellucid by the end of March!!!
2. I've been giving in to my baser fic-writing urges and have nearly finished a draft of shippy Mac/Stella CSI: New York fic. I...have no idea what's gotten into me! Writing middling, mediocre fluffy relationship fic is pretty easy. Writing reasonably good fluffy relationship fic is much harder than it looks! I don't know if I'm there yet, but we'll see. And never fear, I'm pretty sure this is just a phase! ;)
While we're on the topic, however, if I've got flisters who are more familiar with the CSI: NY canon than I am (I've seen a handful of eps in seasons 4 and 5, and that's it) and might be willing to read this baby over for continuity at some point, would you mind letting me know? I've done my research, but it's entirely possible I'm missing things.
3. This is a week or two old and may have made the rounds by now, but I was quite impressed with this review of the BSG finale. It's long and detailed and quite scathing, though deservedly so. The reviewer places his emphases in different places than I would (for instance, stories about faith and religion are a bulletproof kink of mine, but I'm no happier with the deus ex machina ending of BSG than he is), but I think he's right on again and again. I also like the way he points out how easily it could have been massively more satisfying than it was.
I'm also mildly curious to know what whatshisface science advisor, who apparently thinks that anyone who didn't like the ending was a disappointed shipper who didn't get it (*vomits*), would think of a review like this, which has as its central point of contention that the narrative was ruined by adherence to bad science.
(Though I continue to get So Very Ragey at all the mainstream reviews of the finale that are all "here are the zillion reasons why it sucked, but there were at least a few nice moments, like the sweet ending for Adama and Roslin." Why am I one of only five people in the world who seems to think that marrying a corpse is CREEPY AND GROSS, OMG, and that the ending for those two characters RUINED what had formerly been one of the best relationships on the show?!?!?!?!? I suppose that must be my unpopular fannish opinion.)
4. Changing the subject, have a wonderful post about the relationship between food and healthcare and the money the US government spends on both: You Can't Fix Rising Healthcare Costs Without Fixing Food. Read beyond the initial graph which gives the false impression that the argument is going to be reductive to issues of obesity. It's far more cognizant of the complexities of the situation than that, and the article really focuses on the kind of food (and processed food-substitute products) that the government subsidizes versus the kind of food it ought to be subsidizing, the problem with a focus on calories and nutritional content rather than on the origins of food (such a focus, for instance, would suggest that water and Diet Coke are equally healthy, since they are both calorie-free, ignoring the fact that Diet Coke is comprised entirely of chemicals and isn't food at all), etc. Best of all, I think, Richardson has some concrete suggestions (including a couple of bills currently before Congress) that might at least make a dent in the problem. All very much in the vein of Michael Pollan and similar folks, but with more of a concrete policy side.
2. I've been giving in to my baser fic-writing urges and have nearly finished a draft of shippy Mac/Stella CSI: New York fic. I...have no idea what's gotten into me! Writing middling, mediocre fluffy relationship fic is pretty easy. Writing reasonably good fluffy relationship fic is much harder than it looks! I don't know if I'm there yet, but we'll see. And never fear, I'm pretty sure this is just a phase! ;)
While we're on the topic, however, if I've got flisters who are more familiar with the CSI: NY canon than I am (I've seen a handful of eps in seasons 4 and 5, and that's it) and might be willing to read this baby over for continuity at some point, would you mind letting me know? I've done my research, but it's entirely possible I'm missing things.
3. This is a week or two old and may have made the rounds by now, but I was quite impressed with this review of the BSG finale. It's long and detailed and quite scathing, though deservedly so. The reviewer places his emphases in different places than I would (for instance, stories about faith and religion are a bulletproof kink of mine, but I'm no happier with the deus ex machina ending of BSG than he is), but I think he's right on again and again. I also like the way he points out how easily it could have been massively more satisfying than it was.
I'm also mildly curious to know what whatshisface science advisor, who apparently thinks that anyone who didn't like the ending was a disappointed shipper who didn't get it (*vomits*), would think of a review like this, which has as its central point of contention that the narrative was ruined by adherence to bad science.
(Though I continue to get So Very Ragey at all the mainstream reviews of the finale that are all "here are the zillion reasons why it sucked, but there were at least a few nice moments, like the sweet ending for Adama and Roslin." Why am I one of only five people in the world who seems to think that marrying a corpse is CREEPY AND GROSS, OMG, and that the ending for those two characters RUINED what had formerly been one of the best relationships on the show?!?!?!?!? I suppose that must be my unpopular fannish opinion.)
4. Changing the subject, have a wonderful post about the relationship between food and healthcare and the money the US government spends on both: You Can't Fix Rising Healthcare Costs Without Fixing Food. Read beyond the initial graph which gives the false impression that the argument is going to be reductive to issues of obesity. It's far more cognizant of the complexities of the situation than that, and the article really focuses on the kind of food (and processed food-substitute products) that the government subsidizes versus the kind of food it ought to be subsidizing, the problem with a focus on calories and nutritional content rather than on the origins of food (such a focus, for instance, would suggest that water and Diet Coke are equally healthy, since they are both calorie-free, ignoring the fact that Diet Coke is comprised entirely of chemicals and isn't food at all), etc. Best of all, I think, Richardson has some concrete suggestions (including a couple of bills currently before Congress) that might at least make a dent in the problem. All very much in the vein of Michael Pollan and similar folks, but with more of a concrete policy side.