the promised weeklong entry (i know you care)

[hermionesviolin]

Comments

Jesus' geneology

[onwingsofeagles]

PB has given variations of that sermon with some frequency. He is big on the theme of "it is not by works that we are saved." I just reviewed the passage and not having done any scholarly reading lately, and it's been several years now since I've read the OT, David is the one who leaps to mind - always - as imperfect and yet still beloved by God. The last time I heard PB speak on this, I was disurbed because he said there are four women listed, and they are all "bad" in some way -- Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Mary. Or maybe I just was cranky that day. Tamar was raped, Rahad was a prostitute, Ruth was a foreigner, and Mary was a teenaged mom. I guess his point was that they were unlikely vessels for God (from a human point of view). But at the time I thought, yeah, and what about the men? Why ONLY trash the women? I may have been in a bad place

[speacechilde]

I'm trying not to interpret this as meaning i might not get into the seminar

i don't think the e-mail implies that you might not get in. it just sounds like another, less formal variety of the "seminar application" that's usually required. i wouldn't worry about it--besides, who wouldn't want you in their class? an intelligent and enthusiastic senior english major? she's be insane not to admit you. and she might be, but then, that's her problem, isn't it?

[hermionesviolin]

Mostly it felt like a follow-up to the piece of paper i'd already filled out, but "I'll turn the list of admitted students in to the registrar after I've heard from everyone." was making me nervous.

Thank you for your encouragement :)

[hedy]

It always surprises me that people don't have pavolvian reactions to the rosary (entry on art piece on the rosary in hillyer last semester here.

If you can wait until January 30, I'll so go with you to the tunnel bar.

[hermionesviolin]

Well those of us who aren't Catholic....

And i can totally wait until Jan uary 30.

pavlovian

[onwingsofeagles]

in a bad way? because?
my only associations are positive
(but then, not Catholic)

[hedy]

How did they do seymour's gender with W-W

[hermionesviolin]

??? W-W played the Dentist. But to answer the question generally, they didn't queer up the play any (though watching it i was realizing how gay-undertone-filled "Mushnink and Son" is), just had Smithies playing male roles convincingly (the Smithie playing Seymour looked nigh on trans, though her bio in the program says "she" frequently, and it looks like the cast members wrote their own program blurbs).

[hedy]

quite. That was my question. I also had a moment yesterday when I was like masochist....oooh! masochism!

[hermionesviolin]

:) You know the masochistic patient is in the movie not the play.

[sarah_p]

Haaa! Just like you thought people were talking about LJ stars in my comments, I thought:

FINALLY met sarah_p. I was totally fearful that it wouldn't live up to my expectations

Was talking about ME, until I read the next bit. I was gonna say, if there were actual expectations for a meeting with me, I'd be WAY worried ;). It was fun, though! And you're fun, and you're who I thought you were (oh, thank GOD), and all was good.

Plus, I got a pimp. Wooohooo! :)

[hermionesviolin]

My first reaction to this comment was "Damn, you actually read that giant entry? I'm impressed."

It totally hadn't occurred to me that that line could have been construed that way, though it's obvious now that you point it out. There weren't actual expectations involved in meeting you, just relief that we finally managed it and now i know who you are (and you're certain of who i am) so we can greet each other if we pass on campus and so on. And you got to see my cute new haircut :)

And yes, ficathon pimpage. Proof that i'm insane i may end up doing all off them after all. ::shoots evil glares in the direction of your enabler-ness::