Posted on March 10, 2007
Last night Earl and I went to one of our favorite local restaurants, The Millennium Steak House in Niles, Michigan. I’d had a hunger for the rack of lamb, and we hadn’t been there in a long time.
Too long it seems, for in our absence the owners made some noticeable changes not only to the menu but to the one characteristic that set The Millennium apart from other dining establishments around here. For whatever reason, they have eliminated the delicious scoop of homemade sorbet each diner received between the starter course and the entrйe.
Earl had finished his onion soup while I had set half my salad to the side for later. He eats items one at a time, while I tend to mix and match. We sat a few minutes, waiting for the refreshing sorbet, when the server came by and said, “Your dinners will be up shortly.”
“What about the sorbet?” I asked.
“Oh, we stopped doing that about a month ago,” she replied.
“Why?”
“I don’t know.”
And she moved on before I could pursue it further.
In the grand scheme of things, most restaurants I visit don’t serve sorbet in the first place, so the meal at The Millennium was really not any less a dining experience in that sense. At the same time, I am saddened that this restaurant is just a little less special now. In fact, without the sorbet, my rack of lamb didn’t taste as special either.
I expressed my disappointment to the hostess as we were leaving. “Oh, yes,” she said, “we’ve had other diners comment on that too. I will let the owners know how you feel.”
That didn’t seem particularly encouraging, so this is a public request to the owners of The Millennium to bring back the sorbet.
See more 10 Minutes in category Changing Scene, Dining/Food
|
Posted on March 7, 2007
I recently ran across a website that publishes words used in general conversation but which have not attained dictionary status yet. It’s a great example of the fluidity of our language.
I offer some of the more appealing words here in the hope of encouraging others to pay attention to how language is expanded through splicing and dicing, through trial and error, and through new connections.
My favorite unword is “ginormous,” an adjective that means something is bigger than gigantic AND bigger than enormous. In its simplest form, it’s the superlative superlative for biggest. But then people don’t use big anymore, when they can use bigger words.
Another favorite unword is “awsometastic,” although I would prefer to spell it this way: “awesometastic.” It means something that is more than awesome and more than fantastic. Truthfully, I think both “awesome” and “fantastic” are overused, so I like splicing them into one word to save space and time. At the same time, maybe the entire list should be retired.
Then there is “confuzzled”: being confused and puzzled at the same time. And “gription,” meaning the purchase gained by friction; as in, “My car needs new tires because the old ones have lost their gription.”
I can agree that some of these words more than others are apt to appear in the next edition of Webster’s. At the same time, I’m pleased to see that American English is not a dead language; rather it’s one that is always expanding. Maybe there’ll be a word for that on the unword list someday.
See more 10 Minutes in category Things to Ponder, Writing
|
Posted on March 6, 2007
Shortly after Earl and I moved into our house in Michigan my friend Judi came to visit. She brought her camera and went around the house taking pictures, even though we were hardly settled in. A while later, a beautiful album arrived at our home.
I hadn’t looked at the album recently, but last night I came across it. The first photo shows me standing in our doorway waving, and I imagine Judi shot it just before she drove away.
What struck me most about the collection of photos is how much our house has changed in the almost seven years since Judi first came. That photo of me waving also shows the old walkway to the front door and the old bushes, both of which have been replaced since then.
The interior shots reveal the former owners’ color choices, as we hadn’t begun to paint the inside yet. Except for our master bedroom, which I had already painted an ungodly shade of pink. It wasn’t on purpose, but that’s how we discovered that the paint the previous owners used needed to be whited-out before we applied our own colors. I smile at that pink bedroom because we’ve already re-painted it to a more soothing grey-tan. In fact, we’ve repainted every room in the house.
A large green vase sits in the middle of the kitchen table. It was a purchase Judi talked me into when we went shopping in downtown St. Joe. “You’ve got to get that vase,” she said. So I did. She talked me into a lamp for the bedroom too, and there’s a picture of it as well.
This album is a treasure, because it reminds me of our progress in making the home our own. We can create a long list of changes we’ve implemented, but the visual reminder of some of them is much better. Thanks, Judi.
See more 10 Minutes in category Changing Scene, Nostalgia
|
Posted on March 5, 2007
I’m not sure of all the details. What I do know is that the ACE Hardware store down the road about three miles from our house closed shop last year and built a new facility much farther away. The former building remained empty until True Value decided to open a store there.
I’ve heard that the hardware stores have a personal feud, as they are owned by siblings who want to outdo the other. I can’t verify this, but if it’s true there could be an added factor in the mix. Either way, all I want is to buy water softener salt at a reasonable price, get paint mixed without disappointment, and buy filters for the furnace and the dryer with ease.
The new True Value hardware store opened this morning, and Earl went there to reconnoiter. He introduced himself to the new owners, but beyond that I don’t know what he said. I’ve heard True Value wants to cater to contractors, which seems like a good strategy given our neighborhood is abuzz with residential building. So where does that leave the homeowner? I’m not sure.
The truth is, I’m fickle. I loved the ACE store and was sad to see it depart. I felt sold out. But if True Value has what I want, I may go there instead of visiting the new ACE. I realize that my decision has no bearing on either company’s business plan.
I’m also reminded of the time, about four years ago, that six supermarkets opened within a two mile radius of each other. I wondered if each could survive, and in the end only three did: Martin’s, Harding’s, and Meijer. The others, as they say, are history. We’ll have to wait and watch if fifty percent of the hardware stores will stay intact. I’ll keep you posted.
See more 10 Minutes in category Small Town Life
|
Posted on March 4, 2007
This past week Earl and I, along with his daughter and son-in-law, went to the Saugatuck Brewing Company — about an hour from our house — to redeem Earl’s birthday gift certificate. Now maybe you’re thinking we went to drink beer, but the reality is we went to make our own microbrew. After sampling various options the brewery offered, Earl chose a dark Porter; and a staff member at SBC pulled out the recipe on a well-used sheet of paper.
It’s quite a process, almost akin to those scientific experiments we did in high school chemistry . . . only more fun. For four hours, we weighed and measured grains, steeped water, and added yeast into a huge container that you stir with paddles the size of small oars. In between steps, we ate pizza and reminisced about how Earl’s dad made his own beer for his wedding in the 1930s. It was a sweet, sentimental evening.
At the end, the beer was poured into a plastic container to ferment. This takes about two weeks, when we’ll return to bottle our own– hopefully — delicious brew. In the meantime I’m reminded of a saying that is attributed to Benjamin Franklin: “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.”
We’re going to end up with about sixty 22 ounce bottles of beer, so I’m hopeful we’ll be very, very happy. To learn more about this unique experience, go to www.sbrewing.com.
Posted on March 1, 2007
I’ve been visiting hair salons for years, but I still don’t communicate well with the person who cuts my hair. It doesn’t matter if he or she is called a hairdresser, a stylist, or just a plain old barber. And it doesn’t matter how long I go to the same person. We don’t talk the same language.
For instance, I’ve learned the word “cut’ shouldn’t be used as a generic term for anything related to hair and scissors. It has a very specific meaning. When you say “cut” to hairdressers, this is tantamount to giving them complete license to remove almost every strand of hair from your head. If you had something else in mind, then you should use words like “trim,” “just shape it up,” or “clean up the split ends.” You can even try the ruler approach, as in “Just trim an inch off the bottom.” But never say “an inch or so . . .” because “or so” is a very large amount; and the hairdresser will opt for that over the inch.
The same goes for getting a permanent. If you don’t want to look like Little Orphan Annie, be sure to specify a body wave. But don’t ever just say, “I think I’d like it curly.” And if you want a few highlights to lighten your locks, emphasize “few,” or prepare for a totally different look.
Then there’s the issue of a little. As in, “Just a little hairspray, please.” My definition is a quick, once over squirt with the can or bottle. My hairdresser’s interpretation is to use just one bottle.
Maybe hairdressers are frustrated. After all, they went to school to learn how to style hair. They are considered the professionals; yet, they often have to do just what the customer wants whether it’s an attractive style or not. Dentists don’t really have this problem; neither do cardiac surgeons. But I’d wager that if the stylist and the customer could come to some common agreement regarding the meaning of such terms as trim, layer, highlight, and shape, both would be happier.
See more 10 Minutes in category Annoyances
|
Posted on February 25, 2007
Earl reminded me this morning that Christmas is just ten months away. Not that I needed or wanted reminding, but he enjoys the holiday so much that the countdown for next year always begins on December 26.
“Want to know how many weeks and days, as well as months, are left?” he asked me. “No thank you,” I said. And he looked sad. Nevertheless, Christmas will come in its due time.
As for the Oscars, tonight is that due time. At eight-thirty in St. Joseph, Michigan, Hollywood will begin its annual homage to itself. By then, the red carpet will have already been trodden with the famous, the near-famous, and the wannabee famous. And it will be time for Ellen deGeneres to take the stage as Mistress of Ceremonies.
Some things are certain: There will be an opening number that lacks verve. Ellen will attempt to make witty comments and political jokes. There will be poor choices for couture among the guests. The acceptance speeches will be beneath anyone who makes his or her living in front of the public. I mean if you’re an actor, shouldn’t you be able to stand in front of an audience and say something admirable and creative?
But then, movie actors mouth other people’s words. Which makes me wonder if they can’t think on their own when the situation calls for it.
Why do you watch, you might ask, since you’re so critical. Well, I’m a curious devotee of award shows; I watch the round of shows — Oscar, Emmy, Obie, Tony, SAG, you name it — every year to critique and analyze. Even to learn. It’s probably not why most people watch, but then most people probably don’t have someone in their lives to remind them that Christmas is ten months from today.
It may not seem relevant, but I bet that when Oscar night is over, there are actors and actresses out there who say the same thing about this award night.
See more 10 Minutes in category Special Events
|
Posted on February 21, 2007
I am clear that talk shows have great appeal, but I am equally unclear regarding their intellectual value. I’m not sure what is gained by hours and hours of opinion thrown at the public in the guise of informed conversation.
This may show my bias, but I remember when there were fewer talk shows and the host was not necessarily a personality in his or her own right. He was merely a conduit whereby various authorities on the topic of the day were able to offer informed opinions. Often these authorities had done extensive research or committed their life’s professional career to the study of the topic at hand. They had credentials.
Back then, people like host Dick Cavett might have determined the topic of the day, but he brought authorities on the show to present credible information. It was the host’s job to ask relevant questions that enabled the authority to shed light on a specific subject. Today, the host of a talk show offers his own opinion as the authority, whether it is about child pornography or Anna Nicole Smith’s unusual life and death. If he has credible guests, he belittles their point of view when it doesn’t match his.
In addition, many talk shows have call-in components, where Joe in Alaska calls to say he thinks steroids should be banned in sports and Nick in Mississippi says interracial marriage is against God’s will. I respect that both Joe and Nick are entitled to their opinions, but that doesn’t make them authorities on the subject. Rather Joe and Nick become flashpoints for the host who then reiterates his own point of view. Unwittingly these call-in members of the audience help promote the host instead of promoting an intellectual discussion of the topic.
I suspect we’ll never go back to the way it was. I only hope there are enough people out there who can discern the difference between fact based on study and opinion based on nothing but opinion.
See more 10 Minutes in category Annoyances, Things to Ponder
|
Posted on February 20, 2007
Last week the junior senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, became the latest candidate to announce he’s running for president. It drove me crazy. Not because he’s unqualified. That remains to be seen. Not because he’s an African American. That’s irrelevant to me. Not because he’s inexperienced at the national level. So was Abraham Lincoln.
What maddened me is that the next presidential election is twenty-two months away and the inauguration is even further. Our current President, as much as I don’t like him, is still in office; if wannabees start filling the airwaves with their promises, what progress will Congress make in the almost two years left before we go to the polls?
This is just one on my list of concerns. I’m concerned that the media will focus on the possible next president instead of the current one. I’m concerned that it should take almost two years of campaigning to obtain the office. I’m concerned about funding. And, finally, I’m concerned about negative campaigning.
To address these issues, I’d like to see legislation that limits the time, the energy, and the money expended on achieving an elected office. To me, this would level the clichйd playing field because each candidate would have the same amount of time to convince voters of his or her leadership; the same cap on monies to be spent; and — please God — the obligation to create advertising that said what the candidate stood for and not what the opponent did wrong.
This approach has the potential of opening the field of candidates beyond those with time on their hands, deep pockets, and a penchant toward criticism before personal performance. Does anybody out there agree? Email me at anne@annebrandt.com.
I’ll report on your feedback.
See more 10 Minutes in category Politics
|
Posted on February 17, 2007
Remember the hue and cry over New Year’s Eve 1999, when government and corporations went to great lengths to make sure their computers could make the switch from 1999 to 2000 without crashing and burning? People everywhere spent hours and dollars backing up their systems in case of the Great Berserk-ness. Nothing, of course, really happened.
Now there’s a new scare, although it hasn’t received the press that Y2K did. This year, Daylight Saving Time goes into effect on March 11 instead of the usual first Sunday in April. At that time, we put all clocks ahead one hour to lengthen the evening daylight hours by stealing sixty minutes from the morning daylight hours.
Most likely there will be uncountable citizens who wake up on March 11 unaware that they’re late for church. This happens even when we change on the usual date. But the more serious ramifications are for industries that are particularly time-conscious. Like transportation. Unless changed, airlines and railroads could remain programmed to read the calendar wrong for another three weeks. This won’t make for great customer relations.
Bankers use time-stamping in a variety of transactions; so do cellphone manufacturers, computer programmers, radio and TV announcers, school administrators, payroll processors, bartenders (to know when to offer the Last Call), the list is endless. So I urge you at the very least to be aware of the situation. Then, on March 11 check all those dates you put in your computer’s calendar program to make sure you show up at the right time.
And, for an interesting take on the whole issue, go to http://webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/index.html.
