Invested Vest
Well, after all the measuring frenzy to figure out where to start shaping the armholes of my vest, I took a look at the actual suggested measurements from the pattern (a novel idea?) and MY measurement was 2 full inches longer than what the pattern called for - something is very wrong here. I split the difference - we'll see how it goes. It did involve a bit of undoing, but I hate sweaters that are too long.
Also, I got a little carried away with the casting-off armhole shaping - "decrease 2 stitches at the start of the next 4 rows" ended up as decrease 4 stitches every row until you give your head a shake (only 2 rows thankfully). I had such a good time undoing my casting off - so very much fun.
I listened to Michael Enright interview Jane Fonda about her new book on CBC radio this morning - if anyone listened to this crappy interview I'd love to hear your opinion (I guess mine is pretty clear). I now see that it's so easy to interview someone... just keep asking the same stupid questions over and over, throw in some rhetorical questions until the person you are interviewing gets mad at you, and then ask the same old questions again. Arg....
Also, I got a little carried away with the casting-off armhole shaping - "decrease 2 stitches at the start of the next 4 rows" ended up as decrease 4 stitches every row until you give your head a shake (only 2 rows thankfully). I had such a good time undoing my casting off - so very much fun.
I listened to Michael Enright interview Jane Fonda about her new book on CBC radio this morning - if anyone listened to this crappy interview I'd love to hear your opinion (I guess mine is pretty clear). I now see that it's so easy to interview someone... just keep asking the same stupid questions over and over, throw in some rhetorical questions until the person you are interviewing gets mad at you, and then ask the same old questions again. Arg....
Sauce!
Cool - I'm very excited about vesty. Perhaps we should plan a knit evening sometime soon to get back into the groove of the knit!
I have to say, that my mom says the same thing about Michael Enright, so I guess this isn't a reflection of his style of interviewing in general. I was just lying in bed Sunday am saying "I can't believe this guy... this is awful".
The dirt: when Jane got really pissed was when he said this to her, (paraphrasing) "some of the passages in your book were the sort of thing you only usually see in the tabloids at the checkout counter". Now, I haven't read the book, so maybe that's true. I guess there are some pretty racey parts of the book, but according to her, the point of telling the story in this level of detail was to serve as a lesson to young girls to learn from her - that she did alot of shitty things (including some three-ways with other women and her then husband) that she feel betrayed her true self, all in the name of pleasing him, instead of worrying about being true to herself. It seems her book, aside from being an autobio also has (based on what she said in this interview) a "be true to yourself" message.
What I found most irritating in general about the interview was that he would also often ask her questions that she just spent 5 minutes answering. My favorite: she spent a good 5 minutes talking about the old days as an anti-war protestor, and how she thinks she really felt she had to go over the top (be super radical) to try and get away from people's pre-conceived idea of her from Barbarella in particular)and take her seriously. Right after that whole dialogue finishes he says "so... did you feel you had to go over the top...(repeats everything she just said)". She replies "I just finished saying that". What else can you say?
There's a good chance the book's not that great, so maybe he wasn't that interested, and therefore couldn't ask very thought provoking questions. I am in general not a big fan of "tell-all" autobiographies, so, for getting so mad about it, I doubt I'll actually read it. Funny. End of rant.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Weird - I wanted to edit the last post I made (from "I didn't read the interview" to "I didn't hear the interview" - simple typo.) and the only way was to delete it. Stupid thing. Here's my edited post...
Can I add my own CBC rant? Every morning I'm enraged by Marcus and stupid Ruth. They blather on about ridiculous things... Why don't they just put Barry Mercer on there full time? He's so suave and relaxing to listen to, especially in the am.
As far as the interview, I didn't hear it, but I hate interviewers that seem to be reading from their script. They ask a question, then don't listen at all to what the interviewee is saying. Then, whether it's been discussed or not, they just go to the next question. I also get frustrated with interviewers who are just trying to make themselves look smart by asking "THE TOUGH QUESTIONS" - I think there's an art to exposing a difficult truth without seeming like an arrogant ass.
The one thing I also failed to mention was that M.E. was back-peddling SO fast after he made that analogy to tabloid news, and realized how miffed Jane was. She kept saying that she really didn't feel her book was salacious (love that word) ... and then he would say "oh NO, I really didn't mean to imply it was...". I guess it was just a sloppy, not very well thought out question, sort of like the interview as a whole. I do wonder what the point was of them booking the interview with her at all, as it was pretty clear he wasn't that into it. She is in the middle of an official book tour, so her agent is probably just booking her like crazy. I'd love to think her agenda in writing this book is legit, I hope it is. I still doubt I'll read it though.