C. (Comment, never msg).’s Comments (group member since Jan 30, 2014)

C. (Comment, never msg).’s comments from the Gentle SPECTRUMS group.

It looks like Leanne goes into detail by chapter 5, so I will only add to the career and telephone subjects. Thank you both for starting with gusto! It was a productive bus trip, Leeanne. I am excited to open our book tonight.

I am hampered by the annoyances of a picky, small, one finger, virtual keyboard and will make it short until our landline phone, powering our landline internet, is back for our PC. Unacceptable news is that Bell doesn't seem to work on repairs evenings and week-ends and gave a shocking estimate; December 27! Telephone and internet are essential services, especially when living in the country!

This keyboard sucks and must only fill in, which I am grateful about, including for e-mail and business. Good news is that I have more internet data this month than the phone had suggested was left. That leaves the keyboard as the limit rather than internet allotment, thankfully.

With this information imparted, here is the conversation I can plunk out, in a separate message box.

My friends, I trust you know I prefer YOU to start conversations and suggest buddy-reading plans. Therefore, I am leaving this thread for you to open. Seeing a lot of posts gathered up, regardless of when I can join you, will be a treat.

I am finishing a Billy Crystal autobiography and have used too much cell phone data in one week. I might read your entries so keep typing them. After making this awkward typing and thread-making effort to tell you the gift it is to post last, please let no one dismiss it with "we could wait".

Leanne will be on a bus, we all need happy togetherness and happy, relaxing days, and tomorrow is our start date. As my beloved Dad had fun exclaiming for us children: "On your mark, get set, go"!!!! 🐈

It is okay Shirin and it is only me. What did your comparison of words I dislike mean? That people are different? I was unoffended; as I said, only asking. Cell phones are hard to type on. I look forward to using our PC on-line again.

I leave you to read the rest. While you typed this, I added much more to my book post. 👑

That is right: I do not understand what you were saying and ask you to clarify please. It sounded like you said I called Kerri odd, when I am very odd. That part is true, no problem! The debate is only on her book interpretation, never a remark about anyone personally. Was that your issue?

Agreed, we friends speak honestly, comfortable there is never anger. With our questions, we are seeking to understand. You already know I admire your linguistic bravery, grace, and intellect.

I asked both of you to prompt me on parts I forgot but have a strong memory for clues and information. Here is what I know, still using a data limited cell phone instead of our PC! The novel might have implied Maura was the Mom but she said Artemis was gone as soon as Blue was born. We also know Blue was born 18 years ago.

Maybe her capacity as a mirror sent Artemis away. Neeve was transported by a mirror but I don't know how that worked. Kerri suggested an adoption and that the three resemblances prove they are relatives. Agreed.

I don't see why Kerri thought Richard was put off by illigitimacy! He is a compassionate, modern sweetheart like his parents in 2014. He only disliked his hero punishing someone with extremeness. I don't think Richard is a child making up an ideal hero. He believes Glendower somehow communicated in compassion with him, after a hornet sting. His experience of him was of kindness.

Richard and Roger knew about Gwenllyn from history. It was no surprise, Kerri. I do not remember getting a reply to message 24. I thought it was skipped until you both were done the novel. You know I saved your fabulous reactions to the conclusion. I was replying in detail when our internet source broke; our town’s phone line. A week later, those jerks are starting to fix it today!

Yes indeed, the pace of many stories were slowed by details we didn’t want. I would like to have read a brief scene of Richard and Ronan finding out about Adam’s appointment and skipping school to join him. How did they evade teachers? It was suspenseful when Harry Potter and friends avoided teachers!

Although Blue should have updated Calla, she had permission she had not requested before to use their car. Calla had never paid attention to her and is not a Motherly figure. She gave Blue an excessively negative reaction. Everyone else used the communal car regularly. Blue merited a turn too.

What drove Noah bonkers? At Jessie's home we might think it was Gwenllyn’s unhappy vibes. He also went nuts at her university counselling (we do not say "college" in Canada). I don’t think Noah was with them in the cave nor know why not.

While I fill a bath, I will disprove the century believed fallacy that "The Turn Of The Screw" was unclear, or free for interpretation. Recognizing information is a mystery solver's bread & butter! I am not divulging story contents, only emphasizing facts in the introduction: the story's genre itself! It was an 1800s novella that began with a prologue.

Supper guests were asked if they want to hear a ghost story, considered extra scary for pertaining to two children. Their host said it was acceptable to tell something so sensitive as a ghost experience because the lady, whom he knew, had just gone. It was a fact. For 100 years, some readers tuned this out, or were misled by synopsis writers and academics who thought the crux and genre were vague.

This lady who was a governess briefly saw a man and woman in a window, from the driveway. She reported it to the head housekeeper, concerned about thieves. No one was there. When this housekeeping manager got their description, she was shocked that they sounded like dead employees.

The governess saw them a couple more times, the boy saw them, and his sister said she did not but acted as if she was lying. It is natural either way, for a child to block something uncomfortable or honestly not see a ghost. She was angry to be asked.

I suppose that confused unfocused readers long ago, into missing all that was written, with no question about it. Some readers wondered if the lady spooked herself into thinking she saw ghosts, or was unstable. That is an insulting outmoded perception of females and anyone who acknowledged the existence of ghosts until recent periods!

The lady did not have the paranormal in mind. Her report to the manager was seeing *people*. The other large point of evidence is this: you twist what was written to propose the woman was unwell and are in error to propose she thought of ghosts at all. Leave the book pages as they are and the answer is clear that she saw ghosts, unknown to her.

Do you see now, why questions about Artemis' sense of time and whatnot, feel like a tiring, needless stretch? He said Maura can't be Blue's Mom. l don't recall anyone saying he can't be her Dad but Maura DID belatedly tell her child that this was the truth. He vanished at her birth, she guessed he was trapped, and she found him. I caution questioning what we know. If Maggie created drama over a statement of surprise like you wonder about, it will be lame. If she adds a dimension to these novels that we enjoy, it will be impressive and emotional.

I'd enjoy your opinions on the things I asked last time. For example, do you like that Maggie skipped action details, Anne Perry style?

Do you feel sad Matthew is a guest on Earth instead of a native? I do.

In real news, please monitor Canada Post's strike on-line. You can see the status and send mail when it is over. I will be relieved to finish our private and group conversations thoroughly with both hands. Message 24 is well worth seeing anew, meanwhile. It has retained fun discussions that you both naturally, put aside while completing the novel.

Shirin, I don't understand why my neurological condition was mentioned, called misophonia. It is not about "disliking" certain sounds, as if it were deliberate. They are painful awhile afterwards, not only when they occurred, so I told you two friends about it at the beginning. I deleted those private revelations after you read them. Misophonia had no part in my recent posts.

I would not criticize anyone in a personal way. Literature wise, I think Kerri is stretching something that was stated plainly, the same as Noah telling readers he is a spirit. I suggested in friendly counterpoint, that we believe what is written unless Maggie shows us not to.

Power outages are serious and we understand anyone needs to save entertainment for when power is stable. In the country, we have well water that works with electricity. Power outages remove water access, a serious inconvenience.

I can't type anymore than this without our PC keyboard using landline internet. The best I can do to keep pleasant conversation going is ask you to reread message 24, where I think I posted my excitement of finishing our novel. It will be fun for you to see it now.

I *LOVE* both of your excited posts after you finished the whole story and will answer everything you wrote when our technology is restored on Monday. It is hard to type this much on a cell phone keypad, using one finger instead of trained professional typing using all ten fingers.

Shirin, I have no trouble among friends with my guesses being incorrect. Maybe these characters had little time to talk like Kerri said. I think it was lazy of an author to want us to believe no one peed or ate for years. Please never imagine I would disrespect either of you, or deem that my views were perfect. I don't understand what you were saying.

My review of an old story discusses a time when I am certain people missed what was written clearly: "The Turn Of The Screw". I wondered if this happened again but am obviously waiting for Maggie's resolution of Artemis' odd comment. We want Maura to be Blue's birth Mom, don't we? Kerri, I explained being unsure of hours has nothing to do with Maura updating Artemis about Blue - who was there for her pregnancy. She likely spoke awhile before being enchanted by the spider's door. I don't know if he spoke. In reality, I sure know that those who are unconscious hear us.

I wonder if you saw my points about Blue seeming as young and inexperienced as the age she knows she is: 18. If correct, she can't be the daughter of sleepers. She is not old. Perhaps she is related or reincarnated to the woman on Roger's flag. We learned from Gwenllyn that Artemis might be old but that is fine for having kids.

Do you consider Gwenllyn an underused, anticlimactic event? A live relative of the fabled Welsh king ought to be a startling plot turn; proof that the raven king is real, in Virginia like they thought. She validates for the questers that beings of 600 years can be suspended. Richard tried getting information but no one else exclaimed: "What a discovery"!

I wish I could type better. W eare going to another town to shop anyway. Look, I knew you would say exactly this, about being instantly frozen. I consistently feel that you are stretching this, not accepting the dialogue word for word. In any case, those words are evidence to the contrary. Artemis said "She can't be your Mom"; not "Wow, did you have a baby while I was away".

We need Shirin to remember Joe's death or to check the book. Your paste ended with the identical paragraph that did not include what we want to clarify. I am grateful for anything personal to read this morning! Thank you for you e-mail too, sweet friend.

Shirin, don't lose interest now that we can gush about everything together! Please reply to message #24, where I recorded my reaction and summaries of what each novel brought to the quest story. "The Raven King" is for answers!

Maggie skipped some details that I guess is okay. We don't know how Adam's pals discovered his court date or how Richard brought Calla to Jessie's place. I think Noah told him, after calming down from his freak-out, or Richard suggestebd they try that recent location. Detail after big events and to leisurely close stories with satisfaction are the areas of importance. Augmenting her afterglows was my sole critique of Anne Perry, whose later novels are longer.

Your revived animals in a cathedral cavern are two gorgeous, favourite quotes, Kerri. Before our phone line plopped out, they were replies I most looked forward to making. Along with Shirin finally enjoying my end of novel exclamations in the message I identified a couple of paragraohs ago.

Our landline, our source of internet, cut out before I was done my response. I am not going to peck out a full reply on a new cell phone I am learning to use.

To keep us moving, how did Joe's creature die and specifically kill Joe? I think Ronan's spider killed Joe's. Then that creature fell on Joe's car, while he was in it?

I had typed examples of Artemis' doubt or surprise being nonsense after two weeks in the cave with nothing to do but talk. Short reply is that you are reading too much into a plain statement.

Shirin, I don't think Neeve is evil; only seeing if Piper needed assistance after the rockslide.

Shirin, read message #24 now that you are finished. Let's compare our feelings of this experience! I am going to reply to your reactions too, which are wonderful.

Hello, my friends! You know the pile-on of not writing for a day because you had things to do, then returning to insightful, exciting posts. I was occupied again, then you both wrote more of your inspiring, enthusiastic updates. I took a trip to town and now am ready to write. Where to begin, with so much to say? I will follow the advice I give: start small. I don't need to write all of it today. Give us something to talk about and I can check that topic off of my list of great subjects to write about.

Help me clear up a detail about the previous novel. How did Joe Kavinski died? I think his creature died and fell on a car. Did the crash kill Joe? Did something different kill Joe, whose removal expired the creature? I ignore negative or superfluous characters. I hope Maggie did make an mistake. A dreamer should not die because their dreamed image did. They should be able to discard items or return them to Cabeswater.

One more bit of food for thought, before I dig into our principal subject. Do you remember why you did not react to Noah saying in response to being cold: "I have been dead for five years"? Did you read fast and miss it, or not take it seriously? I don't believe in stories being indirect, having hidden meanings or being symbolic. I like to follow the descriptions and dialogue on the pages. They should convey the story they are telling, even if we can relate big significance to it after. However, did you think it was a figure of speech?

In our present novel, no one is commenting on a big revelation Artemis made. You are wondering why a 600 year-old person could be Blue's Father. No one is reacting to this: Artemis told Blue "Maura can't be your Mother". I look forward to writing again.

Wow! Michael Bublé has won "The Voice", doubly! If you want a lot of firsts along with something rare and beautiful, try a Canadian!

This is the first time a Canadian has been a coach on the American hit show, so I had to tune in. It is in fact, the first time in a decade that I watched to the end. Usually, I tap out after team picking, because I like the banter of the coaches. I don't want to sit through anything else, not even song performances.

I love some of Blake Shelton's and Adam Levine's humour. Michael Bublé blended in unusual friendship and warmth with coaches Reba McEntire, Gwen Stefani, and Snoop Dogg and made this the funniest year! Goodness knows what Michael will be like with Adam Levine.

His first time on this show, two of Michael's artists made it to the top five finalists. He became the coach winner of "The Voice" before we knew the winning singer, because his two artists won first AND second place! I wonder if this is the first time any coach has triumphed this way.

Ask a Canadian and see the humanity and talent shine! In the voice of another fellow Canadian, Matthew Perry: "Could he ~BE~ any more amazing"!? Congratulations Michael, Sofronio, and Shye!

Yay, Shirin! Kerri is learning to talk about almost everything without spoiling. Yes, we are sneaking! When I am back, I want to talk about everything! We are making our drive shortly. Yesterday was for relaxing in unbelievably warm weather for December: +5 C by day and no freezing at night! Unheard of!

We put away some plants outside in the flowerbed who are finished growing, ready to retire. Because they have a little green of life in them, I wouldn't do this unless the temperature was good, so this was ideal. The above freezing weather also let me carry several ladybugs outside, often stuck in the house and sadly stepped on through the winter. They gather at the doors in the fall and I set them free every time I see them by a window by day, or lamp at night.

Your previous posts to these were also excellent: both you of entirely writing your thoughts and answering also a little. So many quotes and ideas exciting for me to read, that I will have so much fun answering you both and asking new questions tonight or tomorrow! Love, your friend, Carolyn.

One P.S. before bed. I arose with Ron this mornig so I would sleep early, after a little reading tonight. We are going to the city this week-end for Christmas shopping, new cell phones, and fun! I have not been to the city since we last visited my dear Dad in the hospital. It is time to enjoy an outing.

What we have posted will tide Shirin over long enough for her to read more. I copied Kerri's awesome reactions and will reply to them soon. A couple of short replies first, the less to write later.

Joe did not give Ronan any awakening or new ideas! The kid made inappropriate jokes about "being gay" because Ronan had close buddies. Like you do to any bigot, he was ignored. To shut Joe up, or because it was no big deal, Ronan finally revealed a bit to readers. His orientation was not new to him just because we read it for the first time. When Ronan said for the hundredth time "Richard is a close friend" and Joe challenged "You did not say you aren't gay"; Ronan simply replied, "No, I didn't".

A fun comment: I know about "Raven Boys" tarot cards. I have watched for a low price for two years, as a possible Christmas gift for Kerri. :-) I am uninterested in tarot and do not believe we need manufactured tools to read and sense the world around us. I knew Kerri was interested and would enjoy the memento of our buddy reading.

Shirin, a short follow-up e-mail is all I need. If there is more to say, write again! Don't wait to put everything in one letter. It is good to finish old subjects. We will enjoy photographs or new conversations the next time. :)

Protonmail abruptly opened without explanation a couple of nights ago: unreliable. Shutting it myself like I am now, is more likely to be fine, than loading it after it crapped out. It is a relief to know letters go to Prairie and I won't miss seeing them. Good-night, my friends. ~Carolyn.~

You can only guess at my style of reading, after my thorough description of my experience? I hope you meant before I wrote it! While I am reading or watching, it is not "only a book or film" to me. The emotional investment is there and also the surge of what they might feel and it doesn't matter that it is fictional. How wrong it feels to be rooted in the heroine or main character and an author giving pages to a villain. I am not merely reading, I am driving the story or on the protagonst's side. The changed perspective, especially to a character we are against, is jarring.

Sigh, I can imagine night time writing making it hard to focus. You can't have forgotten Matthew Perry's character was always my favourite, followed closely by David Schwimmer's. Yikes, Chandler Bing was not "snarky". That is sharp and rude, the only attempt I will make at defining something I hate. I loathe "sarcasm" almost as much and view it with negativity too but it is not a synonym. Sarcasm by itself, without humour, is bitchy and distasteful: Penny on "The Big Bang Theory", Emma Leroy and Wanda Dollard on "Corner Gas". Smile for a change, quit rolling your eyes and emitting disdain!

On the other hand, "sarcastic HUMOUR" is a light, entertaining blast. It was Chandler's style part of the time, which is different and warmer. Part of the time, he had "self depricating humour" which is not sarcastic at all but very humble. There was also "intelligent, wry observations" that I admire highly as well. Matthew Perry as Chandler Bing was HILARIOUS, original, sweet, relatable, and unforgettable. It is MY KIND of humour, not something my radar would be pick up as undesirable.

I wonder if "sarcastic humour" is what you like in real life. People are different. Perhaps you like sarcasm by itself, which is rude and angry. What I *LOVE* a combination of the three HUMOUR types: used by Jimmy Fallon, Brent Butt and Lorne Cardinal (Davis, the police officer) of "Corner Gas", and Conan O'Brien, the human being. There is a reason I named our beloved cat after him: the three combined humour types reveal a sweetness that makes you want to hug that cat or person.

I also love a combination of the two *humour* types, which are cutting but as humour, are hilarious and relatable instead of ugly: "intelligent" and "sarcastic humour". There is a reason I digitally record four talk shows four days a week and watch them with Ron after he is home from work. Jimmy Fallon is my least favourite for being too cute and not being sharp enough, at least towards things we want the relief of laughing boldly about, like the stupidity of Donald and his creepy cabinet in the country below us.

My favourite of the "sarcastic and intelligent observation" humour styles is Seth Meyers. If I were in New York, his talk show would be the first ticket I would score. He surprises me by not being self-deprecating but relatably, somehow yields a sweetness and approachability in his comedy. Graham Norton is the same: keenly sarcastic and sharply intelligent but sweet, without being self-deprecating. They are the most similar to Conan O'Brien, who does include self-deprecation and laughs at himself. There is no one like him and he is a legend to me.

Ron & I piss ourselves over the "go for it!" boldness of Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel, of "sarcastic and intelligent wry observation" humour. We look forward to listening to them, when Ron is home from work! Fast-forwarding recordings from different times of night and watching more shows in less time, is my new favourite thing. Especially shows Ron is drawn to join me with. :)

Anyway, I sometimes put hours into what I write, so I never want "only guess" as the response! I hope to read "Yes Carolyn, we understand now". For you guys, there is pleasure in darkness or in simply reading such a story or character; from a distance where you say "It was only a story". Stories are real to me while I am experiencing them in a book or film and the emotional reactions are real. I love that ability and have to be careful that the tone I am being walloped with is benign or positive. I must be a writer / director / actor's dream come true as an audience! I float or shudder for awhile afterwards.

Do you guys remember me telling you about how I reacted to reading "Ready Player One", or my review of it? I really did fly into the livingroom with outburst reactions to share with Ron, because I could not contain some of the shocking action by myself! I had to rapidly summarize the dystopian premise and tell him why I was reeling, he he. THEN I could vent in a way that made sense to him, which satisfied the release of my high pressure reaction!

That sure was the end of this book. Kerri, you see what I mean about Blue taking the lead for part of it and it being like an Indian Jones segment. I can't wait to talk about that.

I wanted to finish our analysis and understanding of less desirable topics separately. I am very conscious of the warmth and loyalty Ronan Lynch has and only wish his personality was less hostile and ugly. I was not talking about this book, when I said angry, rude people think they are strong and that politeness and soft temperaments are weak (my middle brother has that idea).

I accept Ronan among the friends and know he belongs in their circle. I root for him. I just needed to understand your approach to his bitchy side and I do. I can only write so much in one burst.

Next, I am going to LOVE shouting about the end of this novel with you! This year too, I wonder if we can pause until about February, to give ourselves a little space before diving into the conclusion. You can see what I mean that it is not a cliff hanger because things have conclusions but there is no information or reaction to any of them. That ending is abrupt, an apt word for it.

I can sometimes not open Protonmail for a week. Please always write at Prairie. It would be upsetting for emotional replies to go where I would not reliably be able to open them. Only photographs to Protonmail. How about showing cave photos at our group photo album here? Your first one is public, which is why I got the idea. My internet is slow no matter what. I look forward to a time when I can download and share everything properly with a dear, special few people in my life like both of you friends.

I will answer a few parts here, then open a fresh new comment box for our new conversations. Thank you both for your effort to think about your appreciation of negative personalities or behaviour and explain it in clear ways. I am someone who takes time to understand what you said, to see if I can identify why and how my feelings differ. I think many elements contribute to our differences. Let me know if my conclusions sound right to you.

We have a lot in common but are unique women with three individual personalities, experiences, wisdom, and preferences. I read as widely as you do but I am willing to observe that in some ways, you are more open to a broad artistic spectrum than I am. We have all agreed we do not want negativity or people behaving angrily or rudely in real life, except Kerri. I think you like sarcastic people in real life too, which is odd because book characters who irritate you by singing in riddles or not answering quickly and directly, is similar to sarcasm. I fucking hate it. It is not funny in the least and I wish people would say what they mean. They prevent an emotional connection, when not allowing their warmth or wonder in something around them, to match the person trying to commiserate with them. I suppose these people think they are funny but Kerri, don't you dread asking them anything after awhile? Knowing you are going to sit through a snappy song & dance and never receive an easy, emotionally warm response to a simple query? If you dislike such people in real life and only enjoy them on paper, I am glad to have misunderstood.

Shirin dealt with a rude person at work and I faced it in my family. Even though our Dad just went to the afterlife, one Brother acted terribly and insulted my private bond with our parents; things you never do to anyone! I think, Shirin & Kerri, you like exploring good and bad human behaviour and personalities in fiction. Kerri approaches the study of anything, even animal death in stories, in such an analytical, unemotional way; it seems robotic to me and this description is not an insult. You have an odd ability to tolerate anything and feel like you were educated by it. Reading terrible things in fiction is like reading a disease in an encyclopedia, without being upset by it.

Shirin, unless I am incorrect, I don't think analyzing negative things is the reason you can read and enjoy some of them. You have different reasons. Maybe seeing someone dare to do what we pray we don't need to do in life, like battling in a war or shooting an opponent, is satisfying to see in a fictional way. I can understand that in sexual novels. I would not like to sleep with a stranger or real life but if written well, it can be entertaining or appealing to see such a story. It can be vicariously interesting to read something we would never do. Do I understand right, Shirin?

Kerri is open to reading opposite sides of everything. Shirin draws the line at animal death and sexual assualt. I refuse to ever read those things because they are wrong and upsetting to think of. I was upset to unintentionally sometimes find that continent in books I read. It disturbs me long afterwards, which is why I have to avoid it. Maybe Kerri doesn't experience a sample of how victims feel or imagine how they felt, or she does briefly but shuts it off afterwards. Does this sound right?

Perhaps in a land of oppression like our dear Shirin sees where she lives, fight scenes or killing bad characters can feel good. On rare occasions, if I am in an angry mood, harder music than I normally care for or a violent or fast-paced film can make me feel good and lead my furious emotions to a state of relief. Or maybe like Kerri's perspective, these are only stories to you, Shirin and there are no feelings in the fictional behaviour or situations.

We have talked about preference and how you look at entertainment and art. Now let's look at our own characters and what my bond with reading and stories is. I am a clairsentient: I am hit with emotions around me. This is what Blue is. I believe "clairvoyant" was a typo by Kerri or if not, a mistake on the author's part. Clairsentience can occur fictionally, because of the way I read and watch films. I allow a story to carry me away emotionally, as if it is real while it lasts.

I allign myself as the protagonist or heroine sometimes, or certainly feel for them and root for them. Do you ladies think this deprives me of a dual entertainment from good and bad, or an analytical appreciation of the dichotemy or balance an author or film director achieved? Or does this lend me a capacity to enjoy stories more profoundly? A story cannot, however, contain elements I dislike. Give me what I am looking for and while the story lasts; I fly inside the book, television, or movie screen. I think I am the audience artists dream of: immersion in their message, material, or performance.

Ron doesn't understand this, which can be annoying for both of us. I will turn towards him during a romantic scene and he is only trying to hear the dialogue, not caught up in the romance too. I will react to something and feel annoyed if he doesn't think the animal onscreen is adorable too. I might be outraged at something and instead of simply gratifying my outburst with a "Yeah!" of agreement, he annoyingly says "It's just a show". I even hate commercials to spoil the mood of what I was watching and dim the volume as fast as I can. I have often thought commericals should be programmed to match the show or film they interrupt.

I am emotionally pulled into stories and if I do not imagine I am one of the protagonists, I side with one of them and follow them with full investment. I do not believe in an "unreliable narrator" and hate that expression. We are supposed to follow someone's story in books and films and not doubt their feelings, whatever details they might encounter or understand better later. This is why Shirin & I hated "The Murder Of Roger Ackroyd", where the protagonist was the bad guy. We invested in him.

That doesn't apply to most stories. What impacts the way I read why I am surprised by what other people enjoy, is that when I follow someone's story or emphathize with them; I do not want to waste time on any other character, certainly not opponents or villains. Of course story characters handle them and learn information about them but I never want authors to give villains any chapter or page of narration. I am against them. I am for the good guy. Don't waste time on their feelings or goals. Show me them through the perspective of the heroine. That is who I am following. Because of my emotional investment, it is not only time-consuming or annoying to drag through a negative characters musings or narration. It is an emotional jerk out of the person I was supporting or vicariously understanding. It is an unpleasant reset of my mind, which will never tolerate a villain and I am impatient to return to the character perspective my mind and feelings are geared to.

Finally, our differences come from my reasons for reading. It is to be entertained, inspired, amused, and educated. These must be positive. You have seen me write for years that entertainment is a world or environment I can choose differently from the challenges of life; therefore my entertainment is going to be happy, healthy, and positive. There will be no sad stories and no unpleasant drama. Now you ladies know that I am also emotionally and mentally drawn into the stories I choose. On top of that, I am a clairsentient who would feel the slap of abuse or death and therefore, I keep it out of my entertainment. Reading, movies, TV, fiction, and the non-fiction I choose to read and learn from.... must be positive and happy in the main.

I accept and will remember that the two of you read and assimilate reading and fiction for different reasons and from different perspectives. You step back and think of it as only fiction, which makes it easy to root for bad buys.

Ronan Lynch is good inside and often enough in action. But he doesn't smile or share a spreading of warmth among people as he does it; only with animals. I want the best for him. I only don't see anyone favouring his angry behaviour and speech; worse than being sarcastic, which I hate as it is. However, the way you each described your admiration has my understanding now. You love the surprise: an ugly personality making beautiful things. Unexpected generosity and loyalty from the guy who yells over nothing. For me, it is a relief when Ronan is kind and I wish he would continue that positivity in his whole being from then onwards. "Don't you get it? You are nicer that way"!

"The grouchy curmudgeon who is nice on the inside" is an old news, overdone, trope cliché that you two must have seen too many times like I have but maybe you always enjoy it. I get that. Kerri says he is more interesting. Not for me but I acknowledge what you look for when you read. Dual perspectives or the art of the unpleasant being restored by good things. Shirin loves the creativity, I think, of hidden personalities and it doesn't matter that she has seen it before. I enjoy understanding my friends and how some people are different, so I appreciate this analysis. Thank you.

Shirin, thank you also for your useful consideration of the "young adult" label. I think it makes books sound like they will be immature, sloppy, and nothing original. It is true that maybe they tell people the action and challenges will be light and non-violent. Well, not too bad. I would be creeped out to read of anyone under age 20 having sex but hope Richard and Blue get kissing and show some romance!

Maybe we are different in one more way, in closing. It is worth examining why Kerri thinks negative attitudes are more interesting. I am endlessly fascinated and admiring of Richard and Blue. The "bad boy" cliché might have some affect. Goodness is never boring to me and there are numerous discoveries we can make of its spectrums and origins too. Or how Richard and me for that matter, keep up a positive outlook and hope in life, including in our behaviour and the way we speak; despite how we were hurt or disappointed.

It is a sadly common misconception that goodness, vulnerable emotions, or crying are weak. Angry or closed people are not automatically strong. Violent, numb, or detached people might be cowardly. It was easier in Colin's mind, to hire someone to kill Mr. Lynch, than earn or research his own artifacts. Anyone with an employment agency of killers / hit men does not know how to gain success authentically, or handle its challenges himself.

One of my favourite scenes, not talked about yet, is how Richard & Ronan found out about Adam's court day and ran to support him at it. The way Richard used his family's influence to shake the judge's hand and confidently ensured that he would be allowed to be the character reference that Adam needed: that was kick-ass to me! Confidence from goodness is what thrills me. Knowing Ronan would tell the judge the violence he witnessed and stopped, so that Adam's attacker would be punished and possibly have to pay for his ear injury, felt glorious to me. Adam understanding this loyal, true friendship was one of the best parts of the novel. To me: Ronan in goodness, is at his top form and his most fascinating.

I was deleting superfluous paragraphs of mine. Your input is the priority but I noticed, the second half of message #20 was unanswered. I am eager to discuss them with you after. For instance: how do you picture the Sargent home and number of people it supposedly houses? I'll let you skim for messages to talk about, after your impressions. I think we did pause some entries until you are finished your reading diary.

This was entirely a reply: about my least favourite character.

Maybe I prioritize Ronan penultimate to Noah, who is not alive and should go. I don't see wavering about how to feel about that. He was not known by the friends alive and has been gone too long to alter fate. If he has an unexpected role like Blue and the Sargents and they are not solely helping the friends, that is great but that should be all. It should hardly be sad, except that they thought their new friend was alive at first. Not spending time with the people who ARE sad about his death, angers and perplexes me.

Believe me, I hope I can talk with and see my loved-ones in an obvious way. Just me, not needing a ley line to see, hear, and possibly touch my cats and parents. However, it would be upsetting if they did not dwell in Heaven and only visited me here. If their souls did not live or at least see and check in for orientation in Heaven prior to visiting me, I would be upset. I would help them go where souls belong. Half the comfort is knowing our families are there. Their visits would not be as nice if something were off.

Would someone please answer whether or not Roger could see Noah? Did he only use his room? If you say you do not remember, I wonder why no one does? Surely we can help stir each other's memories with different details.

Kerri: I am eager to talk about where you are in this book. We have an agreement from Shirin and our chapter heading method, so keep us from feeling that we should refrain. Even so, we are not giving major plot details. I have waited awhile for one person to get farther, so please thrill me with how you feel and what you like again. Your last entry was perfect: entirely new thoughts. It will especially be wonderful for Shirin to express her feelings and reactions. We will discuss that fully. Reading these posts and writing back is how I start my day. I do not run into fatigue.

I am not debating but seeking to understand something that is perplexing. You are both saying no more than in the last book, except about Joe. I understand you counted his appearances as magical scenes, even though they were unpleasant. For me, "magical" refers to something inspiring that feels good. However, I understand now, counting Joe's scenes as paranormal action to marvel at. You disliked him but could enjoy the paranormal.

I countered solidly that Joe didn't have anything to teach Ronan. Only that another "greywaren" existed and not one Cabeswater liked or respected. I wonder how their original relatives who must have passed it along, were generated. Joe showed Ronan about drugs to help him sleep, which in the church with Adam, he did not seem to need. Joe did not know anything about how greywarens worked. He was nothing but a child waving his hand over fire, unprepared for anything but delight in its momentary warmth and glow.

Joe did not care about Cabeswater, speak with the forest, or so much as know its name, I don't think. He had weakened it. Did anyone make him aware of that and did he care about it afterwards? Do you see what I mean? He had nothing to teach and his scenes were wasted pages in the novel. Maggie had an idea to add him but to no purpose.

His Mother, Brother Matthew, the cows, and his crow are far better equipped teachers. His entire home is a school with abundant examples, now that he is experimenting as a serious student. He also asks Cabeswater whatever he needs to know. Whether or not Joe knew Latin, he did not seem to hear or read Cabeswater at all.

May we please be clear at last: my question about Ronan, I said to Shirin, is not "how can you like him at all". It is "how is this angry jerk a *favourite*". "Grumpy people need love too" is cliché. "He is loyal and honest when needed". That is stating the obvious. We are left with a shitty attitude and temper, which has nothing to do with anyone's background excuse for it.

None of Ronan's friends consider him their favourite to deal with. They wish he would be warmer and nicer. You & Shirin please explain why someone who snaps, is angry, and violent, is your *favourite*. It is obvious I hope, that I want to understand and am not debating. I wish the best for Ronan and accept him in the friend circle. He is not likeable, though!

The protagonist of the "Tradd Street" mysteries I used to love, Melanie, seemed grumpy at first. The mystery quality went down in the last two books and needless dramatic content diluted them long before that. Sympathy grew when I learned she had been watching over an alcoholic Dad since childhood and that her opera singer Mom had left when she was about 8. While I got to know her, she stopped being uneasy.

She inherited a historic home from her Grandpa's friend. The people in her closest circle became intrusive, bossy, and judgy.
They pushed her to rise early and jog when she was not athletic, bugged her about nutrition when pastries were her moments of joy. She worked hard and was the top historical real estate agent in South Carolina. Her "best friend" was understandably passionate about preserving historic buildings and urged Melanie to restore her home with authentically. She catered to that friend and spent the money.

This friend colluded with everyone who entered Melanie's life, most inappropriately the housekeeper of her residence, to hide pastries from her! Melanie and her friend were 40 years-old, well respected career professionals. Melanie began hiding snacks to enjoy them. That housekeeper and a step-daughter disturbed them, with notes about "healthy alternatives".

At the end of the series, finally, her Mother (back in the picture in novel #2) reminded her she could tell the housekeeper to stop that. However, it was hard to speak-up when her step-daughter, friend, and a half-sister (it is an intriguing series) joined together to spoil her pleasure in desserts. Who was siding with Melanie and telling them to stop changing someone they are supposed to love?

If you are annoyed with this short summary, you will be glad to Melanie told her friend and relatives off once in awhile. It was the only time she was grumpy anymore, including with a boyfriend who allowed women to flirt with him. Read any reviews of "Tradd Street" books besides mine. Not only the characters but almost every reader calls MELANIE unlikeable and bitchy, when she only occasionally told people off for being intrusive!

The friend, step-daughter, half-sister frowned every time she ate a dessert, even when dessert was being served entirely to supper or party guests! And this was a thin lady! They went so far as to ask her favourite doughnut store not to side with them and not sell her anything unhealthy.

Her circle criticized her for being RIGHTFULLY uncertain about having a relationship with Jack, an attractive author. He did not define his feelings and commitment in words, his bread & butter. He "tired of waiting" and dated her cousin! Still on her side? I was through and through.

You will find very few reviews that don't lame Melanie for being irritable or "pushing away love"! We don't read anyone's mind or throw ourselves at a man. Public opinion piles-up against female characters who need to speak out MORE! People don't get Hagar Shipley either from "The Stone Angel", whom I instantly saw as warm, loyal, and funny. I can't believe anyone interpreted her as grumpy.

Ronan is negative and bitchy most days. People excuse a male "bad boy". I wonder if that is what is going. WHY. I refuse to be in a relationship where anyone gripes at or around me. How is it a "favourite character" in a novel?

I am not saying he isn't worth having as a friend, who people would willingly work around. How is he your damn favourite, compared to Blue or Richard, always pleasant and kind?

Besides that, I am watching for new reactions to each chapter you have read. Bring the magic back please: enjoying each other's impressions.

This was entirely a reply entry. I am really eager to talk about how far you got in this book, with the agreement from Shirin that we need not wait for her to get there. I have waited awhile for one person to get farther, so please thrill me with how you feel and what you like again. Your last entry was perfect: almost entirely new thoughts.

With so much to talk about, it frustrating that the entire theme was about hated or disliked characters. Let's let the magic spill over! Reading these is how I start my day, which is great for not running into fatigue.

Shirin did not make any new points, which my follow-up asked her to elaborate on. You saw that, right? I am not debating but seeking to understand something perplexing. You are both saying no more than in the last book, except about Joe.

Okay, I understand you counted his appearances as magical scenes, even though they were unpleasant. For me, "magical" refers only to something inspiring that feels good. I countered solidly that Joe didn't have anything to teach that Ronan's Mother, Brother Matthew, cows, and entire home would not show him now that he is experimenting as a student. He also asks Cabeswater whatever he needs to know. But you counted Joe's scenes as something paranormal to marvel it. Point understood there. You dislike Joe but the scenes were interesting.

My question about Ronan, I said to Shirin, is not "How can you like him at all". It is "how is this angry jerk a *favourite*". Please, not anything lame like "you enjoy bad boys". Why a favourite?
"Grumpy people need love too" is a cliché. "He is loyal and honest when you get down to it". That is stating the obvious. Maybe my middle brother has background issues that he justifies for being like a shit. I refuse to be around him. I don't care how his mind justifies his logic or temper.

Yes, Ronan has loyal friends and family. None of them consider him their favourite to deal with. They all wish he would be warmer and nicer. You & Shirin please explain why someone who snaps, is angry, and violent, is your *favourite*.

The protagonist was irritable of the "Tradd Street" mysteries I used to love, while their quality was good and dramatic content didn't dilute their mysteries. I disliked her while she was like that and marvelled at her loyal friend. I had some sympathy when I learned she had been watching over an alcoholic Dad since childhood and that her opera singer Mom had left them when she was about 8. Understanding the background for bitterness, as I do for Ronan, did not make Melanie a favourite.

She became appreciative and compassionate and launched into the mystery of the historic home she inherited, from her Dad's friend. The people in her closest circle became intrusive, bossy, judgemental: forcing her to go jogging when she was not athletic, bugging her about nutritional when pastries were here pick-me up moments of joy. She worked early, hard hours and was the top historical real estate agent in South Carolina. Her "best friend" was understandably passionate about preserving historic buildings and urged Melanie to restore her home with authentically down to every nail. She catered to that friend and spent the money.

What I did not abide is this friend collaborated with everyone who entered Melanie's life, most inappropriately the housekeeper she kept at the old residence, to not let her have pastries. These friends were 40 years-old, by the way, both well respected career professionals. Melanie began hiding snacks to enjoy them and this housekeeper and later a step-daughter after she married, would leave notes instead with "healthy alternatives".

At the end of the series, finally, her Mother (back in the picture in novel #2) reminded her it was her home and she could tell the housekeeper to stop that. However, it was hard to speak-up when her step-daughter, later a half-sister (it really is an intriguing mystery series) collaborated to spoil her pleasure in desserts. Who was siding with Melanie and telling them to fuck off and stop changing someone they are supposed to love?

If you are annoyed with them hearing this short summary, which angered all readers in about six books, then you will be glad to Melanie got annoyed at being treated like this and told them off once in awhile. It was the only time she was grumpy anymore, including with a boyfriend who was not comfortable declaring his love and intentions openly and allowed women to flirt with him. He demanded and even left the relationship for a time, because Melanie "did not trust him enough". Oh gee, you think!

What is the reason for sharing this? Read any reviews of "Tradd Street" books besides mine. Not only the characters but almost every reader calls MELANIE unlikeable and bitchy, when she only occasionally told people off for being intrusive! The friend, step-daughter, half-sister frowned every time she ate a dessert, even when dessert was being served entirely to supper or party guests! And this was a thin lady by nature! They went so far as to ask her favourite doughnut store not to side with them and not sell her anything unhealthy.

Worse, her circle criticized her for being RIGHTFULLY uncertain about having a relationship with Jack, the attractive author. It was because he did not clearly define his feelings and monogamy in words, his bread & butter. He "tired of waiting" and dated her cousin for awhile, even though he never declared love or proposed a commitment! You will find very few reviews that don't somehow blame Melanie for being irritable or "pushing away love" when there was nothing she wanted more. You don't read anyone's mind or throw yourself at a man. He needed to tell HER he is in love with you.

Public opinion piles-up against female characters who needed to speak out MORE than she did against bullshit in her circle. People don't get Hagar Shipley either from "The Stone Angel", whom I instantly saw as warm, loyal, and funny and can't believe anyone interpreted as grumpy. But you write a negative, bitchy for no reason male character and it is somehow acceptable or attractive. I want to know WHY.

I say again, the question is not "how do you like him at all". I accept him as part of the circle and will read his sequel, even though I would prefer it is about Blue or Richard by far. How is this kid behaving like a negative, glum, violent jerk and you are calling him a *favourite*?

Please share new impressions of the reason you did up until here. I don't think you treated us to any of it.

Shirin, I did not put detail about any chapters in any of my writing. If you were not looking at it, I might as well jump in excitement to discuss everything but I am being quiet. However, if you were conserving time today, I like that you wrote your reactions. This is what I love to read the best. :-)

I don't think you understand my meaning about Ronan. I am only asking "How is this grumpy, violent boy your *favourite*"? I am not asking how it is possible for anyone to like him. It is very common, old news for someone to be untrustworthy or hurt, to be distant or closed emotionally. However, Ronan throws the negative emotions and reactions at everyone.

When he is the LEAST likeable person, I don't care what the background reason in the past is. How do you or Kerri declare he is your "favourite"? Do you see the difference?

We can see past the unpleasant parts of a person, if we know there is a good character there. I know Ronan had a good character here & there, otherwise he would not have Matthew, Richard, Adam loving him as family. However, he is not the most pleasant, fun, or hilarious. He is the LEAST pleasant, fun, or hilarious. All Ronan's friends tell him to stop being a jerk and dislike it. Why not prefer someone who does NOT do that. That is all I am asking.

I survived alcoholism and violence in the past and friends who betrayed instead of helping at that crucial time. One brother was an asshole, I am glad I rarely have a need to hear from ever again. The other hardly communicates. New neighbours have a dog who barks. The peace was finally quiet after 12 years

Three cats who are the lights of my life, went to Heaven in one year. Both my parents are in Heaven now, not only my Dad.

A mail strike came a few days before my birthday, delaying my mail the year I miss my parents very strongly. There is no one else to celebrate with me. Do I act unapproachable? I prioritize being kind and fun. Why not like Richard and Blue better, who also work hard to be warm and friendly? I hope you don't like Colin better than them. He is evil, greedy, cares nothing for anyone else; including letting them stay alive.

I understand appreciating villains, depending who they are. They must not be evil or harmful in any way. Only clever or firm about their goal. Sometimes the villain is the protagonist. I want her or his perspective, or I would not read the book. I am not debating. I am seeking to understand this perspective. I hope that is clear.

Shirin & I only used the name Roger. I wonder why you didn't ask us who it was? Something amusing occurred to me, after reading your quote selections that were among the most beautiful and intelligent in the book to me too. Perhaps Roger's usefulness was speaking those eloquently memorable observations!

He contributed nothing besides divulging to Blue, Richard's childhood nightmaresbof the dangerous wasp event. He flew all the way to the United States to see an obvious ley line and phenomena noticably active around it. I think he could see Noah, didn't he? He gave a little advice but otherwise, only watched the friends work. A man this interested, with a recent history of uncovering flags bearing Blue's likeness and other artifacts, would not hesitate to peek around the entrance of a cave. He would be cautious and reduce heavy athletics at an age that sounds like it is in the 70s but it should be child's play for him to browse a few steps inside with the friends.

I loved the same quotes. I am happy you are leading with your own material. You bring new things to the table, including my same favourite dialogue that I did not write down. I absolutely thrill over well worded speech and writing.

Your joking gives me pause. Kerri, would you really join friends on such a marvellous quest but be thinking of returning to the sunlight? Focusing on leaving is not enjoying a great moment in life. It sounded like you meant besides claustrophobia, which one does not dismiss, naturally. My neurological challenges aren't fun but I managed to build a slideshow of clips showing that I made dreams come true around our world. In the films and books we enjoy; no one likes the chattering group member who hardly wants to be there! ;) It would be a bumber for yourself, if you would not marvel at the cavern around you, how old the stones were, and feel lucky to be in a special place.

For example, most people annoyingly focus on making sure wildlife is deterred from yards. It goes without saying. I insisted on enjoying the Mother with three black bear cubs at our birdfeeder this spring. I exclaimed "Aren't they precious! I can't believe I get to see them with my own eyes so clearly". I wholly enjoyed that they were there. I told you about the little baby who layed down to rest, while his siblings looked for birdseed. He or she was a true infant, tired from their busy day and ready to nap. :)

I am glad I convinced you that the notion of reporting something unpleasant being "intrusive" is a misconception. The friends are NOT protecting Richard in the least. From what? Feeling startled for a day? Worry means there is something you need to take care of. Robbing him of the unpleasant emotion does not do anything to remove or resolve the threat. You intrude when you don't reveal details that belong to someone else and take part in withholding it. Worse, people are likely to whisper about it to everyone except the person it involves. You understand the reasoning, that it is awfully more intrusive to make decisions about someone else's details: whether or not they are strong enough to deal with it, which is insulting. You affect trust of yourself furthermore. Once you know someone has hidden something from you, which is a neighbour to lying, it would take a lot of change to trust them in the future.

Some people have bad reactions, which make them hard to approach. My determination to make our home peaceful, has me uncharacteristically uncomfortable (because relief rides on it), about speaking to people a couple of houses away, with a new noisy dog. I will be glad I did. No matter how they reacted on the spot, they will keep it in mind from then on. I also can ask animal control to speak with them about the obligation to train dogs not to be touchy about hearing people meters away, at their homes. Not revealing the problem would have kept a situation in misery.

Why did you like the destructive scenes with Joe Kavinski, who was evil enough to trap Matthew as bait but hate the Greenmantles? They are no worse. Joe was willing to kill, for no reason but amusement. I dismiss the idea that "he taught things to Ronan" and remind you that Ronan grew-up in a houseful of dream experiments. He might not have known about his Mom & Brother until recently or understood that many of the fanciful items were from his Dad. Nonetheless, his memories and home are a whole school from which he will learn. He would have without Joe. The forest and the figure who sometimes directed him there in the last novel, are instructing Ronan and Adam.

I hate to say Colin's wife (I forgot her name) is trouble that did not go away by novel's end. I am angry with Maggie for that intrusion from someone who is greedy and bored; not magical. I love a story where you solve a mystery quest, appreciate the gift or treasure at the end, and no villain appears to make you flee, to ruin the beautiful moment. We don't need bad guys. The work, faith, openmindedness, intelligence, trust, and friendship it takes to solve the quest is story enough.

I said all Kerri's quotes were valued or enjoyed by me too. It is true that we have to be aware of reverse prejudice. This is a tricky time in social justice but I dislike the term "white privilege". I understand the original intention is that caucasians do not get negative reactions from situations like police. I stand with non-caucasians in refusing to let that fear and danger continue for them. I value knowing how they feel. I grew up with black friends who are family. Life however, is not easy in all ways because of skin colour.

Your book example is sobering: we are trying to stamp out prejudice against the poor but Blue was snobby towards Richard's financially wealthy upbringing. Leeanne is being introduced to sociology in university and at the present, thinks millionaires are the problem with the world. Are they? If I wrote stellar books or somehow began earning a lot of income, is there anything wrong with enjoying the improvements it brings to my life?

The way money is used and government leaders organize funding is the problem I think. Abstaining from being a billionaire would not stop the problem. I think leaders must stop putting funds in the wrong places. It is past time to generate energy, including heating and transportation, without oil for example. It is past time to end killing animals and thinking of them as food. Plant-based food production takes far less money, improves rather than pollutes the land, and grows ample nutrition and resources for everyone.

The way billionaires are a problem, is making money from animals or oil and buying the election of leaders to avoid stopping those industries. They are afraid of change, the reason we did not advance and improve earlier. Make money a new, sustainable way. The Gansey and Lynch families are positive examples of people who live with weath in humble, positive ways. Blue need not worry about going to university wherever she chooses, if she asks for the finances nicely.

Yes, Adam's realizations are so well pondered, I am impressive Maggie dug so deep. I often say I want to be respected first, loved by those who should love me secondly, and understood as well as possible thirdly. You must not acquaint one part of a person and think that comprises who they are. Tanya thought because I am not a slut, I was pious and might as well wear a habit. I am respectful and protective of my life and health in everything. The ways I have fun are countless.

I have more sweaters including of Mom's, than I need. They aren't necessarily big although being baggy is part of the comfort and warmth of what a sweater is. I would gladly share them, if postage becomes cheaper, or sending things by a different carrier. Enjoy your new ones. It is certainly sweater country here, although we should laugh that I only wear them when it is coldest, or if we walk or drive somewhere. Ron bundles up if there is a casual breeze.

Ronan's spinoff reminds me that Amazon has not sent me volume 2 in a year. They don't want e-mail and only give chatting or phone options. You know I can't turn off the internet, phone them, and refer to my account off-line. I guessed their address was ".ca", the same as "CS(at)Amazon.com" and it was accepted. I don't know if anyone sees. There was no reply about sending me the hardcover instead or cancelling the paperback if it is unavailable.

For my birthday, you know Ron bought me the first edition hardcover of volume 3! I should ask him for volume 2 and cancel it. Too bad in person, stores charge more. I could wait and possibly receive volume 2 at a decent price months from now. What if we are ready to read the next series, however? Do you own those? Thankfully in this series, Shirin gave us "Opal" to read and discuss after volume 4.

You can search strike news on-line, which is anyone's guess. You should remember I was angry that it interfered not with Christmas but with birthday mail. Had it waited a week, or until the Tuesday after, I would have received much wanted cards, on the first birthday without my loving parents. Now it spoils the card tradition I have continued every year since I was 8, not to mention ordering or buying anything on-line, or sending gifts to my only immediate family in Toronto. They strike close to Christmas on purpose; unknowiningly early enough to delay some of my birthday cheer.

I learned that Amazon.ca uses its own couriers and only puts it in the mail from the Winnipeg warehouse. They surprised me with a courier to our door previously and will certainly do it that way now. Lorraine is also mailing last year's gift (she had an injury on the ice last year) by courier from the United States. By next week, I will probably receive all of her sweet thoughtfulness. I suggested that you wait until January to order from Amazon Canada. I could also ask Lorraine if you might have her e-mail address, to ask what she bought me. :-) Then my wish list would be yours to explore, with lovely results for me! I am very glad Ron & I mailed your Christmas card and gifts early.

I hope Canada Post and their union workers will break the disagreement in details because this is the time Christmas cards and gifts should be coming and going in the mail. Governments avoid interfering in workers getting what they ask for, however our Prime Minister forced a return to work in 2018, at Christmas time. A third possibility is agreeing to get things moving and delivered by using a small number of employees. A full strike shut-down should not be imposed on people. It is correct that we rural people rely on it the most and those with family & friends out of town.

Thank you for the joy today, of input that is your own, with some answers to what I wrote previously. I hope Shirin reads much more, so we share our excitement about everything in this novel.