domingo, 29 de mayo de 2011
never enough
Interestingly, popular sciences endeavor to attribute Rh-neg blood groups to “mutations.” A solid alternative case may be extended to the conclusion that Rh-neg is NOT a mutation, but possibly the original human blood group. This, however, does not reflect tenured thought, and thus has never been adequately researched.
That there was a group of “pure” humans, not directly related to the evolutionary processes on Earth, is a distinct possibility. This reasoning would suggest that the original humans on our planet where not directly related to the apes, but at some point were “MADE” or “genetically engineered” to give such impression.
Perhaps it was never intended that the Rh-positives become the dominant species. That through some as yet undetermined epoch, the genetically impure group gradually became the controlling species, except for several remote enclaves, initiated a wide-ranging genocidal pogrom, effectively wiping out those who gave birth to them.
All of which begs the questions: What reasons were the sub-species created, what was the process of conquest, what was the duration, and does it continue?
BLOOD GROUPS – General Overview
Nearly 85% of all human beings have RH positive blood. Which merely indicates that their red blood cells contain a substance called the RHesus (rhesus) blood factor. Simply put, their positive blood contains a protein that can be linked to the Rhesus monkey. It is acknowledged that blood factors are transmitted with more exactitude than any other human or animal characteristic. It is not generally known from where the negative RH factor derived, although tantalizing evidence exists that it arrises from genetic experimentation a little over 5,000 years ago.
The highest concentration of RH negative blood occurs in the Basque people of Northern Spain and Southern France, and in the Eastern/Oriental Jews. Only 15% of the entire world´s population is known to have the RH negative blood factor. While it is known that RH negative blood – (type ‘O’) is the purest blood known to mankind, it is not known from where the negative factor originates, as it is generally theorized by evolutionists that there is an unbroken bloodline from early human prototypes (pre-humans) to present day human beings.
As previously mentioned, ‘Rh negative’ blood indicates no protein connections exist to the Rhesus monkey, whereas ‘RH positive’ blood does carry protein linked to the Rhesus monkey – hence the ‘RH’ designation, ie. rhesus. All other earthly primates have this RH factor. Thus if all humans evolved from that line, all would have the RH factor. Obviously, that is not the case. Therefore, there must have been some manner of intervention giving rise to Rh-negative blood groups.
Blood type ‘O’ is the most common of the blood groups. When we separate the ‘O’ types into ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ we find that ‘O’ negative (the universal donor blood) constitutes less than 7% of the world´s population. Science at this very time is attempting to create a synthetic RH negative ‘O’ blood, but without success. For while the protein in positive blood can be cloned, that of negative blood cannot – which is quite interesting, and may be indicative of an alien origin, or more probable, from early genetic experimentation during previous advanced human civilization(s).
If the RH negative factor does not derive from any known earthly link (seemingly outside of the theorized evolutionary process) – from where did it originate? Geneticists generally claim the RH-negative factor is a mutation of unknown origin which apparently happened only a few thousand years ago. These ´negative´ blooded people spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, France and later into America, Canada and Australia. Basque peoples contain the largest concentration of known ‘O’ negative blooded people today because, they for the most part, have confined themselves to one area, whereas the Celtic people have branched out among all of the new world.
That there was a group of “pure” humans, not directly related to the evolutionary processes on Earth, is a distinct possibility. This reasoning would suggest that the original humans on our planet where not directly related to the apes, but at some point were “MADE” or “genetically engineered” to give such impression.
Perhaps it was never intended that the Rh-positives become the dominant species. That through some as yet undetermined epoch, the genetically impure group gradually became the controlling species, except for several remote enclaves, initiated a wide-ranging genocidal pogrom, effectively wiping out those who gave birth to them.
All of which begs the questions: What reasons were the sub-species created, what was the process of conquest, what was the duration, and does it continue?
BLOOD GROUPS – General Overview
Nearly 85% of all human beings have RH positive blood. Which merely indicates that their red blood cells contain a substance called the RHesus (rhesus) blood factor. Simply put, their positive blood contains a protein that can be linked to the Rhesus monkey. It is acknowledged that blood factors are transmitted with more exactitude than any other human or animal characteristic. It is not generally known from where the negative RH factor derived, although tantalizing evidence exists that it arrises from genetic experimentation a little over 5,000 years ago.
The highest concentration of RH negative blood occurs in the Basque people of Northern Spain and Southern France, and in the Eastern/Oriental Jews. Only 15% of the entire world´s population is known to have the RH negative blood factor. While it is known that RH negative blood – (type ‘O’) is the purest blood known to mankind, it is not known from where the negative factor originates, as it is generally theorized by evolutionists that there is an unbroken bloodline from early human prototypes (pre-humans) to present day human beings.
As previously mentioned, ‘Rh negative’ blood indicates no protein connections exist to the Rhesus monkey, whereas ‘RH positive’ blood does carry protein linked to the Rhesus monkey – hence the ‘RH’ designation, ie. rhesus. All other earthly primates have this RH factor. Thus if all humans evolved from that line, all would have the RH factor. Obviously, that is not the case. Therefore, there must have been some manner of intervention giving rise to Rh-negative blood groups.
Blood type ‘O’ is the most common of the blood groups. When we separate the ‘O’ types into ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ we find that ‘O’ negative (the universal donor blood) constitutes less than 7% of the world´s population. Science at this very time is attempting to create a synthetic RH negative ‘O’ blood, but without success. For while the protein in positive blood can be cloned, that of negative blood cannot – which is quite interesting, and may be indicative of an alien origin, or more probable, from early genetic experimentation during previous advanced human civilization(s).
If the RH negative factor does not derive from any known earthly link (seemingly outside of the theorized evolutionary process) – from where did it originate? Geneticists generally claim the RH-negative factor is a mutation of unknown origin which apparently happened only a few thousand years ago. These ´negative´ blooded people spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, France and later into America, Canada and Australia. Basque peoples contain the largest concentration of known ‘O’ negative blooded people today because, they for the most part, have confined themselves to one area, whereas the Celtic people have branched out among all of the new world.
nothng but a man
While he is
nothing but a man, there is something about him that distinguishes him from every
other man. He is the picture of his mother, only he has not her smooth, round face.
HIS HAIR IS A LITTLE MORE GOLDEN THAN HERS, THOUGH IT IS AS
MUCH FROM SUNBURN AS ANYTHING ELSE. HE IS TALL, AND HIS
SHOULDERS ARE A LITTLE DROOPED; HIS VISAGE IS THIN AND OF A
SWARTHY COMPLEXION, THOUGH THIS IS FROM EXPOSURE. HIS EYES
ARE LARGE AND A SOFT BLUE, AND RATHER DULL AND HEAVY....'
nothing but a man, there is something about him that distinguishes him from every
other man. He is the picture of his mother, only he has not her smooth, round face.
HIS HAIR IS A LITTLE MORE GOLDEN THAN HERS, THOUGH IT IS AS
MUCH FROM SUNBURN AS ANYTHING ELSE. HE IS TALL, AND HIS
SHOULDERS ARE A LITTLE DROOPED; HIS VISAGE IS THIN AND OF A
SWARTHY COMPLEXION, THOUGH THIS IS FROM EXPOSURE. HIS EYES
ARE LARGE AND A SOFT BLUE, AND RATHER DULL AND HEAVY....'
domingo, 22 de mayo de 2011
sábado, 21 de mayo de 2011
Lo que has logrado
Luca Piergiovanni / EFE
Stéphane Hessel, autor del milagro editorial «¡Indignaos!» y héroe de la Resistencia francesa, ha expresado hoy el deseo de que su alegato contra la indiferencia y a favor de la insurrección pacífica se «contagie» por todo el mundo.
Casi 1,7 millones de ejemplares vendidos en Francia en sólo cuatro meses, avalan la publicación en España de este «librito», en palabras de Hessel, de apenas 30 páginas, que prologa el escritor y economista español José Luis Sampedro, y que edita Destino en español y catalán, Cenlit en euskera y Kalandraka en gallego.
Además del compromiso y la indignación que propugna Hessel, Sampedro ha abogado hoy en rueda de prensa en Madrid por la «libertad de pensamiento» como salvoconducto hacia un futuro mejor.
A sus 93 años, ambos comparten la «indignación» ante las injusticias y la «preocupación» por conseguir que su mensaje de «libertad y justicia» alcance a los jóvenes para que salgan del «desánimo» y la «indiferencia», se comprometan y renueven la sociedad.
Sin perder la sonrisa y con un hablar intenso y pausado, justifica el enorme éxito de su opúsculo en que ha aparecido en un «momento crucial de la evolución de la sociedad mundial».
Define como «conmovedor» que su mensaje se haya publicado ya en una veintena de países, incluidos la mayoría de los europeos, Estados Unidos, Japón, Corea del Sur, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile y Brasil, al tiempo que en breve llegará a Australia y Nueva Zelanda.
Optimista, Hessel señala, como ejemplo esperanzador, el «surgir de una juventud no violenta, pero eficaz», en los países árabes sacudidos por una ola de deseo de libertad y de justicia.
Nacido en Berlín en octubre de 1917, en plena Revolución Rusa, vivió de lleno la Segunda Guerra Mundial, con un destacado papel en la Resistencia francesa, fue torturado y deportado, pasó por tres campos de concentración, burló a la muerte apropiándose de la identidad de otro preso y se evadió dos veces.
Tras la gran contienda bélica fue diplomático y formó parte, en 1948, del equipo redactor de la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos.
Un bagaje que avala y refuerza su exhortación contra la indiferencia, para él «la peor de las actitudes», y clama por la insurrección pacífica, al estilo de Mandela o Martin Luther King, frente a «lo inaceptable: las injusticias».
Y es que los principios y valores por los que él luchó, dice, «son hoy más necesarios que nunca» y, además, están «en peligro».
«Los jóvenes de ahora se juegan la libertad y los valores más importantes de la humanidad», advierte el comprometido intelectual desde la altura de miras que le da su experiencia, su compromiso, y sus 93 años, «la última etapa. El final ya no está muy lejos», apunta.
Una «verdadera» democracia necesita, recuerda, una prensa «independiente» capaz de posicionarse frente a la «dictadura actual de los mercados financiaros que amenaza la paz y la democracia» y que «tutelan» a los estados.
«El dinero es el dios de esta civilización», ha denunciado, por su parte, Sampedro, para quien esta crisis, que va más allá de lo puramente económico, solo se superará cambiando el sistema, «que afortunadamente -dice- está en decadencia».
A lo largo de su larga vida, Hessel, que se naturalizó francés en 1947, se siente afortunado por «la suerte de haber tenido una sucesión de razones» para indignarse, y, cita en concreto, como la última de ellas, la situación en Palestina.
Y le resulta «insoportable» que «los propios judíos puedan perpetrar crímenes de guerra», tras haber sufrido el Holocausto.
También se muestra tajante en contra del terrorismo, que califica de «abominable», «inaceptable» e «ineficaz», y advierte que solo se al terrorismo islamista únicamente se lo podrá derrotar «con la no violencia y el respeto mutuo de culturas».
Hijo de un escritor alemán amigo del filósofo Walter Benjamin, condiscípulo de Sartre, de quien alabó su mensaje libertario, Hessel, admite su «optimismo natural», y se reconoce más cercano a Hegel, pues piensa que «todo aquello que es deseable es posible».
Su deseo es que todos, especialmente los jóvenes, encuentren un motivo de indignación, «un valor precioso», en sus propias palabras, y para encontrarlo, concluye, solo basta con mirar alrededor: «Buscad y encontraréis!».
Stéphane Hessel, autor del milagro editorial «¡Indignaos!» y héroe de la Resistencia francesa, ha expresado hoy el deseo de que su alegato contra la indiferencia y a favor de la insurrección pacífica se «contagie» por todo el mundo.
Casi 1,7 millones de ejemplares vendidos en Francia en sólo cuatro meses, avalan la publicación en España de este «librito», en palabras de Hessel, de apenas 30 páginas, que prologa el escritor y economista español José Luis Sampedro, y que edita Destino en español y catalán, Cenlit en euskera y Kalandraka en gallego.
Además del compromiso y la indignación que propugna Hessel, Sampedro ha abogado hoy en rueda de prensa en Madrid por la «libertad de pensamiento» como salvoconducto hacia un futuro mejor.
A sus 93 años, ambos comparten la «indignación» ante las injusticias y la «preocupación» por conseguir que su mensaje de «libertad y justicia» alcance a los jóvenes para que salgan del «desánimo» y la «indiferencia», se comprometan y renueven la sociedad.
Sin perder la sonrisa y con un hablar intenso y pausado, justifica el enorme éxito de su opúsculo en que ha aparecido en un «momento crucial de la evolución de la sociedad mundial».
Define como «conmovedor» que su mensaje se haya publicado ya en una veintena de países, incluidos la mayoría de los europeos, Estados Unidos, Japón, Corea del Sur, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile y Brasil, al tiempo que en breve llegará a Australia y Nueva Zelanda.
Optimista, Hessel señala, como ejemplo esperanzador, el «surgir de una juventud no violenta, pero eficaz», en los países árabes sacudidos por una ola de deseo de libertad y de justicia.
Nacido en Berlín en octubre de 1917, en plena Revolución Rusa, vivió de lleno la Segunda Guerra Mundial, con un destacado papel en la Resistencia francesa, fue torturado y deportado, pasó por tres campos de concentración, burló a la muerte apropiándose de la identidad de otro preso y se evadió dos veces.
Tras la gran contienda bélica fue diplomático y formó parte, en 1948, del equipo redactor de la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos.
Un bagaje que avala y refuerza su exhortación contra la indiferencia, para él «la peor de las actitudes», y clama por la insurrección pacífica, al estilo de Mandela o Martin Luther King, frente a «lo inaceptable: las injusticias».
Y es que los principios y valores por los que él luchó, dice, «son hoy más necesarios que nunca» y, además, están «en peligro».
«Los jóvenes de ahora se juegan la libertad y los valores más importantes de la humanidad», advierte el comprometido intelectual desde la altura de miras que le da su experiencia, su compromiso, y sus 93 años, «la última etapa. El final ya no está muy lejos», apunta.
Una «verdadera» democracia necesita, recuerda, una prensa «independiente» capaz de posicionarse frente a la «dictadura actual de los mercados financiaros que amenaza la paz y la democracia» y que «tutelan» a los estados.
«El dinero es el dios de esta civilización», ha denunciado, por su parte, Sampedro, para quien esta crisis, que va más allá de lo puramente económico, solo se superará cambiando el sistema, «que afortunadamente -dice- está en decadencia».
A lo largo de su larga vida, Hessel, que se naturalizó francés en 1947, se siente afortunado por «la suerte de haber tenido una sucesión de razones» para indignarse, y, cita en concreto, como la última de ellas, la situación en Palestina.
Y le resulta «insoportable» que «los propios judíos puedan perpetrar crímenes de guerra», tras haber sufrido el Holocausto.
También se muestra tajante en contra del terrorismo, que califica de «abominable», «inaceptable» e «ineficaz», y advierte que solo se al terrorismo islamista únicamente se lo podrá derrotar «con la no violencia y el respeto mutuo de culturas».
Hijo de un escritor alemán amigo del filósofo Walter Benjamin, condiscípulo de Sartre, de quien alabó su mensaje libertario, Hessel, admite su «optimismo natural», y se reconoce más cercano a Hegel, pues piensa que «todo aquello que es deseable es posible».
Su deseo es que todos, especialmente los jóvenes, encuentren un motivo de indignación, «un valor precioso», en sus propias palabras, y para encontrarlo, concluye, solo basta con mirar alrededor: «Buscad y encontraréis!».
viernes, 20 de mayo de 2011
Indeed
Out There:
6) Fluid is fun.
Look, sex is sticky. There’s no way around this. If you want to represent the truth of the acts, you will likely be required to pay homage to the resultant wetnesses. And I’m not just talking about semen or vaginal fluid. I’m also talking sweat and saliva, which I consider to be the perfume of lovers, as well as whatever one chooses as a lubricant (sesame oil?).
7) Real people do not talk in porn clichés.
They do not say: "Give it to me, big boy."
They do not say: "Suck it, baby. That’s right, all the way down."
They do not say: "Yes, deeper, harder, deeper! Oh, baby, oh, Christ, yes!"
At least, they do not say these things to me.
Most of the time, real people say all kinds of weird, funny things during sex, such as, "I think I’m losing circulation" and "I’ve got a cramp in my foot" and "Oh, sorry!" and "Did you come already? Goddamn it!"...
6) Fluid is fun.
Look, sex is sticky. There’s no way around this. If you want to represent the truth of the acts, you will likely be required to pay homage to the resultant wetnesses. And I’m not just talking about semen or vaginal fluid. I’m also talking sweat and saliva, which I consider to be the perfume of lovers, as well as whatever one chooses as a lubricant (sesame oil?).
7) Real people do not talk in porn clichés.
They do not say: "Give it to me, big boy."
They do not say: "Suck it, baby. That’s right, all the way down."
They do not say: "Yes, deeper, harder, deeper! Oh, baby, oh, Christ, yes!"
At least, they do not say these things to me.
Most of the time, real people say all kinds of weird, funny things during sex, such as, "I think I’m losing circulation" and "I’ve got a cramp in my foot" and "Oh, sorry!" and "Did you come already? Goddamn it!"...
what if
The most influential man in history
What if Shakespeare had never lived? What if he, like so many children of the 16th century, had died in childhood, just another lost infant son of an unknown Stratford glove-maker? Instead of the bland monument with its threatening inscription -"cursed be he who moves my bones"-imagine a nameless grave, a corpse knocked about and forgotten long ago in the Warwickshire muck. How would the world be different without him?
Most writers spend their lives avoiding the question of what writing amounts to. It’s an annoying question, and tends to be asked by annoying people, like your parents and their friends and the businessmen at gala fundraisers. I’ve never yet heard a satisfying answer, because no matter what anyone says there’s almost always a better way to achieve the intended goal than by writing. If you want to improve the world, go plant a tree in the desert or chain yourself to a whaling vessel or sign up to teach underprivileged kids in an at-risk neighbourhood. Samuel Johnson, the 18th-century critic and wit, famously said that anyone who doesn’t write for money is a blockhead, but sadly the opposite is true. If you want money, may I suggest corporate law? Or at least aluminum siding.
What if Shakespeare had never lived? What if he, like so many children of the 16th century, had died in childhood, just another lost infant son of an unknown Stratford glove-maker? Instead of the bland monument with its threatening inscription -"cursed be he who moves my bones"-imagine a nameless grave, a corpse knocked about and forgotten long ago in the Warwickshire muck. How would the world be different without him?
Most writers spend their lives avoiding the question of what writing amounts to. It’s an annoying question, and tends to be asked by annoying people, like your parents and their friends and the businessmen at gala fundraisers. I’ve never yet heard a satisfying answer, because no matter what anyone says there’s almost always a better way to achieve the intended goal than by writing. If you want to improve the world, go plant a tree in the desert or chain yourself to a whaling vessel or sign up to teach underprivileged kids in an at-risk neighbourhood. Samuel Johnson, the 18th-century critic and wit, famously said that anyone who doesn’t write for money is a blockhead, but sadly the opposite is true. If you want money, may I suggest corporate law? Or at least aluminum siding.
miércoles, 11 de mayo de 2011
(Medical Xpress) — We all remember that feeling of intense emotions as a new love and romance begins. Despite the ongoing debate that intense love fades through the years, there are still many couples who claim to have that intense feeling years after marriage. In a new study published in Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, researchers have discovered similar neurological responses in those experiencing new love and those in long-term and passion filled relationships.
The study first looked at those in the rush of a new relationship and love. Researchers found that these individuals, when presented with an image of their partner, showed responses in the area of the brain that processes the brain chemical dopamine. This is the area of the brain that is often associated with food and alcohol and is a motivator for wants and desires. When these same individuals were shown images of similar looking people, that region of the brain remained unaffected.
The study first looked at those in the rush of a new relationship and love. Researchers found that these individuals, when presented with an image of their partner, showed responses in the area of the brain that processes the brain chemical dopamine. This is the area of the brain that is often associated with food and alcohol and is a motivator for wants and desires. When these same individuals were shown images of similar looking people, that region of the brain remained unaffected.
lunes, 9 de mayo de 2011
Statements
Blanca Romero is more than silly, is the silliestisssima.
Cannes invite, Almodovar premier and Replay.
Papers sent...
Cannes invite, Almodovar premier and Replay.
Papers sent...
jueves, 5 de mayo de 2011
black
Beachcombing’s mother has flown in from the Dominions to visit her grandchildren and generally cause confusion – arguments over restaurant bills, dietary controversies and black cats…
On the last point Beachcombing has to admit though that his mater has a point, one worth sharing with a wider audience.
It would hardly be worth worrying about the question of why black cats are unlucky: after all, black is taken, in the western tradition – the Indo-European tradition? – as being an evil colour. No wonder that black cats then are associated with witches and the devil. Memories here of cat organs and cat throwing competitions…
But there is a teaser that is less easily answered. Why are black cats unlucky everywhere except – it seems – the UK and Ireland? (Are they unlucky everywhere else or is this just a fiction put about by various online sources? Beachcombing ran into a few references to Japan appreciating black cats.)
Go to Germany, Italy, Spain, and interestingly the US and the black cat is Beelzebub’s moggie. Apparently cat shelters in the US refuse to allow adoptions of black cats around Halloween for fear that they will be tortured by creative adolescents brought up on Hollywood horror schlock.
So why the British-Irish exception? Beachcombing has gone running to his books on folklore and the annals of the Folklore Society determined to prove his mother wrong but has found nothing that is even vaguely convincing.
One common explanation is that black cats are hated in countries where the witch craze took off in the early modern period: Switzerland, Germany… But if England was relatively unscathed by the old-women drowners, black-cat loving Scotland was a hot-bed of witching, while black-cat hating Italy killed relatively few sabbat-goers… Then it is necessary to explain as well why countries like India where Christian witches were never sought are hostile to black cats.
Another explanation is equally unconvincing, namely the notion that Dick Whittington’s black cat, which, at least in some versions of the story brought Dick good luck, is the root of the British enthusiasm for black felines.
This tale is surely, however, proof of black-cat love in the British Isles rather than its origin? It would certainly be interesting to see how old the earliest version of the story is.
So what is the explanation? drbeachcombing AT yahoo DOT com
The best that Beachcombing can offer is the possibility that black generally has a different folklore value in Britain and Ireland.
There are, after all, superstitions that first-footers (the first to arrive at the house at New Year) need to have black hair.
There is the superstition too – though it must be a modern creation – of chimney sweeps being lucky at a wedding.
There are the black painted faces of the lucky Morris dancers.
Could this list be extended?
Perhaps through some act of cultural miswiring the early or medieval inhabitants of Britain and Ireland convinced themselves that black was a good colour and this survived into modern times. Are we even dealing – the last chance saloon for the truly desperate – with a Celtic convention?
Beachcombing admits that it is all fairly weak, but it has to be better than witches or Dick.
On the last point Beachcombing has to admit though that his mater has a point, one worth sharing with a wider audience.
It would hardly be worth worrying about the question of why black cats are unlucky: after all, black is taken, in the western tradition – the Indo-European tradition? – as being an evil colour. No wonder that black cats then are associated with witches and the devil. Memories here of cat organs and cat throwing competitions…
But there is a teaser that is less easily answered. Why are black cats unlucky everywhere except – it seems – the UK and Ireland? (Are they unlucky everywhere else or is this just a fiction put about by various online sources? Beachcombing ran into a few references to Japan appreciating black cats.)
Go to Germany, Italy, Spain, and interestingly the US and the black cat is Beelzebub’s moggie. Apparently cat shelters in the US refuse to allow adoptions of black cats around Halloween for fear that they will be tortured by creative adolescents brought up on Hollywood horror schlock.
So why the British-Irish exception? Beachcombing has gone running to his books on folklore and the annals of the Folklore Society determined to prove his mother wrong but has found nothing that is even vaguely convincing.
One common explanation is that black cats are hated in countries where the witch craze took off in the early modern period: Switzerland, Germany… But if England was relatively unscathed by the old-women drowners, black-cat loving Scotland was a hot-bed of witching, while black-cat hating Italy killed relatively few sabbat-goers… Then it is necessary to explain as well why countries like India where Christian witches were never sought are hostile to black cats.
Another explanation is equally unconvincing, namely the notion that Dick Whittington’s black cat, which, at least in some versions of the story brought Dick good luck, is the root of the British enthusiasm for black felines.
This tale is surely, however, proof of black-cat love in the British Isles rather than its origin? It would certainly be interesting to see how old the earliest version of the story is.
So what is the explanation? drbeachcombing AT yahoo DOT com
The best that Beachcombing can offer is the possibility that black generally has a different folklore value in Britain and Ireland.
There are, after all, superstitions that first-footers (the first to arrive at the house at New Year) need to have black hair.
There is the superstition too – though it must be a modern creation – of chimney sweeps being lucky at a wedding.
There are the black painted faces of the lucky Morris dancers.
Could this list be extended?
Perhaps through some act of cultural miswiring the early or medieval inhabitants of Britain and Ireland convinced themselves that black was a good colour and this survived into modern times. Are we even dealing – the last chance saloon for the truly desperate – with a Celtic convention?
Beachcombing admits that it is all fairly weak, but it has to be better than witches or Dick.
lunes, 2 de mayo de 2011
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)