detail from Carrie M. Becker's "Barbie Trashes Her Dreamhouse"

Via Susie at Suburban Guerilla, we learn of “Barbie Trashes Her Dream House” by artist Carrie M. Becker.  Be sure to click the previous link and marvel at the level of detail and layers of junk that Becker meticulously crafted, including an extremely disgusting toilet in the Dream House bathroom.  (I’m only slightly ashamed that my office looks a bit like this detail, at right, only with many more books and many fewer cardboard file boxes.)  If you live in or near Witchita, you can go see the installation yourself in September 2012, when Becker takes hoarder Barbie to the Riney Fine Arts Center Gallery at Friends University.

Speaking of real life in miniature:  remember that miniseries about the Kennedys that was protested by Kennedy loyalists and then dropped by the History Channel?  I’ve watched 6 episodes so far, and it’s really quite entertaining.  I can’t speak to its historical accuracy on the fine points, as I’m not a modern U.S. political historian, but Greg Kinnear’s performance as John F. Kennedy is pretty good and rather sympathetic.  It looks like all of the men who play JFK’s inner circle–McGeorge Bundy, Robert McNamara, Bobby Kennedy, etc.–are having a blast playing dressup and Situation Room together.  Those of you who remember fondly The West Wing and 24 will appreciate the similar style of the script, cinematography, and musical score.

There appears to be nothing libelous in the movie–all of the less attractive stuff about the Kennedy family saga is very well-known and extensively documented:  Joe Kennedy’s history as a bootlegger and adulterer, his softness on Nazism, and his political ambitions for his sons; John Kennedy’s Addison’s Disease and orthopedic problems stemming from his war wounds; JFK’s other women.  If anything, the movie downplays JFK’s extramarital sex life inside the White House because (I think) it wants us to see Katie Holmes’s Jackie in a favorable light, and if it portrayed the full extent of the President’s priapism she’d look like too much of a victim for modern audiences to still like and respect.

The actors do their best to imitate the unique Kennedy diction.  All I can say is that their Kennedy accents are less annoying than most other attempts to mimic them.  If any of you have seen The Kennedys, I would welcome your opinions in the comments, especially those of you who can speak to its historical accuracy.

Finally, have any of you seen my watch?  It went missing two days ago, and I can’t tell you how out of synch I’ve been ever since.  Maybe I should mow that pile of crap off of my desk, and see what turns up.

My favorite was this part:

“Please remove your giant diamond rings,” wrote one contributor to a community forum on Urbanbaby.com last week, billing her post as a public service announcement. “I work at a non-profit,” she continued, “and when I interview someone who is sporting a huge diamond, I immediately deduct points from that person. I talked about this with some of my colleagues today, and they feel the same way. It’s just an unnecessary risk.”

The poster later clarified that she has a specific reason for resenting when applicants bring their bling to an interview: She works for a non-profit that helps African women and children suffering from the effects of the conflict diamond trade.

Forget the engagement ring:  that woman should have lost the job purely for teh stoopid.  But I wish the interviewer had explained better her thought that huge diamonds are “an unncessary risk.”  Is it a risk to their fundraising abilities?  Is it a safety risk for the other employees?  I’m not wild about people who work with their hands who wear enormous rings of any kind–physicians who regularly have to glove up, for example.  It just seems obnoxious and inconvenient to have to ease the glove over the blingy-dingy.

Personally, I’m not moved by the claims that this represents discrimination against women, because lots of married women don’t wear diamond rings and yet remain legally married.  What do the rest of you think?

At the convention, there was a lot of buzz about Mattel’s Barbie® I Can Be™…Architect. Please help us continue the buzz by sharing the following with members so they can vote for their favorite dream house.

Check out the designs–the one with the pool slide from the runway is really tempting, but I think I like the Eero Saarinen-esque one the best. At least, I can see myself living and working in those airy, sunny pods quite easily! You can review them all and vote for your favorite, too.

After all, I’m just a Barbie girl, in my Barbie world–life in plastic, it’s fantastic!

It’s that short wilderness camping season here in the Rockies–I’ll post as I can, but this afternoon we’re loading up the wagon and heading on down to Durango for a little ride on the Durango to Silverton narrow-gauge railway and a little hike up to Chicago Basin.  Maybe I’ll finally get to Mesa Verde, which apparently was the inspiration for “Blue Mesa” described in Willa Cather’s The Professor’s House, which I finished reading just last night upon the recommendation of our old pal Roxie of Roxie’s World.  Dead dogs have suprisingly good book recommendations, friends!   

Don’t worry about the ranch–we’re leaving behind a few ranch hands to take care of the four-legs types.  (The  creepy dolls can shift for themselves.)

First of all, there’s a Visiting Assistant Professor position in early American history for academic year 2011-12 “with the possibility of renewal.”  The job carries a 2-3 course load and a wonderful community of other early Americanist faculty and graduate students.  One year in Williamsburg seems just about right.  (It reminds me of that old W.C. Fields joke:  “First Prize, one week in Philadelphia!  Second Prize, two weeks in Philadelphia!”)

Secondly, we see that the deadline is nigh for short-term fellowships from the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation for projects that are closely related to the collections of the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Library, “with its distinguished collection of primary and secondary sources relating to eighteenth-century Williamsburg, the colonial Chesapeake, African American studies, decorative arts and material culture through 1830, archaeology, architectural history, digital history, and historic preservation. An important component of the work of the Foundation’s Division of Research and Historical Interpretation, Rockefeller Library fellowships primarily support research on topics related to British America, the American Revolution, and the Early Republic.” 

The application deadline is May 1, 2011, and the Foundation is looking to support junior scholars (graduate students and the untenured) “working on topics related to the American Revolution, Early Republic, or ideas and philosophies of America’s founding fathers,” and any scholars working on “topics related to African and African American history, including the Atlantic slave trade, the development and practice of slavery, the experience of free blacks, the formation of early black institutions and economies, and the emergence of African American expressive culture.” 

Some readers of this blog might want to note in particular this fellowship:

The Fellowship in 3D Visualization is a two-month residential appointment awarded once each year to explore innovative ways in which 3D visualization technologies can enhance our understanding of Early American history or a closely-related field. The fellowship, intended for doctoral candidates and junior scholars, can be used for projects at any stage of development. The Fellow will be based in the Digital History Center’s 3D Visualization Lab at the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Library and will work alongside staff engaged in the ongoing Virtual Williamsburg 1776 project. Successful proposals will clearly demonstrate the potential for the creative use of 3D visualization technologies for enhancing new or ongoing research. Applicants are not required to have 3D modeling experience, but preference will be given to those who have some familiarity with computer-aided drafting and/or spatial technologies and applicants should clearly describe their technical expertise in their proposal or CV.

So, c’mon everyone:  buff your CVs, request those letters of recommendation, grab your Felicity dolls and go!  (Dressup for humans is optional, of course.)

Do you know this movie, or does it stir a distant memory? I find it mesmerizing still–it’s a glimpse of an experience that’s something new for most urban or suburban children. If you have young children in your life please share this movie with them.

At least it’s the most important parts of the Holy Family–the Madonna and Child, natch.  Joseph:  he’s always seemed like the Ken of the Holy Family to me.  Barbie and Skipper seem to do just fine without him.

Well, don’t they?

All kids love log!

Have you heard the pseudo-scientific news?  Human girls are biologically programmed to play with dollies like little mommies!  A recent study suggests that female juvenile chimps play with sticks and nurture them like babies, whereas male juveniles turn their sticks into weapons or other manly toys–it’s scientifically proven.  Echidne has the goods, as I knew she would.  She’s got an interesting follow-up post on a 2007 study of a Senagalese chimp community that found that female adult chimps led the way in tool-making and killing in their communities–but as she notes, that study didn’t go viral now, did it?  She writes, “[I]t’s every bit as significant as the new stick study, only it shows female chimps as tool makers and as killers. So are we going to draw conclusions about human society from that one, too?”

One of the aspects of these studies that purport to show the essential or biological basis for gendered behaviors in humans is how selective we are in looking to the non-human animal kingdom for justification of human behaviors.  After all, what is “natural” behavior?  $hitting outdoors, scratching our crotches, and smearing our scent everywhere is “natural,” I suppose.  Human societies have developed multiple different technologies and etiquettes for dealing with all of these “natural” needs and urges. 

Well, never mind the study from one community that suggests that female chimps are natural born tool-makers and killers.  Because of course the play of one community of chimps living in captivity can stand for all of chimpanzees worldwide, and juvenile chimps are the same as human girls and boys, all you need to get for the kiddies this Christmas is one stick each, and sit back and watch the fun happen!  (Is anyone else thinking of this classic from the 1990s cartoon, Ren and Stimpy?)

"They blew him up???"

It’s rough out there for a robot.  Check out this story from the Denver Post this morning:

A robot met its end near Coors Field on Wednesday night when the Denver Police Department Bomb Squad detonated the “suspicious object,” bringing to an end the hours-long standoff between police and the approximately 8-inch-tall figurine.

Denver police spokesman Matt Murray said a citizen called police at 3:27 p.m. to report the presence of the plastic, white, toy robot, cemented to the base of a pillar supporting a footbridge near 20th and Wazee streets. Police closed 20th Street between Blake Street and Chestnut Place but did let a few people past the police tape to retrieve cars parked in nearby lots.

Nobody was allowed within about 100 yards of the robot.

Thank goodness state and local governments got all of that federal grant money after 9/11 to purchase anti-terrorist equipment and beef up their bomb squads!  Otherwise, who knows what havoc misfit toys could wreak upon the citizenry?  At least some inconvenienced passers-by figured out the right way to pass the time while the footbridge was blocked:  “Some pedestrians, unable to reach their vehicles at a lot adjacent to the robot, decided to wait it out at a bar on 20th Street, asking uniformed officers to let them know when the road reopened.”  Thanks, peace officer!  Have one on us!

That was funny.  Here’s the part that really cracks me up:

A bomb-squad robot was sent to examine the troublesome robot. Then a bomb- squad officer, dressed in heavy protective gear, took a turn.

Murray said the bomb squad couldn’t be sure whether the robot was safe, so the squad remotely detonated it about 5:30 p.m. to “render it safe.” The robot exploded into several chunks.

Robot v. robot action!  I know what I want for Christmas. . .

Anyway, back to science.  Zuska writes:

Okay, let’s play what if. What if the Science Cheerleaders are responsible for making just one girl stick with her science & math classes – isn’t it all worthwhile then?

Let’s say the Science Cheerleaders do keep one girl in advanced science or math classes, but make three other girls feel like they have to pornulate themselves in order to be 21st Century Fembot Compliant While Doing Science, and make five d00ds feel like it is perfectly okay to hang up soft porn pictures of sexay hawt babes in the lab and harass some colleague because hawt science women WANT to be appreciated for being sexay and smart! – is it still worth it?

She then goes on to describe an effective outreach program she worked with to get more girls, especially girls who would be first-generation college students, into STEM fields.  GROW–Girls Researching Our World–sounds like a fantastic program, involving a summer camp program and other events scheduled through the school year.  Zuska explains that it’s not looking like a cheerleader that’s important to these girls–it’s whether or not women can be scientists and have a dog, have a house, wear jeans to work, work with cool gear, and be normal and fun and self-sufficient.  As one of them explained to a clueless Football camper, “GROW, as in grow up, get a good job, and make a lot of money!”

I did a presentation and Q and A session for some third- and fourth-graders a few years’ back about being a historian, and the kind of questions Zuska’s GROW students asked the women scientists sounded a lot like the questions I got asked, which were more about how being a historian fit into my whole life, and how my whole life was enabled by my work.  (They were particuluarly jazzed about the idea of travelling for work.  Believe it or not, research trips are what sounded super-cool to them!)

Aside:  I wonder if the key is getting to some of these kids before the pressures of adolescence and before girls in particular fall into worries about their looks and body image?  Middle school may be too late for some girls.

Zuska concludes:

There is, indeed, no reason why a woman can’t be both cute and smart. But that was hardly the issue facing the young girls I saw in Kansas. It was lack of knowledge, lack of access, teachers and guidance counselors who didn’t know what was necessary for sci/eng careers and didn’t think it was all that important anyway to steer young girls towards them, parents who were overwhelmed and didn’t know about these careers or how to take the first step to get their kids on the college prep pathway let alone to a sci/eng career, young girls who were just dying for adults to invest some time and energy in caring for them and their bright minds and what they were capable of doing.

Science Cheerleaders is, at the very best, an outreach program for already-privileged girls who are already interested in science/engineering but who are afraid it will make them look like fat lesbians.

Right on.  And, one might ask, what is a super-smart and talented fat lesbian kid supposed to do with a program like Science Cheerleader, anyway?  Is she not deserving of encouragement and support?

Thanks for the shout-out to Fembots, Zuska!  For those of you dames d’un certain age, you might appreciate this.  (Just in time for the Christmas shopping season!)