We'll miss you, Scotty...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/20/obit.doohan.ap/index.html

I suppose it was expected, but still...

I remember hearing about the last con he attended a year or two ago; it made the local news. Rather bittersweet - he did love going to them but was just getting too frail and sick, and everyone knew it would be his last.

I had heard about the triplets he and his wife had in 2000, but didn't realize he had 6 others (from two previous marriages) as well.

We'll miss you, Scotty...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/20/obit.doohan.ap/index.html

I suppose it was expected, but still...

I remember hearing about the last con he attended a year or two ago; it made the local news. Rather bittersweet - he did love going to them but was just getting too frail and sick, and everyone knew it would be his last.

I had heard about the triplets he and his wife had in 2000, but didn't realize he had 6 others (from two previous marriages) as well.

Tut, tut...

If all has gone well, my two oldest should be at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, ogling all the pretties at the Tutankhamen exhibit. Angus was a bit upset to here there wouldn't actually be any mummies, but settled down once he heard there would probably be canopic jars - although, he would really like to see what was in them. The actual organic parts, I'm thinking, would be more the purview of the Natural History Museum. My brother took my dad to see it a couple of weeks ago, as a belated birthday present.

I'm kind of glad John's mom is willing to take the kids to these kinds of things - it would get kind of steep for us. Now, doesn't anyone want to take me? (and why thank you, yes I would like some cheese with that whine).

I have seen several articles in the papers lately pushing the idea that by pursuing big ticket exhibits like this, the museum is somehow selling out and not following their original goals, such as education, community outreach, supporting new artists and the like. But how about giving some people the opportunity to see some historical art that otherwise they might never get to see? Doesn't that figure into it somewhere? Twenty dollars is a heck of a lot cheaper than a trip to Egypt most people may never make.

Tut, tut...

If all has gone well, my two oldest should be at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, ogling all the pretties at the Tutankhamen exhibit. Angus was a bit upset to here there wouldn't actually be any mummies, but settled down once he heard there would probably be canopic jars - although, he would really like to see what was in them. The actual organic parts, I'm thinking, would be more the purview of the Natural History Museum. My brother took my dad to see it a couple of weeks ago, as a belated birthday present.

I'm kind of glad John's mom is willing to take the kids to these kinds of things - it would get kind of steep for us. Now, doesn't anyone want to take me? (and why thank you, yes I would like some cheese with that whine).

I have seen several articles in the papers lately pushing the idea that by pursuing big ticket exhibits like this, the museum is somehow selling out and not following their original goals, such as education, community outreach, supporting new artists and the like. But how about giving some people the opportunity to see some historical art that otherwise they might never get to see? Doesn't that figure into it somewhere? Twenty dollars is a heck of a lot cheaper than a trip to Egypt most people may never make.

(no subject)

If you haven't already got your copy already, you might consider buying the Canadian edition of the newest Harry Potter book - printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper.

And no, I have not read it yet.

(no subject)

If you haven't already got your copy already, you might consider buying the Canadian edition of the newest Harry Potter book - printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper.

And no, I have not read it yet.