Typos, Edits, and BSS
84.1 I should explain…”BSS” stands for “Bold Soul Sister,” one of the funkiest tunes Ike and Tina Turner ever recorded…listen to it here. She starts out with her line: “Things and stuff…and stuff and things…and stuff…” which along with typos and edits, is pretty much what we have here today. Because this week, I spent my “G4BB time” reading over blogs #30-83…and correcting what needed correcting…something I’ve wanted to do for a long time…and now was the time.
84.2 And being inveterately into numbers and stats, I kept track as I went. TYPOS were anything that needed correcting…misspelling, missing word, wrong word, bad punctuation, funky spacing, etc. EDITS were anything else I wanted to change…not mistakes, but just ways I felt I could express things better. Sounds like a boring slog, but hardly…because remember, I like what I write, or I don’t write it!
84.3 Per blog, typos ranged from 0-7…edits from 0-11…both top marks of 7 and 11 were G4BB 37: Mailbag City…guess I was having a bad week. Over 54 blogs, total of 112 typos for an average of about 2…168 edits for an average of about 3. Not too bad, altho I can’t guarantee I caught everything…seems like you never can. But more importantly, I was gratified not to find any real glaring mistakes that would have needed an extensive re-write…I started with #30 because it was about a year ago, and also because I suspected that the earlier ones may need more editing…will get to them, if not next week, soon.
84.4 While not that substantial, there were 3 edits that stand out…not that you’d care that much, but it’s my blog, nez pah? And who knows, you just might be curious, if you noticed them. G4BB 36: The Cousiners began with the announcement that I now had a genealogy Q&A column appearing in a bi-weekly free newspaper that’s put out here locally. And I did…for one week…then never again, altho I’d given the guy 5 columns worth. Never bothered to find out what was going on, and the paper’s out of business now anyway, so there you go…but the announcement is now gone, obviously.
84.5 News of summer revival of the series “Dallas” on TNT prompted G4BB 52: Eek! The Ewings! As much research as went into that, I mentioned several times that I wasn’t fully satisfied and there’d be more to come. Well, that’s been edited out because for now there won’t be…I lost interest in doing that when I lost interest in the show…around the 3rd or 4th episode. It was fine for what it was, but it seemed somehow meaner than in the old days…the “bad guys” used to be entertaining in their chicanery…now, not so much. Plus the plot moved way too fast, instant gratification or whatever…yes, the old “Dallas” was quick-paced compared to daytime soaps, but this was like turbo-steroid fast…and my interest petered out just as quickly. I hear they’ve ordered a second season…good luck and God Bless…but just not for me, sorry…
84.6 Then there’s G4BB 31: Kate ‘n’ Pearl…examining the familial connections between the characters on Petticoat Junction and The Beverly Hillbillies. In terms of hits, it is far and away the most popular of my weekly genealogy blogs…and was indeed a lot a fun to research and write. It’s due for a follow-up and hopefully that’s coming in the very near future…trouble is, to do the job right, you need those damned box-sets…which unfortunately I no got…but that’s definitely on the old bucket-list. And the thing is, I did gloss over the possible connection of Granny to the mysterious Beasley clan, which is the apparent link between Kate Bradley and Pearl Bodine…we’ll see what I can dig up.
84.7 So much for the typos and edits…now for some BSS. The latest posting at the wiseGEEK Cousin page didn’t really need a chart…it was more in the nature of a Dear Flabby letter, which I was pleased to answer as best I could…
84.8 And as with so many of Dear Flabby’s real letters, there isn’t much to say except: You CAN’T change other people or how think act or think…you can only change yourself. See, Poster 71 doesn’t want to go out with her “cousin in marriage.” Or marry him either, I would guess. Well, since he isn’t that yet, she could marry him first, as I suggested. Trouble is, the gist of her letter suggests that doing so wouldn’t stop her uncle and his mother from getting hitched, in which case now she’d now be married to her “cousin in marriage.” But she can’t trim the wind, she can only trim her sail…so I suggested a way she could think about the relationship that would help her realize she isn’t related to this guy, and nothing can change that…it’s all in how she approaches it…and that she CAN change.
84.9 Next…back in G4BB 50: We Got Mail! I touched upon the subject of namesakes, specifically the Joseph P. Kennedys, and I reprise Chart 175 here. Notice there are 4…the original, the Jr., a II, and a III. I noticed recently in our local paper a sad item in the obits…the death of an infant, which is of course a terrible thing, and nothing to trivialize. But what interested me was the fact that this was “John Q. Public VI“…I’ll respect their privacy and not use real names.
84.10 There are no hard and fast rules for using such numbers…each family is free to follow its own custom or inclination. And where the broadest range of different practices occurs is in dealing with the living versus the dead. Here, I wondered if all 6 John Q. Publics were still alive…turns out they are not…only the father V, the grandfather IV, and the great grandfather III. Still, this was an interesting example of how it can be done…and is.
84.11 Finally, in last week’s examination of F.M. Lancaster’s take on 2nd cousins, we had this…he in italics, my comment in red…
I did a little web-surfing, and sure enough, 1½ cousins are few and far between…but I did find one reference, on a very long and somewhat disorganized family genealogy page…here I’ve summarized the relevant bits of information…
84.12 What we have is twin sisters marrying 1st cousins…the green circles in Chart 292 are folks of unkonwn gender. If identical twins, their offspring would be the equivalent of Enhanced Half-Siblings…if fraternal, they’re 1st cousins on the mothers’ side, 2nd cousins on the fathers’ side. In in either case, we’re taking about the relationship between ME’s parent and the 10 children of Peter and Minnie Hiebert.
84.13 Now whichever is actually the case, something is compelling ME to consider those 10 children, in relation to himself, not to his mother, his 1½ cousins…well, at the very least…“plus other ties.” Is this indeed a case of 1C1R being given that unusual fractional cousin name? Does there being twins involved have anything to do with it, to his way of thinking? Can’t be sure…further digging might help…someday…just not today. Back next week…take care…
Copyright © 2012 Mark John Astolfi, All Rights Reserved
shmaeless p;igs…or something…nuts!…
Other Blog at http://stolf.wordpress.com (the legendary Stolf’s Blog)
More bloggage at http://travelingcyst.blogspot.com
Updated Resume at http://travelingcyst.blogspot.com/2011/02/resume.html
Audio samples at http://stolfspots.podBean.com