Search This Blog

Yesteryear

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

November 3, 2010

           I have a lot to say about “Bones To Ashes”. This Reichs author now has me caught up in a mystery of my own making. I’m on page 175 and I say the evidence is overwhelming that I am correct about her background. I further suspect her book was written on a government grant as well. It has been proof-read to the extreme. What manner of person has the leisure time to learn Quebec French as a second language? What kind of easterner is an expert on Tlinget and Haida folkart?
           I’ve picked up on around a dozen other clues, for instance, how she subconsciously refers to food and clothes from the perspective of those who never had to be much concerned with their cost. People eat in restaurants, she dines in brassieres, and yet from her thinking patterns she is definitely not upper class. New money, and a lot of it? She lacks any sincerity found in the self-made. There are additional vague but unmistakable phrases or clauses that reveal she has experienced what others have to research, a shortcut available only the callously wealthy.
           Don’t ask me why I’ve latched on to this hypothesis. I don’t know. But I suspect it is my natural distaste for professional students who use the media to indirectly plug an educational status that smacks of an easy life. These types have all kinds of information, but barely pass muster turning it into knowledge and fail completely at turning knowledge into wisdom. They are too isolated from harsh reality. The book beyond question contains a lot of information.
           Later. Aha, more evidence. The book is 388 pages long. Around page 275 the writing style changes to shorter sentences and she begins to repeat herself. She’s wearing out “chin-cock”, the action of pointing something out by looking at it and nodding upward. Somebody is running short of cash wants this book wrapped up. Reichs has resorted to contemporary Canadian bugaboos to sustain reader interest, such as feminism and kiddie porn. But she waited until Chapter 32 to do so. I’m disappointed, Kathy.

           She also tries to spice up her earlier historically style to include the Internet. I’d say from that point onward, she is doing her own writing and it shows. Her bad guys run strip clubs, have dumb passwords, leave USB drives in flour jars and hide porn shots behind ceiling tiles. Things have definitely gone prime time. Later, I finished the book, it is an exhausting read but has enough momentum to keep you going to the end. I can identify with various aspects, such as the Acadian distrust of all government.
           My bicycle needs a new drive train. The price is $140 which is considerably more than I paid for the original bike. It is my primary transportation and I’m keen on that not changing. This means the drive trains for the pedal wagon would cost $1,400 for a ten person model. Still, compared to the price tag of a store bought model, Dave-O and I are inching along with the plans. He is reverse-engineering it from photos with his CAD software. Later, it turned out all he knew how to do was run the software, not actually come up with workable objects. There is a lot of that going around.

           The book I just read mentioned diatoms, the skeletons of tiny water creatures. This reminded me of pollen rain, the dust the authorities are collecting from all over the world. These tiny pollen grains exist in unique combinations and can be used to pinpoint locations as crime evidence. What I discovered is these grains require 2,000x magnification to be visible. That part is new to me, do they even make a consumer brand scope that has that kind of power? If so, it must be at the limit of optical lenses. I’ll try to find out, either way this is expensive technology.

           [Author’s note: I am not against the use of technology in crime, but rather against the method in which it is abused by the authorities. It is one thing to use technology to prove someone was at a crime scene. It is quite another matter for the police to conceal knowledge of that evidence and grill the accused until he finally says one thing wrong, then use the technology to discredit him in court.
           People who watch too much television don’t understand the difference. The founding fathers recognized the evil of this brand of police interrogation. This is why the Constitution forbids you to testify against yourself even if you want to. If you are a suspect instead of a witness, you should immediately lawyer up. American jails are full of people found innocent twenty years later as technology advances.]


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Return Home
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++