|
|
Sunday, April 29th, 2012
| |
9:45 pm
|
|
| Wednesday, March 14th, 2012
| |
10:27 am
|
http://www.veggiechallenge.nl/
Ha, leuk, wie doet er mee? En voor de vegetariërs onder ons: de uitdaging wordt dan natuurlijk om een dag per week veganistisch te eten!
...zou er veganistische hagelslag zijn?
current mood:  cheerful
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Thursday, February 9th, 2012
| |
3:17 pm
|
Ja hoor, kijk dat dan. http://www.postnl.nl/voorthuis/brieven/tarieven/Brieven/
"We zetten niet meer het tarief op de postzegel maar nummer 1, 2 of 3, want dat is gemakkelijker voor de consument!"
Nee, dat is gemakkelijker voor PTT, TPG, TNT, PostNL, whatever the hell your name is, om binnen een jaar tijd de tarieven met minstens 30% per brief omhoog te schroeven! Een euro voor een brief van 50 gram, dat slaat echt álles. Er was een réden waarom dit soort bedrijven in overheidshanden hadden moeten blijven. Grrrrr. Ik ben echt geen fulltime socialist, maar dit soort dingen irriteren me mateloos.
|
|
(4 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, February 7th, 2012
| |
7:27 pm
|
|
Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it. ~C.S. Lewis
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, November 21st, 2011
| |
2:59 pm
|
Ik ben er eindelijk uit waarom ik de Grand Canyon gewoon niet zo indrukwekkend vind als "de grootste kloof ter wereld".
...Omdat het op een gegeven moment gewoon geen klóóf meer is. Ben ik de enige die dat heeft? Ik bedoel, een kloof, dat is meer van, je loopt over een min of meer vlak stuk grond, en dan opeens BAM! een kloof! Een hele diepe scheur waar je alleen maar in kunt storten, en aan de overkant gaat de vlakke grond waar je verder wilt lopen gewoon verder. Maar de Grand Canyon, dat is geen kloof, je kunt de overkant zelfs maar nauwelijks zien. Dat is gewoon een een dal met aan beide kanten een steile helling. Twee afgronden en een vallei ertussen. En die afgrond is niet eens zo steil dat je er in stort als je te ver op het randje gaat staan; je kunt gewoon naar beneden lopen.
Dus.
|
|
(7 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, July 15th, 2011
| |
1:03 pm
|
Typtyptyptyptyp... tekstschrijven hoeraaaaa. Nou ja geld is geld. Dit weekend ga ik ook in het pension werken; kan ik lekker weer met Daisy knuffelen! *hoopt dat niemand haar meeneemt tot Toby en zij ooit samen een huisje hebben*
|
|
(7 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, May 30th, 2011
| |
4:37 pm
|
Eh.
Er viel net een babykraai door mijn afvoerbuis in de wc naar beneden. Ik heb 'm maar gepakt en op mijn balkon gezet, want ik kan hem niet terug naar het dak brengen, en als ik 'm beneden neerzet wordt hij opgegeten door katten.
Maar nu? Iemand tips voor het opvoeden van een kraai? :D
|
|
(18 comments | comment on this)
|
| Thursday, May 5th, 2011
| |
4:51 pm
|
Jeeeezus. Toen ik van het winter maar bleef hoesten, had de huisarts om het uit te proberen me een seretide inhalator voorgeschreven - bestond een kans dat het de prikkel zou onderdrukken en ik dus niet meer zo zou hoesten. Krijg ik vandaag de rekening van de zorgverzekeraar: Dat koste dus €74,39, hè! En het híelp niet eens.
Jemig. Leuk joh, zo'n huisarts. Wat denkt die nou eigenlijk, dat ik onbeperkt geld heb om aan probeerselmedicijnen uit te geven?! Ga d'r mooi niet meer heen *mopper* Dat heb ik nou altijd, dat de huisarts het flikt om me gewoon maar wat te doen - de helft van de tijd werkt het niet, en dan zeggen ze "Oh dan zal het toch wel dit niet zijn maar iets anders" en dan moet ik nog een keer een medicijn gaan halen dat dan wel zou moeten helpen. Maar meestal helpt dat ook niet en gaat het uiteindelijk vanzelf over. Grrrrrrr. De volgende keer vraag ik van tevoren hoe duur dat medicijn dan wel niet is dat ze me voor willen schrijven *moppermoppermopper* Ik heb helemaal geen geld voor zulke dure medicijnen, en al helemáál niet als ze niet werken.
That said, wil er iemand een vrijwel ongebruikte inhalator met seretide kopen? €50! €40 is ook goed!
current mood:  aggravated
|
|
(12 comments | comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, November 24th, 2010
| |
10:58 pm
|
http://www.minimaalnominaal.nl/
Willen jullie allemaal de petitie tekenen tegen de boete die het kabinet wil invoeren voor mensen die uitlopen met hun studie?
Het allerergste is dat die maatregel dus per 2011 ingaat óók voor mensen die al studeren en al uitgelopen zijn! Dus in feite met terugwerkende kracht, want voor zij begonnen met studeren hadden zij nooit kunnen weten dat die boete er zou komen, en op deze manier worden ze gedwongen om te stoppen met hun studie. Hun diploma kunnen ze dan helemaal niet meer halen. Dat is geen straf meer, daarmee snijdt Nederland zich heel hard in zijn eigen vingers...
ik snap werkelijk waar niet waarom het kabinet dit soort maatregelen op deze manier via de achterdeur wil invoeren. Dit is toch ronduit achterbaks? Hetzelfde verhaal met de tweede-studieregeling (instellingscollegegeld i.p.v. wettelijk collegegeld), die ook geldig was voor mensen die al begonnen waren met hun tweede studie. Die worden dus ook gedwongen om dan maar na 2 of 3 jaar te stoppen met hun studie, omdat zij opeens het collegegeld niet meer kunnen betalen.
Dat gaat toch nergens over? Ik snap werkelijk waar niet dat een overheid zoiets vuils kan overwegen. Dat je die maatregelen in wilt voeren, okee, maar dat je ze ook laat gelden voor studenten die van tevoren nooit hadden kunnen weten dat die maatregelen er zouden komen en dus hun studie niet kunnen afronden, dat slaat werkelijk alles. Dat is net zoiets als iemand op een 50-kilometerweg laten rijden, rustig 50 km/h, en dan achter hem een bordje neerzetten met 30, en dan een boete geven omdat hij te hard rijdt. Dat kun je domweg niet maken!
Oftewel, teken die petitie.
|
|
(17 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, November 16th, 2010
| |
8:33 pm
|
*snerk*
Sorry, ik blijf ze maar posten, maar ze zijn zó grappig. (En ja ik kende het al jaren maar ik heb nog nooit de archieven doorgekeken).
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
| Saturday, November 6th, 2010
| |
1:47 am
|
|
| Sunday, October 31st, 2010
| |
2:44 am
|
|
| Wednesday, October 27th, 2010
| |
11:15 am - Deze manier van kijken is de reden waarom er "ben je bewust?" op mijn computer staat
|
David Foster Wallace-Kenyon Commencement Speech 2005
This speech was originally transcribed and posted at Marganlia.org until recently (though it is still available elsewhere) In order to help keep this speech that was free, and can still be found here, here is the originally transcribed version.
"(If anybody feels like perspiring [cough], I'd advise you to go ahead, because I'm sure going to. In fact I'm gonna [mumbles while pulling up his gown and taking out a handkerchief from his pocket].) Greetings ["parents"?] and congratulations to Kenyon's graduating class of 2005. There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says "Morning, boys. How's the water?" And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes "What the hell is water?"
This is a standard requirement of US commencement speeches, the deployment of didactic little parable-ish stories. The story ["thing"] turns out to be one of the better, less bullshitty conventions of the genre, but if you're worried that I plan to present myself here as the wise, older fish explaining what water is to you younger fish, please don't be. I am not the wise old fish. The point of the fish story is merely that the most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about. Stated as an English sentence, of course, this is just a banal platitude, but the fact is that in the day to day trenches of adult existence, banal platitudes can have a life or death importance, or so I wish to suggest to you on this dry and lovely morning.
Of course the main requirement of speeches like this is that I'm supposed to talk about your liberal arts education's meaning, to try to explain why the degree you are about to receive has actual human value instead of just a material payoff. So let's talk about the single most pervasive cliché in the commencement speech genre, which is that a liberal arts education is not so much about filling you up with knowledge as it is about "teaching you how to think". If you're like me as a student, you've never liked hearing this, and you tend to feel a bit insulted by the claim that you needed anybody to teach you how to think, since the fact that you even got admitted to a college this good seems like proof that you already know how to think. But I'm going to posit to you that the liberal arts cliché turns out not to be insulting at all, because the really significant education in thinking that we're supposed to get in a place like this isn't really about the capacity to think, but rather about the choice of what to think about. If your total freedom of choice regarding what to think about seems too obvious to waste time discussing, I'd ask you to think about fish and water, and to bracket for just a few minutes your scepticism about the value of the totally obvious.
Here's another didactic little story. There are these two guys sitting together in a bar in the remote Alaskan wilderness. One of the guys is religious, the other is an atheist, and the two are arguing about the existence of God with that special intensity that comes after about the fourth beer. And the atheist says: "Look, it's not like I don't have actual reasons for not believing in God. It's not like I haven't ever experimented with the whole God and prayer thing. Just last month I got caught away from the camp in that terrible blizzard, and I was totally lost and I couldn't see a thing, and it was 50 below, and so I tried it: I fell to my knees in the snow and cried out 'Oh, God, if there is a God, I'm lost in this blizzard, and I'm gonna die if you don't help me.'" And now, in the bar, the religious guy looks at the atheist all puzzled. "Well then you must believe now," he says, "After all, here you are, alive." The atheist just rolls his eyes. "No, man, all that was was a couple Eskimos happened to come wandering by and showed me the way back to camp."
It's easy to run this story through kind of a standard liberal arts analysis: the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people, given those people's two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience. Because we prize tolerance and diversity of belief, nowhere in our liberal arts analysis do we want to claim that one guy's interpretation is true and the other guy's is false or bad. Which is fine, except we also never end up talking about just where these individual templates and beliefs come from. Meaning, where they come from INSIDE the two guys. As if a person's most basic orientation toward the world, and the meaning of his experience were somehow just hard-wired, like height or shoe-size; or automatically absorbed from the culture, like language. As if how we construct meaning were not actually a matter of personal, intentional choice. Plus, there's the whole matter of arrogance. The nonreligious guy is so totally certain in his dismissal of the possibility that the passing Eskimos had anything to do with his prayer for help. True, there are plenty of religious people who seem arrogant and certain of their own interpretations, too. They're probably even more repulsive than atheists, at least to most of us. But religious dogmatists' problem is exactly the same as the story's unbeliever: blind certainty, a close-mindedness that amounts to an imprisonment so total that the prisoner doesn't even know he's locked up.
The point here is that I think this is one part of what teaching me how to think is really supposed to mean. To be just a little less arrogant. To have just a little critical awareness about myself and my certainties. Because a huge percentage of the stuff that I tend to be automatically certain of is, it turns out, totally wrong and deluded. I have learned this the hard way, as I predict you graduates will, too.
Here is just one example of the total wrongness of something I tend to be automatically sure of: everything in my own immediate experience supports my deep belief that I am the absolute centre of the universe; the realest, most vivid and important person in existence. We rarely think about this sort of natural, basic self-centredness because it's so socially repulsive. But it's pretty much the same for all of us. It is our default setting, hard-wired into our boards at birth. Think about it: there is no experience you have had that you are not the absolute centre of. The world as you experience it is there in front of YOU or behind YOU, to the left or right of YOU, on YOUR TV or YOUR monitor. And so on. Other people's thoughts and feelings have to be communicated to you somehow, but your own are so immediate, urgent, real.
Please don't worry that I'm getting ready to lecture you about compassion or other-directedness or all the so-called virtues. This is not a matter of virtue. It's a matter of my choosing to do the work of somehow altering or getting free of my natural, hard-wired default setting which is to be deeply and literally self-centered and to see and interpret everything through this lens of self. People who can adjust their natural default setting this way are often described as being "well-adjusted", which I suggest to you is not an accidental term.
Given the triumphant academic setting here, an obvious question is how much of this work of adjusting our default setting involves actual knowledge or intellect. This question gets very tricky. Probably the most dangerous thing about an academic education--least in my own case--is that it enables my tendency to over-intellectualise stuff, to get lost in abstract argument inside my head, instead of simply paying attention to what is going on right in front of me, paying attention to what is going on inside me.
As I'm sure you guys know by now, it is extremely difficult to stay alert and attentive, instead of getting hypnotised by the constant monologue inside your own head (may be happening right now). Twenty years after my own graduation, I have come gradually to understand that the liberal arts cliché about teaching you how to think is actually shorthand for a much deeper, more serious idea: learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think. It means being conscious and aware enough to choose what you pay attention to and to choose how you construct meaning from experience. Because if you cannot exercise this kind of choice in adult life, you will be totally hosed. Think of the old cliché about "the mind being an excellent servant but a terrible master".
This, like many clichés, so lame and unexciting on the surface, actually expresses a great and terrible truth. It is not the least bit coincidental that adults who commit suicide with firearms almost always shoot themselves in: the head. They shoot the terrible master. And the truth is that most of these suicides are actually dead long before they pull the trigger.
And I submit that this is what the real, no bullshit value of your liberal arts education is supposed to be about: how to keep from going through your comfortable, prosperous, respectable adult life dead, unconscious, a slave to your head and to your natural default setting of being uniquely, completely, imperially alone day in and day out. That may sound like hyperbole, or abstract nonsense. Let's get concrete. The plain fact is that you graduating seniors do not yet have any clue what "day in day out" really means. There happen to be whole, large parts of adult American life that nobody talks about in commencement speeches. One such part involves boredom, routine and petty frustration. The parents and older folks here will know all too well what I'm talking about.
By way of example, let's say it's an average adult day, and you get up in the morning, go to your challenging, white-collar, college-graduate job, and you work hard for eight or ten hours, and at the end of the day you're tired and somewhat stressed and all you want is to go home and have a good supper and maybe unwind for an hour, and then hit the sack early because, of course, you have to get up the next day and do it all again. But then you remember there's no food at home. You haven't had time to shop this week because of your challenging job, and so now after work you have to get in your car and drive to the supermarket. It's the end of the work day and the traffic is apt to be: very bad. So getting to the store takes way longer than it should, and when you finally get there, the supermarket is very crowded, because of course it's the time of day when all the other people with jobs also try to squeeze in some grocery shopping. And the store is hideously lit and infused with soul-killing muzak or corporate pop and it's pretty much the last place you want to be but you can't just get in and quickly out; you have to wander all over the huge, over-lit store's confusing aisles to find the stuff you want and you have to manoeuvre your junky cart through all these other tired, hurried people with carts (et cetera, et cetera, cutting stuff out because this is a long ceremony) and eventually you get all your supper supplies, except now it turns out there aren't enough check-out lanes open even though it's the end-of-the-day rush. So the checkout line is incredibly long, which is stupid and infuriating. But you can't take your frustration out on the frantic lady working the register, who is overworked at a job whose daily tedium and meaninglessness surpasses the imagination of any of us here at a prestigious college.
But anyway, you finally get to the checkout line's front, and you pay for your food, and you get told to "Have a nice day" in a voice that is the absolute voice of death. Then you have to take your creepy, flimsy, plastic bags of groceries in your cart with the one crazy wheel that pulls maddeningly to the left, all the way out through the crowded, bumpy, littery parking lot, and then you have to drive all the way home through slow, heavy, SUV-intensive, rush-hour traffic, et cetera et cetera.
Everyone here has done this, of course. But it hasn't yet been part of you graduates' actual life routine, day after week after month after year.
But it will be. And many more dreary, annoying, seemingly meaningless routines besides. But that is not the point. The point is that petty, frustrating crap like this is exactly where the work of choosing is gonna come in. Because the traffic jams and crowded aisles and long checkout lines give me time to think, and if I don't make a conscious decision about how to think and what to pay attention to, I'm gonna be pissed and miserable every time I have to shop. Because my natural default setting is the certainty that situations like this are really all about me. About MY hungriness and MY fatigue and MY desire to just get home, and it's going to seem for all the world like everybody else is just in my way. And who are all these people in my way? And look at how repulsive most of them are, and how stupid and cow-like and dead-eyed and nonhuman they seem in the checkout line, or at how annoying and rude it is that people are talking loudly on cell phones in the middle of the line. And look at how deeply and personally unfair this is.
Or, of course, if I'm in a more socially conscious liberal arts form of my default setting, I can spend time in the end-of-the-day traffic being disgusted about all the huge, stupid, lane-blocking SUV's and Hummers and V-12 pickup trucks, burning their wasteful, selfish, 40-gallon tanks of gas, and I can dwell on the fact that the patriotic or religious bumper-stickers always seem to be on the biggest, most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest [responding here to loud applause] (this is an example of how NOT to think, though) most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest, most inconsiderate and aggressive drivers. And I can think about how our children's children will despise us for wasting all the future's fuel, and probably screwing up the climate, and how spoiled and stupid and selfish and disgusting we all are, and how modern consumer society just sucks, and so forth and so on.
You get the idea.
If I choose to think this way in a store and on the freeway, fine. Lots of us do. Except thinking this way tends to be so easy and automatic that it doesn't have to be a choice. It is my natural default setting. It's the automatic way that I experience the boring, frustrating, crowded parts of adult life when I'm operating on the automatic, unconscious belief that I am the centre of the world, and that my immediate needs and feelings are what should determine the world's priorities.
The thing is that, of course, there are totally different ways to think about these kinds of situations. In this traffic, all these vehicles stopped and idling in my way, it's not impossible that some of these people in SUV's have been in horrible auto accidents in the past, and now find driving so terrifying that their therapist has all but ordered them to get a huge, heavy SUV so they can feel safe enough to drive. Or that the Hummer that just cut me off is maybe being driven by a father whose little child is hurt or sick in the seat next to him, and he's trying to get this kid to the hospital, and he's in a bigger, more legitimate hurry than I am: it is actually I who am in HIS way.
Or I can choose to force myself to consider the likelihood that everyone else in the supermarket's checkout line is just as bored and frustrated as I am, and that some of these people probably have harder, more tedious and painful lives than I do.
Again, please don't think that I'm giving you moral advice, or that I'm saying you are supposed to think this way, or that anyone expects you to just automatically do it. Because it's hard. It takes will and effort, and if you are like me, some days you won't be able to do it, or you just flat out won't want to.
But most days, if you're aware enough to give yourself a choice, you can choose to look differently at this fat, dead-eyed, over-made-up lady who just screamed at her kid in the checkout line. Maybe she's not usually like this. Maybe she's been up three straight nights holding the hand of a husband who is dying of bone cancer. Or maybe this very lady is the low-wage clerk at the motor vehicle department, who just yesterday helped your spouse resolve a horrific, infuriating, red-tape problem through some small act of bureaucratic kindness. Of course, none of this is likely, but it's also not impossible. It just depends what you want to consider. If you're automatically sure that you know what reality is, and you are operating on your default setting, then you, like me, probably won't consider possibilities that aren't annoying and miserable. But if you really learn how to pay attention, then you will know there are other options. It will actually be within your power to experience a crowded, hot, slow, consumer-hell type situation as not only meaningful, but sacred, on fire with the same force that made the stars: love, fellowship, the mystical oneness of all things deep down.
Not that that mystical stuff is necessarily true. The only thing that's capital-T True is that you get to decide how you're gonna try to see it.
This, I submit, is the freedom of a real education, of learning how to be well-adjusted. You get to consciously decide what has meaning and what doesn't. You get to decide what to worship.
Because here's something else that's weird but true: in the day-to-day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship--be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles--is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It's the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It's been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.
Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. But the insidious thing about these forms of worship is not that they're evil or sinful, it's that they're unconscious. They are default settings.
They're the kind of worship you just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that's what you're doing.
And the so-called real world will not discourage you from operating on your default settings, because the so-called real world of men and money and power hums merrily along in a pool of fear and anger and frustration and craving and worship of self. Our own present culture has harnessed these forces in ways that have yielded extraordinary wealth and comfort and personal freedom. The freedom all to be lords of our tiny skull-sized kingdoms, alone at the centre of all creation. This kind of freedom has much to recommend it. But of course there are all different kinds of freedom, and the kind that is most precious you will not hear much talk about much in the great outside world of wanting and achieving.... The really important kind of freedom involves attention and awareness and discipline, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day.
That is real freedom. That is being educated, and understanding how to think. The alternative is unconsciousness, the default setting, the rat race, the constant gnawing sense of having had, and lost, some infinite thing.
I know that this stuff probably doesn't sound fun and breezy or grandly inspirational the way a commencement speech is supposed to sound. What it is, as far as I can see, is the capital-T Truth, with a whole lot of rhetorical niceties stripped away. You are, of course, free to think of it whatever you wish. But please don't just dismiss it as just some finger-wagging Dr Laura sermon. None of this stuff is really about morality or religion or dogma or big fancy questions of life after death.
The capital-T Truth is about life BEFORE death.
It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over:
"This is water."
"This is water."
It is unimaginably hard to do this, to stay conscious and alive in the adult world day in and day out. Which means yet another grand cliché turns out to be true: your education really IS the job of a lifetime. And it commences: now.
I wish you way more than luck."
current mood:  calm
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Saturday, August 28th, 2010
| |
2:48 pm
|
In de categorie "zo moet het wel, Alanis":
De website van het National Register of Public Service Interpreters (http://www.nrpsi.co.uk/) heeft geen Nederlandse vertaling.
*facepalm*
En ik zit met de gebakken peren, want ik moet dus wel een Nederlandse term hebben voor die naam. Of zou ik gewoon het Engels kunnen laten staan? Ik vraag het ze wel, maar dikke kans dat het hoe dan ook fout is (als ik al een Nederlandse vertaling doe, dan is dat waarschijnlijk niet de correcte. Maar ik kan nergens op het internet een Nederlandse standaardvertaling van die term tegenkomen, dus ik denk dat ik er maar eentje verzin. Misschien is het ook wel de eerste keer dat iemand geprobeerd heeft dat naar het Nederlands te vertalen). Zucht. Leuk werk, joh, vertalen :P
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
| |
12:38 am
|
|
| Thursday, July 1st, 2010
| |
8:19 pm
|
Ik werd vanmorgen dus wakker met een hoog, irritant en aanhoudend gepiep in mijn oren. En nee, het was m'n wekker niet, het was een vogel. Buiten. Die onophoudelijk op dezelfde hoge toon bleef piepen. Uiteindelijk ergerde ik me er zo aan, dat ik het bed maar uitgestampt ben. Mijn moeder lachte me alleen maar uit. Maar later op de dag kwam ze naar me toe; zij had de vogel ook gehoord en het was inderdaad een heel irritant gepiep.
Vervolgens kwam ze nu net na het eten weer naar me toe: hij zat er nóg, en hij piepte nog stééds, op steeds dezelfde toonhoogte. On-op-hou-de-lijk. Ze opperde dat het misschien een jonkie was, die hier in de buurt zat. Dus wij op speurtocht naar de vogel! gekeken in de klimop, maar daar zat hij niet. Een meesje ontdekt in de lijsterbes, was die het dan? Nee, dat leek er ook niet op. Hij was met een hoop dingen bezig maar niet echt met piepen, die mees. Dus ik toch maar de tuin in, om tot de conclusie te komen dat het geluid toch echt uit de berkeboom kwam. Hoofd in de nek gelegd en jawel, daar zag ik een vogeltje zitten dat wel eens de boosdoener kon zijn. Weer op naar het balkon, verrekijker mee, en ja hoor, daar zat het scharminkel, nog steeds te piepen, en ik zag zijn keeltje bewegen, de vervoering in zijn kleine oogjes, de overgave waarmee hij zijn gebrek aan zang liet horen.
Het leek me zo op het eerste gezicht een groenling, maar hij zat achter een tak, waardoor ik het niet zeker wist. Dus mijn moeder en ik in de vogelgids bladeren, kijken of de (over het algemeen uiterst hilarische) beschrijvingen van vogelgeluiden ons verder konden helpen. En ja hoor, daar zat hij dan, de groenling, met z'n vinkenbekkie en z'n gevorkte staartje, en zijn roep was als we de gids mochten geloven "een snelle, luide triller en een langgerekt, nasaal 'tsjwieeh'".
Oh ja hoor, dat is hem dus! Met z'n langgerekte, nasale tsjwieeh. Ze hebben er alleen niet bij gezet dat hij het met het ritme en de regelmaat van een wekker doet, en dat de hele dag lang. We hebben nog niet gevonden hoe we 'm uit moeten zetten, de groenling. Misschien toch maar iets naar z'n hoofd gooien, want het gaat toch nergens over dat hij de hele dag in dezelfde boom zit te piepen. Alsof hij niets beters te doen heeft. "Algemene broedvogel en doortrekker", zegt de vogelgids tegen ons. Hup, doortrekken, eikel!
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, June 21st, 2010
| |
8:18 pm
|
|
| Tuesday, June 15th, 2010
| |
9:08 pm
|
Omfg, kijk nou wat Kim me laat zien:
Omfgomfgomfgomfg nou moet ik die serie kijken...!!! Maar ik moet mijn script afschrijven! Het is maar goed dat er geen hete mannen in zitten, anders had ik plotseling heel homo-erotische scenes in het script. En het is dus voor een kinderanimatie. Er zitten überhaupt geen mannen in eigenlijk.
Omfgomfgomfgomfg. Zelfs al ziet Sam er niet zo uit als wat ik in mijn hoofd heb. Wah.
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
| Sunday, May 30th, 2010
| |
10:18 pm
|
|
| Thursday, May 6th, 2010
| |
8:57 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
raim's journal
