CheshireCat

Are you referring to the piping? As far as I know, these kind of cakes are currently seeing a revival, of sorts. Some of the colors are actually impossible to recreate. I needed a color that can be described as a bright magenta-fuchsia mix in summer. So, a pink-ish one with a bit of blue added in but whenever I mixed in blue or purple, the color got closer in shade but lost its brightness. In hindsight, it made sense because blue is added to red and pink food colors to tone it down. I googled and the result was that magenta is a shade of red (as is fuchsia) and red is a primary color, therefore, it can't be mixed. (That would also explain why the food coloring that's called fuchsia looks nothing like the color). I think perwinkle is also an impossible color to mix. With that said, the majority of cakes looked beautiful (although, look-wise, I thought the winning cake was one of the weakest ones) and many of the slices looked incredibly neat. Overall, I feel like the works of the contestants of this season are neater than in previous seasons. I'm quite enjoying it. I've also enjoyed the judging so far. It may be the editing but I like that it's less subjective, like one or the other judge expressing their personal dislike/like for something and that there's more substance to it, like a filling flavor being too heavy for the light cake and things like that. It's constructive and criticism that gives the bakers something they can improve on and that helps them become better bakers.

I don’t think it’s an either-or situation. I think you and everyone else in your generation earned their benefits. I think seniors are struggling with a crumbling social welfare system and deserve recognition of the years they worked and helped grow the economy in, for example, the form of an increase in social benefits. I think students and young adults are struggling with ever-increasing student loans and deserve some form of assistance because I don't think they should pay for higher education in the first place. I also don’t approve of the dismissal of what senior citizens (and the older population in general) contribute to society and I think it’s greatly underestimated. (And I’m not just talking about financial contributions because I think seniors contribute far beyond that). I also don’t think we should let the struggle of one group prevent us from doing something about the struggle of another. I don't think there's anything to gain from that but that it would keep us from moving forward as a society. (To give a couple of specific examples, vaccines or treatments may come too late for some/not work for some, or an immigration reform would benefit only those who go through the process after said reform. But I don't think we should let that prevent us from continuing medical research or pushing for an immigration reform. I believe we need to continue to push for change because we'll be better for it as a society. We can make lives better and in some way or another, I think it'll benefit us all). What I think matters most is that while we do something about the struggle of one group, we don't ignore the struggles of the others. We need to acknowledge those other struggles, too, and do something about them as well or push for something to be done about them, so that the other group or groups doesn’t/don’t feel like they get left behind. (Weren’t changes/an increase to social benefits floated at some point either during the Biden campaign or early in his administration? I feel like I remember something about that). We need a system, society and an economy that sees everyone and works for everyone, so that we can have medical research, immigration reform, student loan forgiveness, increase in social benefits, tax cuts for the middle class and everyone below, and everything else a healthy economy needs, at the same time. (I think Biden was taking us on that path but one of the biggest challenges that we’re facing is that the economy’s response time is sloooow. I believe that was reflected in the election results because many of the people who needed to feel the improved economy the most hadn’t felt it yet).

It's not fair. However, humans are inventors by nature. They also strive to move society forward and improve lives. If we look back, that's what we've done for centuries, even millennia. As we always have to start somewhere, it meant there always was a generation that didn't have what the next generation had, just like there was always a generation where only a select few had something. But we did it anyway because we knew it would improve lives and once we had introduced whatever it was into the lives of people, society worked or fought towards making whatever it was accessible or affordable for as many people as possible. Additionally, I think borrowers who managed to pay off their loans still benefit from student loan forgiveness. Student loan forgiveness means these young people have more money to buy things with. That generates revenue, generated revenue is good for the economy. They also may be more likely to have children which benefits society and the economy as well as social welfare. On the surface, and in the short-term, I think it looks and is unfair. In the medium- and long-term, though, it benefits the country as a whole since a strong middle class is the source of economic growth.

I understand the sentiment but I think it's more complex than that. I'm pretty certain there are a lot of Trump supporters who embody what I think is the definition of the American spirit, like they’re helpful, positive, welcoming and I believe that for many of them race wouldn't make a difference. I believe it's true when Trump supporters say not all Trump voters are racists, sexists, homophobes, antisemites etc. But, as we just saw, it's also true that none of that is a deal-breaker for them. Yes, it says something about the people, but it also says something about the erosion of social norms and values. It tells us that where society draws the line in the sand has changed. I mostly blame social media for that. That doesn't change that the insults and division at Trump rallies weren't a deal-breaker for his voters, I just don't think we'll get anywhere by saying Trump voters aren't good people and leave it at that. I think it's the easiest way out but there's so much more to it than that and that, if we want change, we need to look deeper and, among other things, at how we can restore the values we lost. It's what has been so difficult for me about this election. What does it say for the future of society if voters choose division and insults based on empty promises and feelings over unity, decency, hope and compassion based on facts? I think that if we manage to hold meaningful elections again, campaigns needs to invest heavily in experts in combating mis-and disinformation. Because I don't think that unless we start with the same basis of facts, we can’t have any meaningful conversations. I haven't been able to watch either speech.

Was NOLA filmed in LA? I know they filmed on location but I don't remember if the whole show was shot in New Orleans or if they split time between LA and New Orleans. As far as I know, they deconstruct sets and also sell them once they're done but the staircase and gallery definitely look like they could be using the same set up/set pieces. Maybe they don't sell them all the time? Or maybe, they have the same set designer?

Did he say why? How would that work with the marathon? Are they really not going to have the Olympic sport conclude the Olympic Games? (Although, I can't imagine that running a marathon in July is much fun in the LA area in general).

It might be a recent development but it wasn't when I was doing translations for an international competition held in my hometown several years ago. I'd argue it's a bit more than that. 🙂 Of course, the basis is ballet, but all of the flexibility on display is a requirement, for example. Getting there is a painful process (and most likely unhealthy, too). The jumping skills are acquired by jumping with weights on your feet. (Here's a video of what training looks like for kids in Russia (as all gymnasts have similar flexibility, I don't imagine that it looks much different in other countries. The difference might be in the coaches and their tone (I should probably add a trigger warning as you can hear some kids crying)). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR6z4YUlpIM This video gives an impression of what a Canadian gymnast's training looks like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkUVM5MVvlY ) Growing up dancing, I've done several of these excercises and they're the kind where you think your tighs are burning up and/or your back's going to break. When it comes to the competition, the apparatus needs to be in movement at all times throughout the 1:30 minute routine. Additionally, the apparatus needs to be handled with both hands equally and also with other body parts than the hands. Except for hoop, each apparatus has a focus. That means that 50% of the routine need to consist of those elements. Balance elements for clubs, flexibility for ball, jumps for rope and turns for ribbon. For hoop, it's at the gymnast's discretion. Judging is similar to gymnastics. For example, gymnasts hand in their planned routine, there's a difficulty score and an execution score, splits have to be at least 180°, feet have to touch heads, turns have to be fully rotated, the gymnast and the apparatus have to stay in bounds when performing, when a gymnast loses the apparatus there's a bigger deduction when the apparatus goes out of bounds than when they just don't catch it etc. Top gymnasts train up to 8 hours a day.

At the end of season 3, Neal fled the country, though, before the committee had made a decision to release him. I don't think the show ever clued us in on what that would have meant with regards to a prison term but it would've been his third strike (first was the initial arrest, second was his prison break). When added to what he was suspected of having done, I don't know how kind a prosecutor or judge would've been. Didn't Peter also mention something about how he'd convinced someone to get Neal his deal back? I think the show also left it up in the air just how much the FBI knew about the stolen treasure. I don't think they knew it was Neal, however, there probably were quite a few clues so that it wouldn't have been too hard to find out. He also committed a couple of crimes after that weren't sanctioned by the FBI. I'm not sure in how much trouble he could have gotten in for those.

I think in a way, he walked away freer than had he not faked his death. Yes, it would have been satisfying and rewarding to see the FBI release him from his anklet and recognize that his debt had been paid. At the same time, he'd always have been Neal Caffrey and his past would have followed him wherever he went. I think he might have been afraid that it could define him and that he would have difficulties not letting it define him. Kind of like drug addicts. After getting sober they're more at risk of using again if they go back to their old life. By faking his death, he had a chance to start over, leave it all behind and reinvent himself. That aside, I remember having been disappointed that he had gone to Paris rather than London. But it makes sense that he wouldn't have. Still, I really liked them together and think he would have deserved to be with her.

If memory serves, the plan was to cancel it after S5 and it was given the 6 episodes to wrap up Neal's kidnapping story because the fans pushed for it. I think it was both. In E3 (I believe) there's a conversation between Neal and Keller during which Keller says to him that the Pink Panthers go after the families/loved ones if they're betrayed. I also think he was afraid that the government would yet again move back on their promise/contract or find yet another reason to go back on it. I believe this was the third time that he was promised freedom and then it didn't happen. So, my take was that he took the opportunity and thought better safe than sorry.

I liked the idea. I wasn't sure about the execution. It looked kind of rushed. However, all three cakes kind of did. How much time did they have? I thought it was four hours but it seems like at least the buttercream-decorated cakes would have looked neater in four hours. Unless, the fireworks took a lot more time to make than I think they have. I thought the style looked like something straight off the runway, you know, the kind of clothes designers design but that aren't really ever worn by the average person. I think in terms of flavor, Stephanie had the most interesting sounding while Rob had the most safe-sounding and least original. The cake might have tasted good, still, it's a lot easier to combine lemon and raspberry than poppy-seed-olive oil, orange and tahini. I thought it was interesting that the flavor really only applied to the cake since Chris used orange in his filling. I'm still not sure how I feel about that. If you're given exclusive use, shouldn't it be completely exclusive? (I know Jesse said sponge, I'm just musing if it shouldn't have been exclusive of that flavor, period. It's not much of an advantage when someone else can still use that flavor, is it?) Same here. Although, Rob's skyline didn't convince me either. I'd give him points for not using the cutter and, therefore, being able to make it bigger. However, he had 3 or 4 connected rectangle and I think if they critiqued Stephanie for it, they should have done the same for Rob as well (and if the judges did, the show should've left it in). I wonder if the cutter was all that the show had because city skyline stencils are available and they're larger. While it might have been tricky to get the buttercream hard enough for a stencil, they could have used it on fondant and they probably could have used it on baking paper, put it in the fridge and then transferred it on to the cake. I was kind of disappointed with all three cakes. As said above, all three looked rushed, so, I thought it was natural that it would come down to flavor. As much as I liked Stephanie for doing a risky and more complex flavor combination, I thought the stars she had piped on were too big as in, she used a piping tip that was too large. I did love the flames she created, though. Between Rob and Chris, I liked the idea of Chris' cake more. It was lacking in execution, however, I agreed with the judges that he had the best skyline. I also thought it was the most interesting/exciting design and since he also had a slightly more complex flavor, I probably would have given it to him. For me, it would probably also have worked in his favor that he didn't dye his dough. I thought was weird. On my TV, it looked as red as Chris' fondant did. Even if that wasn't an accurate depiction, I thought the comparison to the raspberry was strange because raspberry aren't red-red. They're, well, raspberry-colored and there's always magenta mixed into the color which means there's a blue part in it. Unfortunately, since I heard more than watched the other episodes, I have no real idea how the three bakers did throughout the show. I had no favorite, so I'm okay with the winner.

I read her (auto)biography and he actually kept her at arm's length until she was 20. There's still the age difference and that he was in charge of her career but it seems to have been a happy marriage. I read that in an interview a few years back and, apparently, it's not just shoes. I don't know how anyone wears shows that are too big or small but it definitely takes a very confident person to buy clothes that they like regardless of size with the determination to make it work. I'm always torn when I see things like that. On the one hand, I wonder why they have to show it; there's a part of it that feels like it's shown for shock effect. On the other hand, I think it's important to raise awareness and it's also important for anyone who goes through something similar as it shows them that they're not alone. It's true that their old enough, still, I don't think it would be quite fair to expect them to help. It's not their illness and as Dion can afford staff, I think children should be allowed to be children. I can also see why she might not want them more involved. They lost their father at the age of 6, now their mother is sick with an incurable disease. That's a lot to deal with and given how she came across, she might want to be able to keep up appearances for the sake of her children. As in, say she's okay even on days when she's not at her best. I don't know if she'll ever get back to a point where she can return to the stage and see where you're coming from. In my experience, it's not that simple though. From what I know, Dion led a pretty similar life to that of a dancer or an athlete. She started singing at a very young age and it seemed to dominate her life. When dancers retire, they often need help finding that second career path as they have to learn who they are without dancing and I think, if she retired, she'd probably feel the same. I think she might even feel like she's losing part of her identity and/or that she lets the illness define her. Even if she's never able to get back on stage or record another album, I'd assume that it's good for her mental health to keep going for as long as she wants to. It gives her a goal to work towards. . As far as the documentary is concerned, I have little to add. It was a lot to take in, very interesting and also, kind of heartbreaking. While I had really hoped to see her on stage again, I don't think it'll happen. But I hope that she can get to a place where she's happy with herself and I'll always cherish the two concerts that I did get to attend.

I've had to work while watching (cookie order for a wedding this weekend), so I haven't been able to see all that much. I mostly heard which isn't ideal when it comes to baking. Monday should be better.

I just saw the news about the reboot. After Garson died, I expected that they'd scrapped the plans, so it was quite a surprise to see it pop up on my Twitter feed.

Just once would I love to see a character like Joe take responsibility. Or, I would love to see the exploration of the emotions involved. I don't believe that Joe truly blames Jubal. I think he's blaming Jubal because it's easier than blaming himself. After all, it's not just that his son gave the pills to the girls and bears responsibility for these deaths. Nate also made the choice to get involved. He made the choice to give pills to girls because he wanted them to like him. He made the choice that he'd sell pills until he got a job. I'm sure there are plenty of young people out there who are in the same situation as Nate, so, Nate's upbringing is at least partly responsible for the choices Nate made. I have a hard time believing that someone like Joe wouldn't see it. But, as I said above, it's easier to blame Jubal. Still, I think it would be great to see the journey of Joe realizing it. Unfortunately, that rarely happens in procedurals. On the other hand, it's also in Joe's character. He said that he turned a blind eye to Jubal's drinking problem. That makes him an enabler. And here, he was an enabler again and tried to make Jubal one, too. As far as the overall episode is concerned, I liked it. I'm often not a fan of character-centered episodes on FBI as they often involve characters making reckless decisions, disobeying orders and then ending up the hero and all's forgiven. But this one was a great episode. It was well-paced and I really liked the way it was written. As in, the twists and the key moments for Jubal (eg, when he was asked to hide the pills or when they were searching for a green SVU). Those were some great moments for the character. The team dynamic was great, too.