Who Are The Heroes?

On August 15th, 1945, Japan surrendered to the United States, and World War II was officially over. That day has always meant something to me: my father fought in this war, my older brother died in this war, my ex-husband fought in this war, and my husband of 36 years fought in the Korean War. To me, these four men are heroes, as are all the men and women who have fought, died, or returned home from the many wars we have been involved in.

But who are the heroes of today? Sports stars from football, baseball, basketball, and the like are touted by the media as being "heroes." Really? What makes a football star a hero? I guess it depends upon your own personal definition of who or what makes a hero.

This is mine: A hero is a person who willingly, and without a thought of himself/herself, makes a personal sacrifice for the sake of someone else, known or unknown.

This is why every member of the US Armed Services is a hero to me. Each of these men and women have volunteered to sacrifice their own life, if necessary, in order to create safety for those of us left on the shores of the United States. This is why each and every one of the First Responders on September 11, 2001, is a hero to me. They willingly and courageously risked their own lives, and many lost them, to save the lives of hundreds of people they didn't know.

Who are the unsung heroes in our midst? How about the four teachers, school psychologist, and the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary school, who all died defending their students? How about six year old Jesse Lewis, who yelled "Run!" to the first graders in his class when the gunman rushed in, but had to stop to reload his weapon before he could begin killing again? His first shot went into the head of Jesse Lewis, who had waited until all his classmates were out the door before he turned to run. Too late.

What about all the grandparents today who are raising their grandchildren because their own kids have left the life of responsibility to drown themselves in drugs, or alcohol, or who go to jail because of having committed a crime? These Senior Citizens have made personal sacrifices, some have even had to return to some form of work to make ends meet, now that they have children in the home again. Their dreams of an easy and peaceful retirement have come to a sudden halt, as they now have to begin raising kids all over again. As a grandmother, I could not do this, so to me, those who do are heroes.

Where are the values of today's society, when we read and hear over TV all the time about the praises heaped upon the sports stars, celebrities, and other people of note, all of whom are referred to as "heroes?" What exactly have they done to be considered "heroes?" As a society, have we fallen so low that a hero is nothing more than someone who has 715 homeruns, or is a celebrity having children without marriage, and who is often leading an immature and sometimes drug-filled life, but who is still held up by the media as a "star?" These are the people our children are supposed to emulate, to be impressed by, and to grow up to be "just like?" Not in my book.

Who are your heroes?

Mikki Sadil
http:// mikki-wordpainter.BlogSpot.com
The Freedom Thief
Cheers, Chocolate, and Other Disasters
Lily Leticia Langford and the Book of Practical Magic
Night Cries: Beneath the Possum Belly, book one

Eighteenth Century Welfare-Parish Relief, by Diane Scott Lewis

In my continued research into history, to add to my 18th century novels, I came across interesting details about the English version of Welfare, Parish Relief. Charity in this era was limited. The very poor had to rely on parish relief to survive. But first they had to prove they had a legal link, such as birth, a residence or employment, in the parish—the territorial area under the clerical jurisdiction of one parish priest—where they sought funds. People who were denied parish relief were sometimes found starved to death.

Some parishes were so small they tried to shuffle their poor into the larger neighboring parishes. The elderly and sick were turned away. A few parishes paid indigent bachelors in other settlements 40 shillings to marry their poor women to take them off the books. Overseers of the poor might interfere in a marriage between two paupers, fearing it would result in burdensome children.
To make matters worse, parish authorities were often corrupt and stingy. They’d spend the Poor Rate (the tax on prosperous citizens for the care of the poor) on themselves instead of their deserving claimants.

The poor rates were a source of constant irritation to those who had to pay them. As the population and rates rose, the richer citizens were desperate to find others to pay for their poor. Men who deserted their wives or bastard children were pursued for support. One prominent merchant was discovered to have let his mother wilt away in a workhouse—he was forced to pay for her maintenance.

For deserted children, or foundlings, wherever they were found was their settlement/parish. Self-sacrificing women often traveled to the richer parishes at the onset of labor, hoping to birth their babies in more solvent settlements. But the parish authorities were aware of this and would force these women back over the boundaries. The Parish Act of 1772 came to the aid of these women by stating: “mothers who are suddenly taken in labour will no longer be subject to be removed...” Of course, enforcing this act was another matter.

Children born in wedlock were part of their father’s settlement. If the fathers died, after the age of seven, the children became part of their mother’s parish.

Reformer Jonas Hanway—a merchant who had traveled widely (and the first Londoner to carry an umbrella)—devoted himself to philanthropy. His efforts resulted in a Parliamentary act in 1767 to set aside funds to send urban orphans to country wet-nurses, and provided incentives for the children’s survival.

Though commissioned in the late seventeenth century, the classic eighteenth century’s solution to ending poverty and idleness was the workhouse. By the 1720’s parishes could commit any pauper who sought relief to the workhouse. Ideally a shelter, these places could never make a profit since many people were indigent because there wasn’t enough work available. Workhouses became the repository of the sick, elderly and mentally retarded. Infants consigned to workhouses before Hanway’s intervention were virtually sentenced to death. Hanway called one London workhouse “the greatest stink of mortality in these kingdoms, if not on the face of the whole earth.”

Three substantial private charities would be formed to take the burden from the parishes. The Foundling Hospital for abandoned children, Magdalen House to reform prostitutes, and Hanway’s Marine Society to clothe and prepare pauper boys for the navy.

Parish relief was resented, underfunded, unorganized and corrupt. Along with these issues and the misunderstanding of poverty’s causes, attempts to help the poor, or at least make them less visible, were doomed to fail.

Enjoy my recent release which takes place in 1781 Truro, England: The Apothecary’s Widow.

Click HERE to purchase

Diane Scott Lewis writes historical fiction with romantic elements.
http://www.dianescottlewis.org

Sources:
Daily Life in 18th Century England, by Kirstin Olsen, 1999
Dr. Johnson’s London, by Liza Picard, 2000

Regency Fashions for Ladies by Victoria Chatham

CLICK TO PURCHASE FROM AMAZON

Fans of the Regency era will, no doubt, be quite familiar with terms like muslin and superfine, half boots and spencers. It doesn’t matter in what era we set our novels, our characters need clothes, at least for some of the time depending on how hot the romance is. The Regency fashions were looser and less form fitting than in earlier eras emulating as they did the flowing neoclassical styles of Greek and Roman statuary.

So what, exactly, did a Regency lady wear under her gown? The fact is – not much! Short-legged drawers with a drawstring waist were only just coming into fashion in the early 1800s but were more popular by 1811. Our Regency belle would also have worn a chemise designed to protect the outer clothes from perspiration or prevent a silk or muslin dress from being too revealing. A chemise rarely had any trimming as the coarse soap and boiling water in which it was frequently washed would have reduced trimmings to rags in no time.

The chemise was worn next to the skin and the corset, either short or long stays over it. The short stay fitted just below the bust and the long stays reached the hipbone and created a smooth vertical line. Both styles of stays were kept in place by shoulder straps. A petticoat, usually with a scooped neckline, short sleeves and fastened at the back with hooks and eyelets, was worn over the chemise and stays. Usually trimmed at the hem, it was meant to be seen when a lady lifted her outer dress to avoid mud or to otherwise prevent it being soiled. Stockings were made of silk, knitted cotton or wool and held up by garters.

Dresses were often made of soft, clinging muslins but the oft mentioned morning dress was high necked, long sleeved and made from plain, serviceable fabrics such as wool and linen. The thin twilled fabric sarsnet, or sarcenet, was woven with different colors in the warp and weft so that when the fabric moved there was a subtle shift in color. Evening dresses, or ball gowns, were satin and silk creations, fitted under the bust, short sleeved and with low necklines. An apparent contradiction in terms was that being fully dressed referred to evening wear which showed quite a bit of skin and décolletage, and being underdressed meant wearing a high neckline as in morning clothes. Colors indicated status as young ladies wore bright colors such as pinks, pale blues and lilacs, while mature ladies dressed in purple, deep blue, yellow, strong reds or black.

Outerwear included capes, wraps, shawls, spencers (a short waisted fitted jacket) and pelisses. Rather than a pocket, which was worn under a dress with a slit in the side for access, ladies carried a reticule, or a bag closed with a drawstring and often decorated with beads. This in essence was the lady’s handbag in which she could keep her vinaigrette and handkerchief. No respectable lady would dream of leaving the house without her hat or bonnet and, at home, married women usually wore caps. Short gloves were worn at all times during the day and long gloves reaching the elbow or higher during the evening. The latter would be removed for dining.

Flimsy flat soled slippers of silk, satin, kid or velvet would be worn indoors. Often embroidered or otherwise decorated, they were usually tied with ribbons and sometimes had a short heel. For walking, a lady had her half boots made of kidskin or nankeen, a canvas type fabric. She might even resort to slipping a pair of pattens over her shoes, which lifted her up out of the dirt and mud and prevented both shoes and hem from getting dirty.

No lady would dream of leaving the house without wearing a hat, usually some style of bonnet trimmed in numerous ways. Chip straw was not actually straw, but thin slivers of wood woven into shape. Grosgrain, a ribbon most often used for trimming hats and bonnets, is still in use today and is a coarse weave, tightly woven fabric. It resembles a fine cord that lies perpendicular to the long edges with the warp (the threads which run lengthwise on the loom) being lighter than the weft (the threads that run across the loom). Grosgrain has to be sewn carefully as it frays easily and holds pin or needle marks. It was usually made of silk or wool and occasionally a combination of the two. It was most often used for trimming hats and bonnets.

Sources:

https://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/

http://candicehern.com/regency-world/

Tom Tierney’s Fashions of the Regency Period Paper Dolls

Wikipedia

Victoria Chatham is proud to be a Books We Love author.

Find her at:

http://bookswelove.net/authors/chatham-victoria/

www.victoriachatham.webs.com
www.facebook.com/AuthorVictoriaChatham

Just A Few Blocks Of Stone

http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B00UC407R0

Click here to Purchase from Amazon

Just a Few Blocks of Stone

I've had a very busy month with some personal setbacks. So this month I'm not in the mood for writing something funny. Someone in last months wrote about some interesting facts regarding Stonehenge. For those of you who think I'm just a crazy funny guy, well I am, but those that know me more, know that I have a far deeper spiritual side and I've done a lot of research into native beliefs and other cultures. I've written a lot of science fiction and love learning about ancient places. One of the most interesting for myself has always been the Pyramids of Giza. Some old blocks of stone, a friend once said to me. Yup, on that he was correct. But once I begun to look closer at these blocks I begun to realize there is so much more here than some Egyptian scribes working with copper tools could have put together.

So some facts on what is known. The main pyramid contains two and a half million blocks of rock cut from an Aswan quarry six hundred miles away. It weighs an estimated six to seven million tons, which probably doesn’t mean a lot until you consider it’s heavier than all the cathedrals, churches and chapels built in England since the beginning of Christianity, and the tallest structure erected until the Eiffel Tower was built it 1889. The main pyramid was supposedly built by the pharaoh Khufu in twenty years. We now know his name is a forgery put there by an English archeologist which wrongly spelled it as Rhufu, and to this day here's been no true evidence of any pharaoh has ever been found inside the main pyramid, or any inscriptions of any kind. Pretty humble scribes in those days, I'd say.

This is quite a remarkable feat, considering the Egyptians lacked astronomical, geological and mathematical expertise. Although no records recorded anywhere by the Egyptians have shown any details on building, moving or assembling the blocks. Which you'd think some egotistical hotshot would have put into permanent inscriptions. I Know I would.

To build this grand edifice in twenty years would require placing one block every five minutes, day and night, nonstop for twenty years (read this as no unions, no holidays). This doesn’t even include cutting the stone, moving it and building the ramps needed to place them. Setting a mere twenty blocks a day would need 340 years just for the main pyramid to be finished. The easiest way would be floating them up the Nile, man what a traffic jam with all those barges.

Historians claimed that they were erected using an earthen ramp circling the pyramid. Engineering experts have said it is not possible to construct them to such precise dimensions in this manner. Also, that ramp would not be shallow enough to allow the huge blocks to be dragged up it. A ramp of a shallow enough gradient to allow this would have to have been 4,800 feet long - that’s more than three times the length of the pyramid itself - and would have to be built out of stone in order to handle the 5-20 ton blocks. And if it were made of stone, where are the remains? Nothing has ever been found to even suggest how all this was done.

If I've got your attention, here’s where the fun and real mind-blowing stuff starts. The precise nature of the main pyramid is amazing. The difference in length of any of its sides is eight inches. The twenty-two inch thick plain it sits on is within one inch of level on an area of 756 X 756 feet. Which doesn't sound big, but is about ten NFL fields side by side. Gaps between the casing stones measure just a fiftieth of an inch and the apex of the pyramid is located directly over the center, not bad considering this building is forty stories high. Some really good string there and a great plomb bob I'd say.

The lower passageway is 350 feet long. It’s straight to one fiftieth of an inch through the blocks they’ve laid, and straight within a quarter of an inch through 200 feet of solid bedrock. Darn sharp copper chisels and a mighty good eye. Oh, did I forget to mention no evidence of any torches used?

The Meridian Building of the Greenwich Observatory in London was built to align with true north and even it is out by nine-sixtieths of a degree. The main pyramid is aligned to true north within one-twelfth of a degree. It sits exactly on thirty north parallel, that’s an imaginary line one third the distance between the equator and the North Pole. Also, if a line is drawn along the longest land parallel on Earth and the longest land meridian the exact center is the apex of the main pyramid.

Calculations of the length of the King’s Chamber and of the length of the pyramid divided by its height both equal pi. If a line is drawn through the apex of all three pyramids and another through the left shoulder and headdress of the sphinx then the entire Giza complex becomes a Golden Mean Spiral based on the Fibonacci spiral of numbers, which is a sacred set of numbers that govern all patterns and growth in nature. Seashells and watermarks have been found about halfway up the pyramids, carbon dated to around 10,000 BC. These shells, along with a fourteen foot layer of silt around the base of the pyramid, seem to indicate that there was flooding here at one time, a fact which could be further confirmed by the inch-thick sea salt crystals discovered inside the pyramids when they were first opened around 1200 AD. You’re probably thinking ‘how did that happen in the middle of the bleeding desert.

According to the Bible, and fossil records, the Giza area had a lush environment around 10,000 BC. This was also the time of the great flood. Erosion marks on the Sphinx, which, by the way, is the largest limestone structure in the world, shows that it was subjected to rain storms for thousands of years and is perhaps far older than the pyramids. Seashell growth on the Sphinx also indicates that it too was underwater at some time. Lastly, the alignment of the pyramids is the same as the three stars of Orion’s belt as they appeared from Earth in 10,500 BC. The two larger pyramids were originally encased in white limestone and the smaller in red to resemble the color of the three stars as seen in the night sky. The Egyptians weren’t the only ones to build pyramids dedicated to Orion. In Xian, China.

You'll find what look like the same configuration of seven pyramids. Also built in Teotihuacan in Mexico is again the same configuration of pyramids. If you draw a straight line across the globe, oddly enough they all link up.  Which makes my scratch my head and say, "Very Interesting. Weird, but very interesting." I like to think facts are stronger than fiction. So if I've got your curiosity piqued, go grab a tape measure and give your local travel agent a call and check out those old blocks of stone.

Note: Photos courtesy of the New York Public Library

Goodbye Julian Bond, hero and powerful voice for justice, By Sandy Semerad

“Those were the days,” Julian Bond said, as I handed him a copy of my novel, A MESSAGE IN THE ROSES.

“It’s based on the murder trial I covered as a reporter in Atlanta back in the 1980s,” I explained.  He remembered the trial and the Klan march I wrote about in the novel.

            I felt fortunate to have reconnected with him. I wanted granddaughter Cody to meet a fearless and cool civil rights activist and listen to him speak at the Destin Library in Destin, Florida.

Although that was a year ago, it seems like yesterday. I can’t believe he’s no longer with us.

We have lost a hero and a powerful voice for justice.

I first saw Julian on television at the Democratic National Convention. He was nominated for Vice President of the United States, leading up to the 1968 election.  He was only 28 and had to decline, due to a constitutional age requirement of 35.

            Julian was ahead of his time. He began his activism at 17.  He helped lead the sit-in movement to fight segregation in Atlanta, and bravely spoke out with a deep and resonant voice for those with no voice in the Jim Crow South.

He was one of the Freedom Riders with Martin Luther King, Jr. and later helped start the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee.

            In 1965, he was elected to the Georgia House of Representative. (The Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act had given blacks the opportunity to vote).

Although he was lawfully elected to serve, the Georgia House refused to seat him, because he had endorsed SNCC’s policy opposing the Vietnam War.

            Julian refused to back down. He fought for his rightful seat in the House. He took his case all the way to the United States Supreme Count. The high court ruled (Bond v. Floyd) in his favor, stating the Georgia House of Representatives couldn’t deny his freedom of speech. He went on to serve four terms in the Georgia House and six terms in the Georgia Senate.

            I remember meeting him face to face for the first time at a Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in Atlanta. We kept running into each other while talking to the same people. We laughed at this coincidence and he said, “Must be in the stars.”

            And speaking of stars, he was a bright and shining beacon of hope, who spoke out for what he thought was right. For decades he's been saying black lives matter, women’s rights matter, gay rights matter, human rights matter, and he never gave up the fight.

“If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t get gay married,” he has said. He was born African American, just as some people were born gay, he said.

            Thanks to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Julian co-founded with Morris Dees, the Klan lost its vicious bite.  SPLC sought justice on behalf of victims. These lawsuits helped to break the Klan financially.

            I could go on and on about Julian Bond’s accomplishments. Not only was he a civil rights activist, commentator, eloquent speaker, professor, author, poet, Saturday Night Live host and occasional actor, he was also a husband, father and grandfather.

“He advocated not just for African-Americans but for every group, every person subject to oppression and discrimination, because he recognized the common humanity in us all,” Morris Dees has articulately said.

I say amen to that, as I bid farewell to a great man.

Buy Link

Amazon

Visit Sandy's website to find out more

http://www.sandysemerad.com

Voices by Ginger Simpson

I heard this older song today by Chris Young and some of it really relates to how I feel when I'm writing.  I recently promised Jude, our publisher, a book by December 31st.  I have it started, but now I have to tune out the voices of Cassie and Will from Deceived in order to get Sarah's Soul finished in time for the fall deadline.

I'm sure I explained in a previous post the difference between Pantsers and Plotters.  I, unfortunately, rely on voices in my head to help me write.  Without all that chatter, I'm at a loss.  I've tried plotting and it just doesn't work for me, so all the people talking in my head are really a blessing...at times.

For me being a "pantser" is akin to having someone tell me a story.  I listen and jot down the words, but I never know where I'm headed until I get there.  It's a lot more exciting, in my opinion, to having a chart of some type that outlines your entire novel for you.  I prefer to be surprised.  The only problem is when the characters are done, so is the book.  I've written some short, some long, and some in between.  You never know how long creating a novel is going to take when you're a pantser.

 I have to admit I do take notes now because my memory has faded with age.  There is nothing worse than forgetting the heroes name and putting in one from another book or having your heroine suddenly gaze through blue eyes instead of green with gold flecks.

If you're a pantser too, you'll be able to relate to this video.  If you aren't, you probably will anyhow, since all those words of wisdom your parents and grandparents shared with you still run through your mind.  I can hear my granny to this day telling me all little boys wanted to do was get in my panties.  I could never figure out what they'd do once they got them on.  How embarassing.  I never wanted to wear Jockey shorts.  Now that I'm older, I realize she was warning me to be a lady.  *lol*

So...I may be camping for the next few months, but I'll be working on Sarah's Hope.  This will be sort of continuation of Sarah's Heart and Passion.  Here's an except closer to the end of that book so you'll better relate to what Sarah is sharing with me now.  She's a chatty one, for sure.

“Really.” He (Wolf) caressed her cheek. “I love you Sarah Collins, and I’d be honored if you would consider spending this life with me. I might have been unselfish enough to have given you up once, but not twice.”

Glee squeezed Sarah’s heart. She’d lived through pure hell in a dream, found the love of her life only to lose him, and now she had a second chance. No way was she missing out on the passion she felt for this man. Locking her arms around his neck, she rested her cheek against his chest, drinking in his warmth, his smell, his feel. “I love you, too, Nathaniel Grey Wolf Elder, and I can’t think of anyone I’d rather spend eternity with…even if it’s on a cattle ranch in Missouri.”

Please check my website for places where you can find this book, and most likely my upcoming one.

                            

http://www.bookswelove.net