Return-Path: X-Processed-By: Virex 7 on prxy.net X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.1.8 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #46 Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 03:00:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #46 1. Re: Wha...? (long rant) Hillary by Mick Alderson 2. Re: New edition by Kevin Lee Allen 3. Re: Motorized Turntable by Bsapsis [at] aol.com 4. Re: Motorized turntable by Bsapsis [at] aol.com 5. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 6. Re: S4 Issues by Brian Aldous 7. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? by Brian Aldous 8. Re: Motorized Turntable by Tony Miller 9. Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary by CB 10. Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary by CB 11. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? by Eddie Kramer 12. Re: plagiarize by "john rourke" 13. Re: plagiarize by "Joe Meils" 14. Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary by Steeve Vajk 15. Re: S4 Issue by Steeve Vajk 16. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 17. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem by Jerry Durand 18. Re: Motorized Turntable by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 19. Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 20. Re: plagiarize by Steve Larson 21. Re: Wha...? by "Paul Guncheon" *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <40D43022.20303 [at] uwosh.edu> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 07:22:58 -0500 From: Mick Alderson Subject: Re: Wha...? (long rant) Hillary Umm, USA-type Stagefolks: Isn't it about time we got back to Stagecrafts JUST a little more? In particular, should we not make an effort to keep our personal politics out of the conversation a bit more? Yes, we treat this forum at times like a "stagehands' bar" and regularly go off topic. I indulge myself! However, there are people on this list from all over the world; I recall posts from UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, South Africa, UAE, Israel, AT LEAST. I don't recall having ever been subjected to their political debates. Certainly not at length. Might we not return the favor? -- Mick Alderson ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <7A2A2CA4-C1F5-11D8-99A3-003065D2C502 [at] klad.com> From: Kevin Lee Allen Subject: Re: New edition Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 09:35:06 -0400 Amazon? Local bookstore? Drama Books? Where would be the best place to find/order the book? Thanks On Jun 17, 2004, at 10:01 PM, Linda Essig wrote: > "Lighting and the Design Idea" published by Wadsworth/Thomson. It=20 > will start to ship in about two weeks. ----- Kevin Lee Allen Production Designer http://www.klad.com 973.744.6352.voice 201.280.3841.cell klad [at] klad.com =F0 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:51:35 -0400 From: Bsapsis [at] aol.com Subject: Re: Motorized Turntable Message-ID: <1B305003.3576A068.0016695D [at] aol.com> Actually, it' a 16' turntable. Not sure who the real client was but heard it worked fine for them. Only took an hour to set up, eh? My crew guys gave me a different story. Might have to check in with them about that. <> Bill S. (Still in London. would someone please tell me why the pubs close so early here?) In a message dated 6/17/2004 3:54:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rcarovil [at] sju.edu writes: > > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > I don't want to speak for him, but we had a rented turntable from Bill in > our space last month. It was a little bigger than you wanted. (I think it > was about 12 ft.) They brought it in and set it up in > about an hour. > > Rob Carovillano > Technical Director > Bluett Theatre > Saint Joseph's University > rcarovil [at] sju.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:54:30 -0400 From: Bsapsis [at] aol.com Subject: Re: Motorized turntable Message-ID: <4D291245.5C4A2F4B.0016695D [at] aol.com> Whether you do it yourself or you buy a unit, the parts remain the same and you can use them in a manner of your own choosing. Bill S. In a message dated 6/17/2004 1:21:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, FrankWood95 writes: > If you have the skills, the DIY approach is better. The > individual components > take less room to store, and can be used for other purposes. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <104.4961ee1e.2e05c825 [at] aol.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 12:47:33 EDT Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem In a message dated 19/06/04 05:13:56 GMT Daylight Time, StevevETTrn [at] aol.com writes: > But, I hear that it has gotten the attention of European regulators who > may ban such gear? I haven't heard that one. Most well-designed and made switch-mode supplies have small inductors, usually bifilar wound, in the mains input, to ensure that the HF signals don't get onto the mains. > Thus the increasing interest in alternatives like IGBT dimmers. These have many other advantages, notably coming on at a voltage and current zero, and turning off at a controlled rate, so avoiding the sharp waveforms of thyristors, which are all-or-nothing devices. Frank Wood ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <723A0764-C21A-11D8-96B8-000A9592AE20 [at] tany.com> From: Brian Aldous Subject: Re: S4 Issues Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:59:44 -0400 > >> If only they'd make the 50=9E about 9" shorter and have a flat field = so >> we could use templates in them... > > I've never had problems with templates in our 50 degree S4's. I=20 > haven't looked that closely at them and none of our LD's have ever=20 > complained. I'll have to look at them a little more closely next week=20= > when the LD does gobos from the 4th elect on the cyc like he does=20 > every year. > > Greg Bierly > Hempfield HS > It depends on what you are trying to do. Slightly off-focus leafy=20 stuff? No problem Something on a steep angle like 4thE to cyc, where=20= throw distance varies greatly between near/top edge of image=20 &far/bottom? No one would notice it at all . Company logo sharp on a=20 smooth wall from ten or 15 feet? Forget the S4 50=FB and get a dirksen = if=20 you can afford such. A few years ago we had to do just that at=20 Time-Warner Cable's midtown office, and no amount of tweaking would=20 make the 50=FB work. It could be sharp at the edge, or the center, or = in=20 between, but not across the field. I was told at the time that due to=20= the single lens design, the plane of sharpness (if I may call it that)=20= is not a flat field but follows the same arc as the curvature of the=20 lens. Not being an expert on optics, I cannot speak to the mathematics=20= of this; I can only report what I have observed in having, as a=20 designer & as an electrician, focused many tens of thousands of units=20 in theatres, museums & installations. In that case, we ended up with=20 an Altman 360Q 4.5x6.5 with a new-style reflector, tuned to death,=20 which worked well. Please forgive my heresy in suggesting that the Source 4 is not always=20= the perfect solution to all problems. I love the 5=FB, 10=FB & 26=FB. = The=20 36=FB & the new-revised 19=FB are OK. But as a designer who often works = in=20 low-ceilinged, low-budget spaces with tiny booths, I find the 50=FB,=20 ParNel and Sc4"PAR" and consoles built a foot wider than necessary a=20 bit frustrating. I have been told that ETC has finally come out with a=20= "very wide" lens for the S4 "PAR". I look forward to seeing one=20 someday. Ok. No more rants for this season, I promise. I'm only in tall theatres or out-of doors all summer, anyway. BA ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: From: Brian Aldous Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:03:05 -0400 > In a message dated 18/06/04 23:46:35 GMT Daylight Time, > jdurand [at] interstellar.com writes: > >> Frank, I believe we just went through the math on this before you >> re-signed >> up to the list. Does someone have the link to the page that >> describes this? >> >> The short answer is that on dimmed 3-phase circuits the neutral can >> carry >> MORE than any individual "hot" line. In single phase circuits, the >> neutral >> carries up to the current in one "hot" line. > > I do not believe this. Full stop. That's OK, Frank. You share this belief with many building electricians & contractors who don't want to install an oversized or duplicate neutral wire. My solution has always been to ask them to bring an amprobe to the theatre and have them measure the load on the 3 hots & the neutral with everything at full... then with everything at 50%. It's fun to watch their eyes bug out. Seems to work with any brand of SCR-based dimmer commonly found here in the New World. Why do you think manufacturers go to the trouble to add a second Neutral connection on larger racks? Because they like throwing money away? BA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:06:01 +0100 Subject: Re: Motorized Turntable From: Tony Miller Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Bsapsis [at] aol.com wrote on Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:51:35 -0400 > (Still in London. would someone please tell me why the pubs close so early > here?) The authorities heard you were coming. Your reputation obviously precedes you. It's a pity you haven't got time to come up to Leeds, the bars stay open till at least 1am but we keep that a secret from all you Americans who just want to talk politics. Maybe next time. Tony Miller. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20040619104138.01822228 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:41:38 From: CB Subject: Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary > And, Kenny Rogers and Stix both I don't kow who did too much what in the seventies, but it was "Styx"... Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20040619104739.01822228 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:47:39 From: CB Subject: Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary >BTW - My college defined plagerism as a form of theft. It's taking/using something >that belongs to someone else without their permission. Plaigerism means "to steal and pass off (the ideas and words of another) as one's own" or to "present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source" (Merriam Webster's Dictionary, 1993). Cheez, Kristi, I hate to come up on the other side of any thread you're involved in, usually because I end up looking like a fool. I think the litmus test (at least according to Merriam Webster) is using it without credit. Most of the footnoted material in books and in research papers is quoted without permission. I think the old adage was, "Steal from one person it's plaigerism; steal from many, its research". Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:35:44 -0400 From: Eddie Kramer Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? On 6/19/04 Brian Aldous sent: > >Why do you think manufacturers go to the trouble to add a second Neutral connection on larger racks? They must - From the US Code (NEC) 520.53 (O)(1); >(1) Neutral Terminal. In portable switchboard equipment designed for use with 3-phase, 4-wire with ground supply, the supply neutral terminal, its associated busbar, or equivalent wiring, or both, shall have an ampacity equal to at least twice the ampacity of the largest ungrounded supply terminal. Eddie -- -------------------- Eddie Kramer IATSE #1 Member NEC Panel 15 ------------------------------ From: "john rourke" Subject: Re: plagiarize Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:49:09 -0500 Message-ID: Kristi, I was going to let this go, but you managed to mispell and incorrectly define this word in two posts in a row. You are a teacher, correct? I have only a passing knowledge of Hillary's book; I have not read it nor do I intend to. It was quite obvious to me from the press, interviews, and sound bites at the time that this was based on an African proverb. It was said repeatedly as I recall, and I had only a passing interest in the subject matter. From the handy dictionary.com: pla·gia·rize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (plj-rz) v. pla·gia·rized, pla·gia·riz·ing, pla·gia·riz·es v. tr. To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own. To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another). v. intr. To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another. Could we get back to Stagecraft, please? John Rourke Portland, OR Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:57:35 -0400 From: MissWisc [at] aol.com Subject: Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary Message-ID: <77AEB487.4746049C.007B9F2A [at] aol.com> Delbert - No need to apologize. I know titles can't be copyrighted else we wouldn't have so many songs named "Lady" or "Etude" ;) The point is she,(or as pointed out to me in a private email... her ghost writer), chose to use someone else's words rather than come up with her own. She could have called it "All Our Children" but then some guy from ABC would probably sue. ; BTW - My college defined plagerism as a form of theft. It's taking/using something that belongs to someone else without their permission. Kristi ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000501c45649$79fad6e0$2fecbed0 [at] hppav> From: "Joe Meils" References: Subject: Re: plagiarize Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 17:05:04 -0500 I agree. You're not going to break through the last 12 years of social programming with these folks here. They have been led to believe something that is not true (that the Clinton administration was somehow the worst on record) and no ammount of exposure to the truth will alter those lies. Someone siad to me, that the Stagecraft list is supposed to be like we were hanging around the bar after the show. So we end up going off topic at times... but I tend to agree here, lets all just drop the Clinton hating and get back to how Bush is providing us all with material for some of the most acidic political plays for generations to come. :) Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "john rourke" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2004 4:49 PM Subject: Re: plagiarize > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Kristi, > I was going to let this go, but you managed to mispell and incorrectly > define this word in two posts in a row. You are a teacher, correct? I have > only a passing knowledge of Hillary's book; I have not read it nor do I > intend to. It was quite obvious to me from the press, interviews, and sound > bites at the time that this was based on an African proverb. It was said > repeatedly as I recall, and I had only a passing interest in the subject > matter. From the handy dictionary.com: > > pla·gia·rize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (plj-rz) > v. pla·gia·rized, pla·gia·riz·ing, pla·gia·riz·es > v. tr. > To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own. > To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another). > > v. intr. > To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another. > > Could we get back to Stagecraft, please? > > John Rourke > Portland, OR > > > Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:57:35 -0400 > From: MissWisc [at] aol.com > Subject: Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary > Message-ID: <77AEB487.4746049C.007B9F2A [at] aol.com> > > Delbert - > > No need to apologize. I know titles can't be copyrighted else we wouldn't > have so many songs named "Lady" or "Etude" ;) The point is she,(or as > pointed out to me in a private email... her ghost writer), chose to use > someone else's words rather than come up with her own. > > She could have called it "All Our Children" but then some guy from ABC > would probably sue. ; > > BTW - My college defined plagerism as a form of theft. It's taking/using > something that belongs to someone else without their permission. > > Kristi > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20040619222218.99762.qmail [at] web41605.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Steeve Vajk Subject: Re: Wha...? (short rant) Hillary In-Reply-To: Kristi wrote: >OK for the legalistic of us... She PLAGERIZED it. ... No where on the > title of the book do I see any indication for a footnote. ;) Since everyone apparently agrees that "It takes a village..." is an African proverb, it is, by definition, a common expression in the public domain. Had she titled her book, "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush", would you still object that she "plagarized" it? Or is it because it's an African, rather than European, proverb that she's not allowed to use it? Here I go, stirring the pot again. ;) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20040619222928.4845.qmail [at] web41603.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 15:29:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Steeve Vajk Subject: Re: S4 Issue In-Reply-To: Greg Bierly wrote: >I've never had problems with templates in our 50 degree S4's. I >haven't looked that closely at them and none of our LD's have ever >complained. I think the problem is that it's difficult to impossible to get a truely sharp edge on both the center and edge areas of a gobo in a 50 deg. Either one, fine, but trying to get both is no fun. It's not a problem if you're using some foliage template that you're softening anyways, but try getting a text or window gobo to look good. Of course, having a good bench focus will make a huge difference in image quality in any S4. steeve_vajk [at] yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1cb.23f753f7.2e061c82 [at] aol.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:47:30 EDT Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? In a message dated 19/06/04 19:03:26 GMT Daylight Time, brian [at] tany.com writes: > That's OK, Frank. You share this belief with many building > electricians & contractors who don't want to install an oversized or > duplicate neutral wire. I'm neither an electrician nor a contractor. I'm a phisycist turned electronic engineer who has had a lot to do with the wiring in a 400-seat theatre. The original wiring was planned by a real expert, who did this sort of thing for the BBC, in big TV studios. If I have, let's say, a 200A three-phase feed, the worst that can happen is that there's a seriously out-of-balance load. But the neutral only carries the out-of-balance current, and this can't be more than 200A. With a totally balanced load, it would be zero. My solution has always been to ask them to > bring an amprobe to the theatre and have them measure the load on the 3 > hots & the neutral with everything at full... then with everything at > 50%. It's fun to watch their eyes bug out. Seems to work with any > brand of SCR-based dimmer commonly found here in the New World. True RMS, rather than doing a mean-to-RMS conversion? I know that it is said that the harmonics are prone to add up, particularly the third. In what must be the ultimate nasty, a full square wave, the level of the third harmonic is one third of the peak signal. But I ask you, where does all this extra current come from? Where does it go to? > > Why do you think manufacturers go to the trouble to add a second > Neutral connection on larger racks? Because they like throwing money > away? Probably because it is cheaper than arguing with people who suffer from this delusion. Copper wire is cheap enough. All I know is that it is nowhere required by the Institution of Electrical Engineers, who write our wiring rules. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.0.20040619153714.02770f48 [at] localhost> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 15:51:09 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem In-Reply-To: References: At 09:13 PM 6/18/2004, you wrote: > From what I read in the Power Quality publications, the wide spread adoption >of switching power supplies in computer gear is creating more havoc than our >*few* theatrical dimmers ever did to the power supply system. >There is some debate as to just how much of a problem the harmonics really >are. But, I hear that it has gotten the attention of European regulators who >may ban such gear? >Thus the increasing interest in alternatives like IGBT dimmers. The big problem is when you have a highly capacitive or inductive load, the current is drawn out of phase with the voltage. This causes a lot of "imaginary power" (really-really bad term) also known as "reactive power" to flow back and forth in the wires. Since most of what flows one way flows back the other way, your power meter doesn't charge you for it (think of it as a loan and payback twice each cycle). This is real amperage flowing, so the wires have to be sized for it (all the way back to the power company). In the past the big problem was motors, always inductive. The power companies have compensated for this by putting capacitors across the lines (in the USA they will be rectangular boxes on the power poles with only TWO connections to each). These capacitors will cancel out an equal amount of inductance. As long as the power company checks the lines from time to time they can add/remove capacitors as needed. Big motors don't come and go often, so it may be years between updates. Now comes computers and switching supplies. Without "power factor correction" circuits on them, these look like a capacitor on a dimmer (there is part of every half-cycle when zero current is drawn, then it jumps to pure capacitive). The capacitors on the poles now only make this worse. And the dimming waveform has all the problems we've discussed already. So, Europe is ahead of the USA, but eventually EVERY switching supply larger than an AC adapter will be required to have power factor correction. Oh yes, switching supplies also draw a HUGE amount of current when you turn them on. You thought a cold lamp was bad, a "bare" switcher for a PC can easily draw 50 amps for a couple of cycles. This also has to be controlled in new supplies, otherwise coming back from a power failure would blow your mains. And, just to complete the switching power supply hassle to the power companies...when you have a brown-out (intentional lowering of the AC mains voltage in order to conserve power), switching supplies actually draw MORE power (constant power output plus inefficiency). ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886 fax: +1 408 356-4659 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1d1.23e8e4a5.2e06201a [at] aol.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:02:50 EDT Subject: Re: Motorized Turntable In a message dated 19/06/04 19:06:14 GMT Daylight Time, tony.miller10 [at] btopenworld.com writes: > Bsapsis [at] aol.com wrote on Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:51:35 -0400 > > > (Still in London. would someone please tell me why the pubs close so > early > > here?) Some do, some don't. 23.00 is normal, but some go on longer. When I was younger, I used to know how to get a dringk24 hours a day. If you're still around on Sunday, I should be glad to see you in our theatre bar at lunchtime, and show you round. It's open from 12 to 2.30. 13, Mattock Lane, Ealing. Ten minutes walk from Ealing Broadway station. If you're burdened with luggage, I can pick you up at five minutes notice there, and deliver to an underground line direct to Heathrow in another five. My 'phone number is 020 8930 2162. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1d8.2470c231.2e0621e6 [at] aol.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:10:30 EDT Subject: Re: Weird Dimmer Problem -- help! Dummy Loads? In a message dated 19/06/04 19:36:30 GMT Daylight Time, ESKramer [at] IEEE.org writes: > >(1) Neutral Terminal. In portable switchboard equipment designed for use > with 3-phase, 4-wire with ground supply, the supply neutral terminal, its > associated busbar, or equivalent wiring, or both, shall have an ampacity > equal to at least twice the ampacity of the largest ungrounded supply > terminal. Well, there's an answer. If the Code says it, you do it. Arguing with the Codes is pointless. That doesn't stop me from wanting to know why. UK Codes have no such requirement, and I think that our engineers are as good as yours. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:30:56 -0400 Subject: Re: plagiarize From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I THINK THAT THIS WHOLE THREAD IS STARTING TO UNRAVEL. LET'S BE ADULTS AND MOVE ON. Steve ------------------------------ Message-ID: <008201c4566e$36ffc6a0$0202a8c0 [at] MyLastPC> From: "Paul Guncheon" References: Subject: Re: Wha...? Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:28:03 -1000 >> <> >> >> Other than being a sound bite, exactly what is that supposed to mean? > It's quite a true statement - inferring that it takes a lot of people > (parents, other family members, teachers, friends, youth leaders, etc, etc) > to raise kids, and that could be equated to the number of people resident in > a village. > > Capice? Not yet. I can see it also implying some of the following things: Parents are not capable of raising a child by themselves and "need" someone (the experts, the general public, the mob, the government) else's advice, rules, input and control. Parents are not expected to and therefore do not have to have responsibility for raising their children. It's okay to put your children in day care or similar. In fact it's preferred. The inference is subtle, yet there in my opinion, that this statement weakens the idea of responsibility of the parent to care for their children and in some respects, actually questions the ability of a the parent to raise their children. I can also see it providing the parent with an excuse for shifting some of their obligation to someone else, i.e. "the village". At the same time, it does propose that we are all responsible for caring for all children, all the time. I don't interpret it mean that I'm supposed to dedicate my life to feeding and clothing all the children on the world, but rather that I should be aware when there are children around me. That they are safe, not doing dumb stuff, and that my behavior affects them. My primary focus is on my own children. And to be honest, the "village" had better talk to me first before it decides it has something to do with raising them. When I had children, they became the most important people in my life. They became the "reason" for my being. What I wanted became secondary to them. Children are our most precious resource. Lofty and poetic statements about them like the one mentioned I find rather curious and sometimes disturbing... especially when made by a politician. Laters, Paul "Someone removed all the twos from this deck," Tom deduced. ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #46 ****************************