Choose wisely

The FB page Buddhism has suddenly appeared in my feed. Normally I don't pay much attention to extraneous sites, but this one caught my eye because it feels 'real'. Or at least it presents truthful content to which I can relate. I especially like any content that advises you to walk away from toxic situations and/or people. Always a good reminder. There's no changing them and it's best to care about yourself in the sense of keeping your sanity and moral clarity. Someone asked me recently if you always choose to walk away from such situations or people, if that will lead to not caring about them at all. I answer no. You can always make the decision to care about toxic people, but you do not need to subject yourself to their toxicity. You can wish them well and go on about your own life, unencumbered by their negativity. And by negativity, I mean extreme negativity, the kind that demoralizes and immobilizes you. That type of negativity is soul-crushing and ultimately life-crushing. 

 

The top 1% and wealth

Another good one from my favorite cartoonist. 

Food for thought.......

Why is it this way, and how did it get this way?

Visiting the Ramme Fjordhotel

Our autumn trip this year took us to the Ramme Fjordhotel in Hvitsen, about a forty-minute drive from Oslo (Ramme Kulturdestinasjon og Fjordhotell | Unike Hoteller Hvitsten). Hvitsten is a small coastal village located on the Oslo fjord. We arrived mid-afternoon on a Friday and left around noontime on Sunday, so we had ample time to explore the grounds, which include a beautiful Baroque-style garden (Havlystparken), cafe and giftshop/farm shop that sells eggs and seasonal vegetables, restaurant/bar, and Edvard Munch's villa down by the water. The latter is a short walk from the hotel. As luck would have it, we had lovely weather the weekend we were there, conducive to walking around and exploring. 

What impressed me most was the garden; it was one of the reasons I wanted to visit Ramme Fjordhotell. It was dotted here and there with intriguing sculptures, ponds and fountains, and lovely arrangements of flowers and trees. There was also a vegetable garden that had an entire patch devoted to the cultivation of asparagus. I finally got to see what full-grown asparagus plants look like (I've planted three in my own garden). They grow quite tall and feathery, and they spread out. I can't wait until mine look like the ones I saw in the Havlystparken. We've decided to visit the garden again in the spring when the many rhododendrons are blooming. 

Some photos from the Havlystparken:

asparagus patch

   

Photos from my September NY trip

 

Display in front of DeCicco and Sons in Tarrytown NY

Tarrytown lighthouse

harbor in Kingston NY

Kingston-Rhinecliff bridge

Esopus Meadows lighthouse 

the Culinary Institute of America (CIA)

Burrito

Manhattan skyline at night

Statue of Liberty

statue near the Warwick Hotel 

another statue near the Warwick Hotel

Hertz rental and PlatePass--not a good experience

I normally rent a car via Hertz when I am in New York. For one thing, it's easy to pick up and drop off the rental car at the rental office in North White Plains. The office is located right across the street from the Harlem Line train station. I've been renting a car at this office for many years now, after I decided to stop picking up and dropping off the car at Newark airport. It became too stressful to drive from and to the airport and stressful to find the drop-off location at the airport. 

My rental experience this time around was not completely problem-free as you'll soon see. A few days before I was to travel, I was informed in an email to pick up the car at the Westchester County Airport rather than the North White Plains office due to Labor Day (September 7), which meant that the North White Plains office would be closed for the holiday. This was fine except that I had to first take a train to White Plains and then take a cab to the Westchester County airport instead of just getting off a train at North White Plains and walking across the street to the rental office. This was an extra incurred cost of approximately $30. The service agent at the airport was friendly enough. I picked up the car in the parking lot and drove out, only to notice that the gas tank was 3/4 full, not full. I was already on the road by then, so I pulled over and took a photo of the gas tank indicator on the dashboard. I had already paid $67.46 for the Fuel Purchase option. When I returned the car on September 21 and talked to the agent at the North White Plains office about this, she told me to take it up with Billing. She was not very helpful. My definition of good service would have been that she could have deducted the price of ¼ of a tank of gas right then and there. But no.

The rental price for the car for two weeks, booked through Booking.com, was very reasonable. But lo and behold if I didn’t get a bill via an September 25th email for $475.86. This was the charge for using ‘Plate Pass’. This was the email message I received: 

Hertz utilizes a service called PlatePass which allows its customers to use cashless lanes or all- electronic tollways without using a personal transponder or paying the toll authority directly. Our records indicate you declined the PlatePass All-Inclusive tolling option at the start of your rental, but during your rental you activated the transponder device affixed to the car windshield and incurred tolls. As a result, you owe the PlatePass All-Inclusive rate as applicable to your rental period. With PlatePass All-Inclusive, you will not be charged tolls and no additional charges will apply if new tolls are received from toll authorities relating to this rental agreement. 

As far as I can remember, the Plate Pass was pulled out once during my two-week rental to pay for the toll going over the Tappan Zee Bridge, by a passenger in my car. Do you mean to tell me that I am to pay $475.86 for using the transponder once? Is this company insane? This is highway robbery and I am planning to report Hertz to the Better Business Bureau. Of course I will gladly pay all the tolls incurred during my two-week rental, but I am hoping that Booking.com will take this up with Hertz to get this charge dismissed. This is the craziest and greediest behavior I have ever experienced--pure unadulterated ripoff. The sad thing is that I have been renting via Hertz for many years. This is the first time that I have had problems with them or experienced poor customer service. It’s very unfortunate and does not bode well for future rentals with this company. 

New York in my heart, for always

My annual trip to New York this year started in Manhattan, where I met Cindy, a college friend, on the first weekend of September (5-6). We stayed at the Warwick Hotel in midtown, one of our favorite hotels in NYC. As luck would have it, the weather cooperated with our plans, which included a jazz cruise on the Hudson River (leaving from Chelsea Piers) and attending the musical Schmigadoon. The jazz cruise was quite enjoyable, and moving--especially when we drove past the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. This at a time in the USA when it doesn't seem that immigrants are particularly welcome anymore. I thought about my paternal grandparents who came from Italy in the early 1900s and who made a life for themselves, first in Brooklyn and then in Tarrytown, New York. They never returned to visit Italy, which must have been quite sad for both of them. Cindy and I also got tickets to see the musical Schmigadoon which spoofs on other musicals like Brigadoon and Oklahoma, but that is also quite touching in its own way. I can recommend both the cruise and the musical. 

The following week included visits with my sister Renata and her husband Tim and their new dog--Burrito, as well as visits with good friends Maryann and Gordon from my Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center days, and with Stef, a good friend from childhood. The weekend of September 12-13 was spent with Judy, my good friend from high school, and her two sisters Betty and Joan. We drove up to Hyde Park, NY on Saturday to visit the Culinary Institute of America, where we ate a very good lunch and enjoyed a food tasting event and a tour of the institute. On Sunday, we managed to visit Springwood, Franklin D Roosevelt's summer home on the Hudson River, and Val-Kill, Eleanor Roosevelt's place of business and eventual home located a short distance away from Springwood, across the main road. Both are national historic sites. I've written about FDR's home before in a 2016 post: A New Yorker in Oslo: Making memories--two weeks in the States  Visiting Val-Kill 'completed' the story of the Roosevelts for me. FDR and Eleanor were a good political team; their marriage endured a number of infidelities, but they supported and defended each other and had each other's backs. On Monday, the four of us took a 1.5 hour boat trip on the Hudson River that departed from Kingston, NY. We had lovely weather and managed to see the Esopus lighthouse as well as some Gilded Age estates along the Hudson River. 

I then visited with Jola, another good friend from my Memorial Sloan-Kettering days, and we spent our time together talking, catching up, eating some good lunches and dinners, driving around Tarrytown, and visiting Untermyer Park and Gardens in Yonkers, NY, which I have written about before (A New Yorker in Oslo: Two gardens worth visiting--Untermyer Gardens and the New York Botanical Garden). And then I made my way to Jean's house (I call it my second home), where I always end my NY vacations. Jean and I go way back to high school; we have a lot of shared history and are very close friends. Maria, another close friend from childhood, came down for the four days I was there, and we hung out together, eating, talking up a storm (Jean calls it incessant gabbing), and having fun. We've settled on a visit to St. Augustine in Florida for this coming winter's annual trip. St. Augustine has history, culture, and relaxing beaches. Our trips together have become something to which we really look forward. The major consideration is the weather, so we are keeping our fingers crossed that snow and/or bitter cold won't throw any major wrenches into our plans. 

Of course, no trip of mine would be complete without a snafu here or there! This time it was a major circuit break/cut in the cables that control the air traffic control grid for the NYC airports. All flights were cancelled at Newark, La Guardia, JFK, Teterboro, and Philadelphia airports on the afternoon of Monday September 21. My flight back to Oslo on SAS was cancelled, but SAS did manage to rebook me on a later flight (United) to Brussels (they worked quickly and efficiently to rebook me). Their hope was probably that by the time the plane left for Brussels (8:30 pm), that the circuit would have been fixed (it was). But nothing was certain and I booked a hotel room at Newark Airport just in case. A shout out to the Howard Johnson hotel at the airport for kindly refunding my money; they could have been sticklers for the regular routine of not allowing customers to cancel unless it was 24 hours prior to arrival. They made an exception for me and I thank them. 

I'm also glad that I arrived and departed New York when I did. This weekend would have been a messy affair to put it mildly--storm, wind, rain, and flooding. A Nor'easter that traveled up the East Coast of the USA, wreaking a bit of havoc and leaving a real mess in its wake. A lot of rain and flooding as far as I can see from the news reports. There would have been no boat trips and very few outdoor activities had I been there this weekend. So the weather gods were with us earlier in September!

Although traveling can be tiring and sometimes unpredictable, I love it. I love the expectation of new adventures as well as the emotional constancy of visiting with close friends and family. I have said it before but I'll say it again--I am forever grateful for the wonderful friends who grace my life. I will continue to travel until I am no longer able to travel. It would have to be poor health only that would stop me from seeing those I love. In my next post, I'll include some photos of the places we visited on this trip. 

Never forget

I remember where I was on 9/11 in 2001. I remember a colleague running into my lab to tell me that there had been an attack on the World Trade Center in NYC. I was beside myself after hearing that news. I was not in the USA at that time, like I was this year. I’m glad I was in NY State this year to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers. This video of the drones recreating the Twin Towers brings me to tears every time I watch it. It is incredibly beautiful and poignant. 

https://youtube.com/shorts/2CDs-Vt9wUA?si=2192fUaX83YHpb_r

Rest in peace, Wendell Berry (1934-2026)

 

More about Ad orientem

I have looked further into the Ad orientem issue and understood that it has been quite controversial for quite some time. Apparently the Ad orientem format is traditionally preferred because it forces the congregation to focus on the actual celebration of the mass and not on the priest who is saying the mass. It is supposed to be more reverential. I had never thought about this before and in truth I've never particularly focused on the priest who says mass except when he steps into the pulpit to deliver his sermon. 

I'm including some links in this post so that you can read more about it if you are so inclined. 

Facing the People, or Facing the Altar? | Catholic Answers Magazine

Ad Orientem – Immaculate Conception Catholic Church

Why is Ad Orientem worship so controversial?

I retain my opinion--that I prefer the Versus Populum format of the liturgy, where the priest faces the congregation while saying mass. I understand that Ad orientem is the historical and long-practiced way of saying mass. It doesn't change my viewpoint. 

If we are first going to choose tradition and take up this priestly orientation again in order to promote reverence and avoid distractions, then my suggestion is to go further and ban the use of guitars and all other musical instruments except the use of the organ in church. I would also ban the singing of modern songs/hymns and focus only on the time-honored traditional hymns that we grew up with (and that many people got tired of--not me). I would ban musical groups from performing in church at Easter and Christmastime. I would ban singing altogether with the exception of church choirs that sing only traditional church music. We did not have musical groups performing prior to Vatican II, so they are not necessary to the celebration of mass. Nor did we have liturgical dances on the altar (as was the case at times when I was a teenager). They are distractions. We have one Latin mass (the high mass) each week on Sundays here in Oslo at my church. If we are going backward in time, then all the masses should be celebrated in Latin as that is the language of the early church. Why focus on changing only one aspect of the mass? 

It has become quite silly in my opinion to focus on changing only one thing--how the priest faces during the celebration. I have never focused on the priest except when he faces us to give his sermon, which we could also do without since most of the priests simply regurgitate the gospel that can speak for itself for the most part. We can return to my childhood days when my mother would attend weekday masses that were quiet, short, and without sermons, just the celebration of the mass. And while we're at it, remove most statues and the accompanying small chapels that honor the saints. These can also be distractions.   

I realize that I sound quite harsh (some of what I write is of course a bit satirical). But if you are going to choose tradition, then go all the way and return the church to pre-Vatican II times. Streamline every aspect of the mass and boil it down to one predictable format. If that's what the Vatican thinks is going to draw in more of the faithful, then let them try. I'm not sure that the lack of attendance at mass has to do with these things. But I don't know. Perhaps there is a backlash against all things modern. For those of you who think that I am planning to leave the church, I am not. But I am voicing my right to have an opinion. 

Time Passages--Al Stewart

Time in a Bottle--Jim Croce

This song was running through my mind today, as I thought about holding on to time. How quickly it flies by. "Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives"--the opening line to the soap opera Days of Our Lives, a soap opera that my mother used to watch a long time ago. The days of our lives are fleeting. They are like sand that we pick up in our hand, only to have the sand flow through our fingers. It's hard (for me) not to be melancholy at times about the passage of time. There's no stopping it or changing its format, so there's no point really in feeling sad about it, but nonetheless, I do sometimes. 

Ad Orientem and Versus Populem

The mass I normally attend on Sunday mornings, the 9:30 am Norwegian mass in the St. Joseph chapel, has changed its format. By that I mean that the priest, who used to face the congregation when he celebrated mass (versus populem or toward the people), now faced away from the congregation (ad orientem or toward the east). I stayed in my pew for all of ten minutes and then left the church, hoping that the 9:30 am English mass at St. Olav's church across the street would have the usual format with the priest facing us. Luckily that was the case. But this is going to become a dilemma for me if the ad orientem format completely replaces versus populem. The St. Joseph chapel has now physically moved its altar against the back wall so that the priest has to face away from us. This was done deliberately and I have no idea why. I only know that I hate the change. I find it rude, stiff, and unwelcoming. The priests have celebrated masses versus populem for over sixty years, since the Vatican II Council, and I see no reason to change the format now. This means that all masses in the chapel will now have the priest facing away from us, and God only knows how long it will be before the masses in the larger church will remain versus populem. And this is not just Oslo, Norway. It's also the case in many churches in the USA, New York City and Tarrytown among them. I have to ask why. The decision to change the format is up to the local bishops and pastors. This means that the pastor of St. Olav's church decided to change the format without even consulting his congregation, asking us what we think of such a change. The ad orientem format is supposed to align the congregation with the priest so that we all face the same way in the celebration of the liturgy. It is supposed to be more solemn and respectful and less narcissistic. The focus is supposed to be more on solemn worship and less on emotion and feelings. Again, it makes no sense to me. 

You may think that I am making a mountain out of a molehill. You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that this is another example of 'change for the sake of change'. The actual change has neither been discussed nor explained to the congregation. It's just another example of a religious patriarchy forcing unnecessary changes on the faithful. 

So I wrote to the church pastor and told him how I felt. I mentioned that I will no longer consider increasing my financial support of the church, as I had actually thought about doing. That's life, and I owe no explanations to anyone. I mentioned that Christ sat around a table at the Last Supper and broke bread with his disciples. He didn't have his back turned to them. He wasn't rude or unwelcoming. I said that I found it rude that the priest now faced away from us. We could hardly hear what he said as he mumbled to himself. I did not feel more in touch with the celebration of mass; I felt annoyed and disappointed. Irritated at a religious patriarchy that again decides what is best for everyone. They will not drag in more churchgoers this way. I need only think of the Church of St. Vincent de Paul in Albany NY that has its altar at the center of the church and chairs for the congregation clustered in a circle around it. Those masses are packed with people. Those masses are welcoming, inclusive, warm, not stiff. I've written about this church before: A New Yorker in Oslo: The Church of St. Vincent de Paul I wish there were more like them, and I hope that they do not change their format. 

The pastor of my church did write back to me, thanking me for my concerns. He hoped that we could one day sit down and discuss our viewpoints. I wrote back and reiterated my concerns and my disappointment, and mentioned that perhaps the church as a whole should consider addressing the pedophile scandals that have plagued the Catholic church for many years. Those are the issues that need addressing and resolving, not worrying about changing the orientation of how the priest says mass. I have not received a reply and I know that I won't. Ad orientem or versus populem is a distraction from the more important issues facing the church. For the first time ever in my life, I wished that I was at a service in a Protestant church, where women can be ministers and where the tone is welcoming and inclusive, the way that Christ would have wanted it, in my opinion. I wonder sometimes if any of the religious clergy actually consider what Christ would have wanted or preferred. They think they know with certainty what Christ wants, because they are ordained as priests. But I don't think they do, in my humble opinion. They're only human, and humans are not infallible. 

(For an interesting discussion and debate of these issues, I refer you to this article: Ad Orientem: Thoughts on debating the non-essential | Catholic Culture The author presents the pros and cons in depth. But still, I want the priest to face us when he says mass. It's what I've know for my entire life, and I don't see the point of this change now, especially when there are no good reasons for and explanations of it). 

When is enough, enough?

Taylor Sheridan is a good writer who has written and produced some very good series. So therefore I have to ask--what's with the sexual sadism and gratuitous nudity in the series 1923? What's the point of it? And why do we need to see this? There are enough viewers so that it's not necessary to justify showing this to audiences in order to drag them in and keep them hooked. Or is that the motivation? I really don't know.

We're done watching 1923, and while I think it's a good series overall, I have major problems with Sheridan's treatment of women. They get battered and pushed around an awful lot, a little too often. There is sadism, rape and sexual abuse; there is the threat of rape and sexual abuse, as well as sexual perversions that are graphically portrayed. Do we need this in a world that is already overly-violent to women? No. In 1923, we've been witness to lesbian rape scenes, sadism toward prostitutes, and unnecessary nudity. It's cringeworthy and gratuitous. These types of scenes make me wonder about the motivation of the writer. What is he trying to impart? What is the point of these scenes? To titillate? To show cruelty in all its grotesqueness? Isn't that what horror films are for? Perhaps Sheridan would defend this by saying that the wild west was a brutal place, and that men ruled it. Sure it was, and sure they did (and still do rule the world, despite the advances that women have made during the past fifty years). We all know that. It was survival of the fittest, dog eat dog, every man for himself. Women had to be tough in order to survive. Women had to know how to shoot to kill. But still, they were abused at the hands of physically stronger, evil, cruel, sadistic men, and in some cases, sadistic women. Many didn't survive. Many men didn't survive either. You carried a gun at all times. Out in the wilderness, on the plains, you were subject to the elements--weather, droughts, locust plagues, animal attacks, and attacks by cruel human beings. And many women died in childbirth. But still, you don't need to show it all. If you do, then why stop at the savagery of men? Why not show wolves, bears and mountain lions ripping men and women apart and eating them? Why is that off limits? Why not show rotting corpses, beheadings and close-ups of scalping? Because there are limits and Sheridan knows that. But when it comes to sexual scenes, he can push the limits. Why push them? 

I sometimes wonder how average ordinary men would feel if the majority of television programming showed men being raped or sexually abused in graphic detail. I doubt that most men would find it entertaining. Yet the depiction of women being raped or sexually abused passes for entertainment. Why? Because men run the show in nearly every arena, and defend this by saying that this is the way it was at those times in history. If the women in Sheridan's series aren't being battered and abused, then they are often portrayed as temptresses or harridans, with some exceptions. I think Dutton Ranch is the show I like the best, mostly because the main female character, Beth, played by Kelly Reilly, is one tough lady with a strong sense of justice who can hold her own. Helen Mirren and Michele Pfeiffer also play strong women in 1923 and The Madison, respectively. I don't want to see men and women being raped, being scalped, being tortured, being eaten by wild animals. You can very well insinuate that those things will happen, but you do not need to show them in gory detail. If viewers want that, they can go to see any number of horror films that will show them exactly that. 

Subtle, indeed

Again, thank God for cartoonists and political cartoonists. What would we do without them?

An article worth reading

I'm gifting my readers this NY Times article--Trump's Broken Promises, in 11 Charts, written by Steven Rattner. It's absolutely worth reading. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/08/18/opinion/trump-economy-campaign-promises.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6VA.tjhl.cxQZLGB9kK1U&smid=url-share