text:
me + annabel capper: or, the limits of Armitage fangrrling, almost a year in
[ETA: some links updated, 6/1/15]Others have been writing about the status of their interest in Armitage of late, and I still worry about my fascination for various reasons, most of which are probably obvious to you. The year anniversary of the trigger event for my Armitagemania is fast approaching with no signs that the symptoms are abating. It continues to relieve me that I'm not alone in dealing with this weird quandary. Many of you are in the same boat and I'm vitally grateful for your company. This post is provoked by a strong reaction I had recently to stuff that has surfaced lately in Armitageworld. I hated myself for being interested, but discovering it left me with a much-needed feeling of relief, albeit a bittersweet one. That's what I'm exploring here.
Caveat lector. I thought about publishing this piece with comments closed, but that seemed unfair to fellow sufferers who might also need to unload on this topic. So I'm keeping comments open with a certain amount of trepidation. Known commentators can post without moderation; new commentators need their first post moderated by me; you may comment with "anonymous" as your tag, but I will have to approve the comment. The last time (of which I am aware) that elements of this topic surfaced in a reputable forum, by which I mean a moderated one, something approaching a bloodbath ensued. This took place after I was exposed to Armitage and before I was blogging, and I was a bit stunned to read some of those comments. It made me understand why the moderated discussion boards all include a proviso prohibiting discussion of Mr. Armitage's personal life. If you comment, please remember the Golden Rule — thinking of "others" as both me and your fellow commenters and Mr. Armitage and Ms. Capper. It's fine to disagree with what I say below or even the fact that I am articulating it for a general audience — I spent a lot of time wondering whether this post in itself violates the "do unto others" rule vis-à-vis either Armitage or Capper, and it took courage for me to hit "publish." Just keep in mind that no one involved in this discussion or concerned with this topic is evil; no one — me included — seeks to do anyone harm. It might help to think of this as a discussion not about Mr. Armitage's personal life per se, but about our reactions to aspects of it that we glimpse.
And so, finally, ad rem. No, still no answers.
I admit it: I've now rewatched Spooks 9.8 a few times. Not because I liked the plot or found the resolution of the Lucas North / John Bateman division any more successful than I did when I saw it the first time. I watched it to see those painful but oh so remarkable performances again. And because Mr. Armitage is so beautiful, even as the villain. I watch as I've been watching since January 4th: to elevate my mood via a combination of factors (beauty, artistry, charisma) that I still don't completely understand. I watch because my eyes open wider, my nostrils flare, when I see him, but because my heart and mind open, too, in response to the figure on the screen. Who doesn't always seem quite real to me. Frankly, it would be easier if he weren't.
Objectification? Oh boy, do I ever worry about it. Precisely because the guy seems like such a mensch on top of all of his talent. If he didn't seem so real, I wouldn't be worried about treating him as if he weren't; if he were a jerk, or talentless, I could just ogle him and be done with it, but then again, if he was a jerk, or untalented, I wouldn't be fascinated. I've been thinking of objectification mostly in terms of its sexual connotations and worried primarily about that — the treating of a person, and specifically his body, as if he primarily exists to fuel my sexual pleasure. That really does bother me. After I realized the extent to which I had slid, during a late summer in which I had lacked time for more careful thinking, from a relatively analytical discussion of his clothing choices at formal occasions into a level of detailed discussion of Mr. Armitage's body that bugged me — including closeups of particularly enticing body parts — I've written relatively little in that direction here since the fall semester started. I wrote a little bit about the problem of beauty as an aspect of criticisms of his career trajectory, and tried to point out that it's not his fault that he's beautiful or that directors try to show us that, and that our reactions to his beauty are about us rather than him. Blaming him for anything about our own lack of restraint in thought, word, or deed is the practical equivalent to me of blaming rape victims for dressing provocatively. We need to take responsibility. So since the Fall I've been avoiding the discussion of Armitage's body as if it were a thing, and mostly been calling him beautiful as opposed to sexy. Mostly. I still slip. So if you've been missing the PHWOAR here, don't worry. I still feel it. In spades. It has a good shot at making a comeback.
But calling Armitage beautiful instead of sexy seems like a dodge. Just like you can't act without your body, so that it's an obfuscation to say that we admire someone for his acting, not for his body, when acting is inter alia the successful rhetorical or poetical instrumentalization of one's own body, beauty and sexiness are both aesthetic perceptions, both uses of and perceptions of the body. It's just that beauty is considered more elevated than sexiness. Though the elevating aspect of beauty is something I desperately need right now. And perhaps particularly his beauty, which speaks to me well beyond the level of physical arousal. Because while I get a sexual thrill from looking at some of these pictures, that's not all I get. They're not just a better sort of pornography for the educated woman. And like the cap above, some of the pictures I love most are not all that pretty. Somehow the pictures symbolize something else: hard work, thoughtfulness, and struggle as values; the attainment of art; the presence of someone who is often described in ways that suggests he tries to do the right thing, of someone who's got scruples. Most of all an inspiring, enveloping energy. A comfort at low points, a reminder of a sort of secular or quotidian redemption that results from the evaluation a job well done or a perception of light breaking through the darkness — the two most common reactions I experience in response to Armitage's work.
I suppose one potential aspect of objectification is that you can make the object of your gaze into whatever you like without protest from him, that you can love who you want to love in whatever way you wish for whatever reason, without the disturbing wrinkles that might make someone unlovable under any other circumstance. But there's a way here in which Armitage's physical beauty seems to function as a placeholder for a spiritual quality, a way of being in the world that I'm trying hard to understand and, I admit, imitate even as I perhaps construct myself the thing that I admire. I know that sounds a bit inchoate. This theme is something that deserves more time, so I mark it here with plans to discuss it down the road. It's not the point today. The point instead is that the aspects of sexiness and beauty that are oh so enticing are still central to my fascination. Noting this would be unproblematic except that lately — in light of events — I've sensed a surge in my perhaps faulty perception that Mr. Armitage is real. And (as Anselm of Canterbury knew of G-d) the potential that something that exists in the imagination could also exist in reality is intoxicating. In the particular case at hand here, that possibility amplifies my desire and admiration. (As well as my embarrassment about the former.)
Datum: My post on the Old Vic Gala is currently the seventh most hit post on this blog. The post says nothing; I didn't attend; I intended solely to bookmark some links I wanted to go back to. I assume that the comments are attracting the attention, as one commenter went to the gala and attended the dress rehearsal. If you look at that post and feel moved to comment on what she wrote, please be aware that I have the utmost respect for her decisions. I don't want to put her on the spot, but the fact that she said it on my blog made me think. Am I objectifying Mr. Armitage in ways that hadn't yet occurred to me? Is the very fact of this blog an objectification? Martha Nussbaum would apparently say yes — as here, I've explicitly turned Mr. Armitage into a thing that I make use of for my own purposes. On the other hand, all analysis does that — it seeks to resolve complexity for the purposes of explanation. No rationalizations about whom an analysis might be for can impede those imperatives. Analysis involves an I-it relationship. One defines an object of study and then studies it. And though I have written quite extensive posts on the techniques of Mr. Armitage's acting, in the end I can't study acting solely as an activity that occurs without a body or a spirit behind it. These things are all connected and they do at least a little to explain the desire to meet the man who stirs us so unbelievably.
The perceived desire to meet the target of our admiration has an inherent tendency to be objectifying, I think; I assume that our desires to meet Mr. Armitage have nothing to do with him. This perception raises the problem of whether one can ever have a non-objectifying relationship with someone one's never met. Martin Buber says you can have an I-thou relationship even with a total stranger to whom you never speak. I-thou is the sort of relationship that moves artistic inspiration, for example, or engagement with the work of another thinker. I hope Buber is right. I'm trying, anyway. But in order for that to happen the blog has to move beyond analysis to talk about how I perceive my self to be in dialogue with Armitage's work. How does the most elevated perception of his "thou" move mine? Laying aside that we can at best guess what Armitage perceives to be the point in his work when he was most in touch with his spirit — and that we maybe haven't seen it! maybe it's not on youtube! — that's a really hard kind of writing to do, but it's what has to come next, the challenge for this blog as my Armitagemania moves into its second year.
Datum: That commentator essentially realized my theatrical fantasy, the sixth most hit post on this blog, and even went a bit beyond. And I can't help but mention in this context that my reaction to the comments on the theatrical fantasy, Stalking Armitage?, an attempt to sort out my (non-)relationship to Mr. Armitage, is the second most hit post here. So the desire for close encounters with Mr. Armitage in real life somehow, either as fantasy or reality, is on the table and has been for some time. It — and concern over it — may flare periodically in the wake of actual encounters.
Datum: Another widely reported fan encounter at the aforementioned gala, in which Mr. Armitage is reported to be — after proving on stage that he is incredibly talented and incredibly willing not to take himself too seriously — not only incredibly good-looking but also incredibly normal and incredibly charming.
Datum: A scan of the program for the Old Vic Gala confirms Mr. Armitage's courtesy and makes me, if you think this possible (cough), respect him even more as a man who hasn't forgotten where he came from and isn't afraid to admit it in public. That assessment may be especially attractive to me because academia is so full of insecure men, so after two decades in this milieu my meters for normal male behavior are skewed hopelessly. But yeah, I'm still asking myself whether he can possibly be for real. I keep looking for a turnoff that I am not finding. Maybe I'm willfully ignoring his recent revelation about his temper. I and a different commentator speculated on the potential reasons for that disclosure and about why we read little negative response to that information. At any rate, for whatever reason, I don't feel it. [Interestingly, while I was composing this, an amusing discussion emerged in the comments to a previous post under the question of "what could you find out about Richard Armitage that would turn you off?" Just more proof that "me + richard armitage" readers are often very intuitive thinkers who grasp the direction of my thoughts before I can put them down on the screen.]
"I just met a wonderful new man. He's fictional, but you can't have everything." Tom Baxter (Jeff Daniels) breaks through the fourth wall to comfort Cecelia (Mia Farrow) in one of Woody Allen's best pictures.
Datum: A post by mulubinba (since removed) about experiences close to home regarding obsession with celebrities, which referenced a forum for sufferers of depression, with some incredibly revealing comments. Do you see yourself there? Do I? Well, this is not a serial activity for me. Armitagemania is the only syndrome like this I've ever experienced. And maybe I am lying to myself, but I don't think I'm obsessive in the technical sense of the term; reading about and looking at pictures of Richard Armitage does not bring me relief from anxiety or fear about vague or specific dangers, and I do not engage in it to ward off bad or irrational feelings about my interest in Armitage himself. Without too much trouble I can stop consuming Armitage product when I have to, as on religious holidays, and I am not doing this against my own rational will. If for some reason against my own inclination I became suddenly allergic to all things Armitage I'd be sad but I'd survive.
But Armitagemania as coping mechanism for distracting me from current problems? Oh yeah. That's been there from the very beginning. I know I'm not alone, either. Can we say "Purple Rose of Cairo"? Do you ever find yourself wishing that Mr. Armitage would just step through the screen?
I get a lot of messages off blog — sometimes one a day. Fewer lately, which is fine, as I have a hard time keeping up with comments. Anyway, I've been getting about one mail off blog per month asking for help in abating the severe recurrence of persistent thoughts of Mr. Armitage. Toward the end of August I asked for reader help on one request. A discussion of levels of Armitagemania ensued that was interesting, in which Skully raised the point of whether we have an obligation to mindfulness toward those who are really suffering. We agreed that we do, but also that we don't know what the answer is, other than seeking support from friends, getting professional help, or going absolutely cold turkey and/or turning off the Internet. In case you were thinking of writing to me: though I am way behind at the moment, I eventually do answer all messages, but I really don't know the answer to this question. As should have been apparent for some time.
Datum: A tweet surfaces suggesting that Mr. Armitage will manage somehow to squeeze "The Rover" into his performance schedule for 2011. The theatrical fantasy again becomes acute in my life. Mulubinba ponders her response to the potential of seeing Mr. Armitage perform in person. She'd go if he were playing in her city but not to the stage door. If "The Rover" happens, what will Servetus do? Luckily, it seems, an actual announcement is still some way off.
Datum (taking deep breath): Pictures of Annabel Capper at the Old Vic Gala in the company of Mr. Armitage surface in a link posted in a thread on C19, as well as a cell phone video of him standing in line to get on the bus to the after party. RAFrenzy writes about the latter, and, as so often, describes exactly how I felt. Like her, I worried about my hypocrisy. When the video popped up on youtube, I first eagerly looked it and favorited it so I wouldn't lose it, then felt unbelievably sorry for the poor guy, that he has to consider the possibility that he could be captured on video while walking the twenty feet from the door to the bus, and ashamed of myself for being such a voyeur, and an eager one at that. Then, I watched it again. Three of those over those more than two thousand viewings were mine. I was disturbed. So. Since Frenz admitted to her reaction to the video, I am going to write, tangentially, about the pictures of Ms. Capper. Because I had all the reactions about them I describe above — and yet another. Relief.
I stress, not for the last time, that I know next to nothing about her. The rest of the post is about my feelings about what I know about her as a way of describing my feelings about my Armitagemania. Meta enough for you? I think if I'm objectifying anyone today, it's her. I apologize for this confession, Ms. Capper, in case you are offended by it, but you really did me a huge favor this week.
As the point of this post is not to generate gossip, but it may inevitably do so, I feel obligated to remind everyone that we have no idea who Annabel Capper is to Richard Armitage. Thinking quickly as I write this, I am aware of only five pieces of neutrally verifiable information that put them together: that they were in the cast of a play together in 2002 in a venue that supports the work of emerging playwrights [original link is dead, but you can read a transcription of that information here]; that they attended the Children's BAFTAs ceremony in each other's company in 2006 (they are pictured together at left); that a doodle for charity purposes that he attributed to himself in 2007 incorporated her name; that they were photographed together at the Carrie's War premiere in the summer of 2009; and that they appeared together at the London gala premiere of Cirque du Soleil's Varekai show in January 2010 (that videolink is dead, but you can now watch it here — worthwhile because she's not dolled up to the teeth in designer clothes but rather sensibly dressed and manages a nice smile but looks quite overwhelmed by all the flashes going off — the video made me think that she was mustering her professionality but possibly dislikes the red carpet experience as much as he has reported he does). Everything else we may believe about his relationship to her is, as far as I am aware, hearsay and not confirmed with independent evidence. He's stated repeatedly since the summer that he's got no current romantic interest; he's also remarked that it's increasingly difficult for him to meet new people to go out with and that he sometimes resorts to an ex when he needs a date.
Silences, lack of any further verifiable information that puts them together, and recent denials of romance on his part notwithstanding (she's never been quoted as herself in an interview about him, and as far as I know, I've only ever read one piece of "friends say" information about him), "Annabel Capper" is a frequent search term that brings readers to this blog. How frequent? It's number 20 — and thirteen of the top ten are variations on the name of this blog or generic search terms for Mr. Armitage — i.e., more than half of the top twenty are requests for the same two things. So in terms of unique requests it's in the top ten, though not as popular as the more generic "richard armitage girlfriend." (Incidentally, "sopa de lima" and "wallace and gromit" are in the top twenty as well.)
When I started blogging I had planned to keep her name out of it to prevent those searchers from landing here, since I wasn't going to provide any additional information about her, and because she mostly works on stage, it seems, her appearances (as well as those in other media) are not stored in places that make it easy for me to catch or comment on them. But that didn't stop me from being curious about her on my own behalf. Eventually I began to think that it was hypocritical for me to be interested in her but not admit it — like saying I had (hypothetically) an illness but not conceding how severe it was. So though I didn't ever write about her, I did mention her name, for example, in picture captions, or in the comments, which is why one can now find one's way here using that search term. The fact that I am now writing a post about my feelings about her means that even more people who search her name will end up here. But the data above and my reaction to it sort of compel me, and I'm not ashamed any more, though perhaps I should be. Because I like Annabel Capper, or more accurately, it's that I like the idea of her, and I have ever since I learned the little bit about her that's available for consumption on the web — really little more than the contours of a professional life, and not dissimilar to the sort of information (mutatis mutandis) that you could find out about me if you knew my real name. Yup: like Hermione Norris, Annabel Capper has become a collateral attraction.
First, and most obvious based on the means I have for learning about her, her body appeals to me. She's tall and not slight. If her Spotlight CV is accurate, she carries not an ounce of extra weight on a strong 5'8″ frame. Her shoulders are wide enough that it looks like she could protect herself in a fight. But it's more than an actual physicality; her pictures suggest an energy that says "don't tread on me." I admire "strong," and Ms. Capper's arresting gaze and marked features expand on the boundaries of conventional attractiveness. Striking, I'd call her, with those intense green eyes and a heavily structured brow that gives them extra broadcast potential and magnetic power. Capable of force, an actor's reel of her work demonstrates — and copes with a range of accents in an "assured" quality of voice. Confident! Second, though she's not a classic lead, her CV suggests, she's apparently talented enough to work regularly in British theatre, including in shows with very minimal casts where one suspects she must contribute a great deal of the energy of the ensemble herself. Cast at an early stage in her career in a prestigious Shakespeare audio project as Helen in Troilus and Cressida. Has not hesitated to be involved in various projects of artistic and political interest. Associates herself with creating meaningful spaces and structures for others to perform in. Has played Lincoln Center in a Sara Ruhl play, which has to have been hard work. Works repeatedly in supporting roles with the same directors, including the respected Mark Wing-Davey, which suggests that she's a team player and a reliable artist who takes direction well. Works hard — CV suggests at least three different roles in 2010. Said to have a "haunting voice" and "vivid intelligence," and G-d knows, Servetus loves smart — which is my third reaction. I found her listed among the visiting faculty in the 2010 and 2011 prospectuses for the University of London's Central School of Speech and Drama, where she is described as teaching writing, another activity dear to my heart (both writing, and teaching it) — and one that demands a particular sort of intelligence that moves beyond "smart." She gives of her talent to others who've been less able to identify or capitalize on their strengths, a final point of attraction for me to Ms. Capper, as demonstrated by an entry from a humanitarian project to visit prisoners and do workshop Shakespeare with them [original text deleted; Internet Archive text here].
I've never met her in person and every one of us has flaws. From my perspective here, thousands of miles away from London and gathering information on the internet, however, Annabel Capper seems: striking, attractive, energetic, strong, artistically adventurous, smart, informed and aware, (multi-)talented, get-along-withable, industrious, generous. All this I can conclude reasonably without her having put any personal information out there about herself other than her resumé. So she's probably also modest — and as we know, she's discreet. The kind of person you'd want as a friend. Worthy of respect. Worthy of trust. Worthy of … love.
I'm not a very frequent C19 reader — not out of any problem with C19 but because my own Armitagemania is so prolix that it doesn't fit well into that format — but when the reports came in about the Old Vic gala I started looking over there for more commentary and up to the minute news. (I'm grateful that people post it and in return, I'd have been happy to discuss this reaction there, but the topic is prohibited, as noted above.) And I wasn't disappointed; it was gratifying to read that stuff. I'm just as curious about information on the "real" Armitage as the next fangrrrl. I jumped right over to the dorktastic video when it appeared and I wrote about it; comments on that post eventually moved in the direction of how far we would go in watching "private" information and disseminating or talking about it. If you look at the comments you'll see that I was much less solid in October about what I'd discuss or not discuss on this blog than I had been in April. And then I saw a link in the C19 thread with the provocative question "Isn't that Annabel Capper?" My heart caught in my throat. My finger hovered over the mouse. Of course I was going to click — how could I ever stop myself? I want to know everything about him! — but I was already feeling dirty about it.
While the finger was twitching, I was already starting to hate myself. The dialogue of the warring Servetuses begins: "Can't leave this topic alone, can you?" I asked myself. "So what if it's Annabel Capper?" The reply: "But what if it isn't? Don't you want to know that, too?" Servetus: "Can't the man spend a night alone and enjoy his success with the people who appreciate him without you googling in to observe him? Come on, take the high ground. Refuse to look." Servetus: "Oh, come on, ignoring information doesn't erase it. If the data there could contribute to your picture of him then you need to look at it. Plus, maybe it will be something so nasty that you'll be shocked out of your preoccupations; wouldn't it be positive then?" Servetus: "Oh come on, you even don't believe that yourself. This is not about information gathering, it is unadulterated prurience. You're just going to feel dirty and hypocritical after you see it. There'll be one moment of excitement and then you'll feel like dreck." Servetus: "Oh yeah? Well you can't stop me." (It was fatal for me to say that to myself, since I have a very oppositional personality.) The defiant finger fell — whether it was Servetus, or Servetus, who propelled it: who can say?
Yeah. And it was her, in two very dimly lit, grainy photographs. Annabel Capper! Standing next to Richard Armitage at the bar of the restaurant, and then next to him while they were talking to a third person! And there was one moment of huge thrill, but I was wrong about the consequences. All of the conflict disappeared, and I felt an overwhelming, dizzying wave of relief, and no conflict at all. My knee-jerk reaction: "Oh, how wonderful that they're there together. How great for him. How great for her." I had wondered whether, for example, his parents or his brother might have been in the audience to witness his first steps onto a live stage in quite some time, and I was just so happy that someone who really cared about him was there for him after such a nerve-wracking reentry. My cheeks blushed and I had a physical sensation of warmth all over. Glee!
Richard Armitage confesses his nervousness about the Twenty-Four Hour Plays to a BBC reporter. Source: Richard Armitage Net
I am not describing this reaction to paint myself as an altruist or to suggest that my Armitagemania is innocent in any way. It's not. All kinds of potential unpleasantness that I just may not be able to admit to consciously could lie behind that reaction. Maybe it stemmed from relief that it wasn't someone whose picture I hadn't seen, so that I wasn't going to get dragged against my ability to stop it into hours of pointless fangrrlish speculation. Or relief that it was Ms. Capper, because I don't believe that she's his current romantic partner, and so he's still single and notionally available to me in my daydreams, without too much disturbing data from reality like a committed lover. (I've sort of filed her in my mind under the surmised label of "potential ex," and wondered whether her days at LAMDA coincided enough with his that she could be the drama school love interest who he "never felt … was the one," in which case my respect for her grows exponentially, since I wouldn't be able to hang out with someone who said something like that about me, even if he didn't intend it to be published. But then Servetus has the unfortunate personality trait of holding grudges.) And the historian evaluating evidence I was trained to be also forces me to point out that her presence there proves nothing: nothing about the pictures says anything about their relationship to him or why she was there. Pictures at an after party don't even prove she was at the performance. She could be his partner, or his ex, or just a very good friend — one must add, a very good friend indeed to put up with and draw upon herself the growing circus around him, to which I am admittedly now making a six-thousand-word contribution — or she could have been there accidentally. And yet other less probable possibilities could explain her presence that probably aren't worth elaborating upon this late in such a long post.
But what this reaction showed me is that there is a limit to the insanity of Armitagemania. I may spend a ridiculous amount of time writing on this blog, which is in turn only a fraction of the time I spend thinking about him and his work, but I still haven't become so much of a fangrrl that I can't tolerate the thought of the actual Mr. Armitage in the arms of a partner in real life or that I would be happy to learn that he'd been dumped and was single again. My excesses aside, at base I am at least capable of fulfilling the laudable self-description of another commenter here of herself the Armitage fan as "a friend he's just never met," of being happy that he has people in his life, no matter his relationship to them, that have stable contacts with him that stretch over long periods — that he has friends and potentially romantic partners towards whom I have no consciousness of jealous feelings. In short Armitagemania is not making me betray my own convictions; maybe I am letting myself off the hook too easily, but Ms. Capper's recorded presence at this event provided the welcome news that I am not at stage 3 or even close.
What a relief.
Ms. Capper, I hope that Richard Armitage loves you somehow — as a lover, as a dear friend — because in the absence of any more personal information about you than I am ever likely to have, you seem like you are worthy of any or all of that, and you are also lucky enough to know him personally, a status that tens of thousands of women envy you no matter how things stand. (I also hope that in private he's the person he appears to be in public — ethical, thoughtful, sweet, loyal, modest — and that if you are his ex, it's not because he has some severe personality flaw, or acted a bit of a monster to you, or that he lost his temper irretrievably or did something else that hurt you terribly. Yeah: if you're his ex, I hope you dumped him. Is that mean of me? Or am I only loyal to my gender?) But even if he doesn't love you, or if he's much less nice in real life than his press suggests, I want to thank you for going to that after party weekend before last. Your presence there did that extra little bit for me that makes him real and reminds me that he isn't just beauty or artistry, a concept that I observe and turn over in my mind to make myself feel better in bad moments — that he is a real person with real relationships, with entanglements that he also may not handle satisfactorily in every regard but that root him in a particular context. That's bittersweet, because (as Anselm demonstrated about G-d, see above) the fact that he exists in reality and not just in the imagination makes Richard Armitage better — even as, at best, I might manage to see him live on stage. In reality, I will only ever know him in my imagination. And that's powerful — particularly on days when my nerves are sore and my soul is exhausted. But it's not the imagination of him, the concept of him, that really powers the energy that comes from his roles, or at least not all by itself.
You appear to be the kind of woman that I want someone who's the kind of man Richard Armitage appears to be to fall in love with. So you, too, have become part of the fantasy — perhaps unfairly, since you didn't sign up for it, any more than he did and indeed much less so.
But for better or for worse, you made him real, Ms. Capper, in a quiet way. It would be easier for all of us fans if he weren't. But if he weren't real, then he wouldn't be half so powerful as a fantasy, either.
188 Responses to "me + annabel capper: or, the limits of Armitage fangrrling, almost a year in"
Servetus, meta analyser in Armitage studies, is unsurpassed in the blogging kingdom!
Mea culpa! Parts of your post spoke directly to me. MillyMe's tragic tale. Take heed in time and desist, dear reader! While Servetus determinedly discussed sartorial details of Armitage dress, Milly was skipping along the dizzy paths of Pwoarosophy and Thighology. Being made John Porter chair and being led gently to the Latin terms for the anatomy didn't seem to diminish her unabashed interest in these fields. Reading about others similarly afflicted (depression and celebrity worship) has only made her aware of how tragic she is, mired in admiration of the body, as she is,and not just of the body of work!
OK, that's me trying to make ponderous fun of my own fascination for an actor I might never lay eyes on! That's why your blog has been such a find. You've been similarly afflicted for as long as I have. I found you quite quickly after that and you have allowed me to take part in the journey of your own fascination and puzzlement as to why him? Why no end in sight yet? and where to now?!
As a counterbalance to the tragic tales of obsession, I refer to an article by Chuck Gallozzi called Admiration of others at personal-development.com.
"When we accept, appreciate, and admire others, welcoming them into our lives, they touch us and help make us what we are. When we embrace others, we embrace life.
Besides being a valuable teacher, admiration is a source of happiness. For what is admiration but delight in what is? It is appreciation and gratitude for what is. A grateful heart is full of joy, while an ungrateful one is full of bitterness."
I appreciate how your blog also provides room for the positive aspects of our admiration of this actor!
Wow's the word. I'm not too sure what the bloodbath was all about because I only started reading RA blogs a few months ago. Nat's blog is in fact the first RA blog I read. I have to admit I did wince a little when I read the title because I could imagine the sort of comments a post like this would invite. Therefore, you are very brave, Servetus.
The only thing I would say about this is I am glad he has someone to share his success with, whether she is his girlfriend or close friend. Afterall, she was there to support him as a friend through thick and thin right from the very beginning. So, if anyone gets the privilege to enjoy the afterparty with him, it should be her.
Dear Prof.,
I can't find your PM. Can you help me? Thanks
Another fascinating post Servetus. I need to read it in more detail later and think about it some more.
I'm probably less conflicted than others about my admiration for ALL of Richard Armitage's considerable talents and physical attributes. He's truly a Renaissance Man in every way. To me my fan-ship for him is a fun and lovely way of escaping the sorrows of life if even for a moment.
I hope there's no harm in it for him, and luckily we're physically separated by the Atlantic Ocean. I find him incredibly sexy, and truly physically beautiful, heartbreakingly so at times. I love his interviews, especially videos of earlier interviews when he was less guarded. There are other actors I have admired and found handsome, but the more I know about Richard Armitage as a person the more loveable I find him!
I've known about RA for about 5 years now, but only in the last 8 or so months have my feelings intensified to the extent I search out information about him every day. I rarely visit the forums, but religiously visit the blogs, especially yours Servetus. So knowing little about his personal life, I rather accidentally ran into a mention of Ms. Capper one day not long ago. The comments I found were along the lines of "not her again!" I then researched RA and Ms. Capper a bit further, but still know little. Now, thanks to this post, I know more. I'm also glad he has a good and loyal and long time friend in AC, and it seems to be a mutually supportive friendship.
So, what is this all leading to you may ask. Only that I think it's natural to be curious about his personal life because let's face it, we are interested in him not just as an actor, but as a man. I don't shy away from finding out more about him as a person, I seek information out, and I love talking about it with others. I will not shy away from any private information I can find or read about him. I wish I knew more, but at the same time am always a bit nervous about knowing more and having my fantasy of RA the person changed forever. But yet, at the same time, I greatly admire and respect his desire for privacy.
This may seem like a contradiction from what I just said above (weird sentence?). I truly believe the only thing RA owes us as devoted fans is to give us the best performance he can as an actor whether on screen or on stage, or wherever. That is all he owes us for buying his DVD's, and audiobooks, and supporting him in whatever he does. He doesn't owe us entry into his private life.
I agree with you, Musa, except I don't search for things about him every day … unless you count following a number of RA fanblogs as searching! 🙂
Very well-written post as usual, Servetus. I agree with you as well – I too have a sort of reluctant interest in Ms. Capper, which is really difficult to explain, because … well, would I be interested at all if she HADN'T been seen together with RA? No. From what you've gathered about her, and written here, I'd say she sounds like a nice person, and we get the impression that RA is a nice person too, so sounds like they're well-matched as friends. If there's more to it than friendship, who knows? Does it really matter to any of us either way?
I suppose that from a sense of being an ordinary woman, that he's seen with a woman who looks REAL is the sort of self-satisfied "see? He's a decent bloke, he wouldn't be interested in one of those fake girls you see everywhere and especially in the glitzy world of showbiz, he wants a REAL woman! (… Like me!)" Because that's just it, isn't it? If he was seen with a supermodel, he would be Just Like Everyone Else – one who cares more about the appearance of someone rather than about the person they are inside, which I loathe anyway, and that would perhaps diminish a part of the attRAction [sic].
Good grief, fangirl psychological analysis is a slippery slope. You go into it with the best of intentions and come out sounding more insane than you did going in! *cowers*
I, too, find him lovable and quite adorable. There are actors I think are attractive, sexy, talented–but none whom strike me as more generally likable and Mr. A. I would have loved to have had a brother, and he would have made a marvelous one, I think.
And because I have such an affection for him, for the person he appears to be, I do indeed also respect him and his wish for some privacy. In this "Big Brother" world where our personal privacy seems to be increasingly trampled upon, I think we all are entitled to that, even if we are a public figure. Bless him and his friends and family as the madness likely increases.
An absolutely wonderful blog post! Thank you, Servetus !!! You hit the quintessence of it all so well that there is just nothing to add.
I normally try to avoid anything related to the private life of RA, so I, like @Riv, did not hear about the bloodbath you refer to.
I also only had a fleeting notion of Ms. Capper. But your description of her is so admirable and wonderful, that I loved to read it.
Also your video is so lovely, though when I think about it, I would not like RA to do that with me, as I would be unable to move or say a word. It would be the most boring and one sided conversation for him, he ever had. What experience would that be for him ;o)
I am even not sure if I would / should attend "The Rover" (stage door visit not even under consideration) if, by any chance, it should be in the time I am in London next year. The only aspect which lets me seriously consider it is, that it would fill the theater and so with my visit I indirectly would support his career.
But with my luck I will not have that chance to decide anyway.
Thank you for this wonderful post. Once again I will have to print it out and read through it again and again to get all the brilliant aspects of it.
I often wonder where the line is from super fan to creepy fan. This is something I often ponder, even being on fan sites, am I crossing the line somehow? For me, I work from home, so in a sense this is the water cooler conversation I would have at work, it is just focused on one person. Your site does provide relief from the stresses of life. I say well, it is healthier than drinking, but how much I am not sure. But in some senses that is me making excuses a bit and trying to be funny.
I am a bit conflicted about all of this, but at least I am in really good company and I feel like if I am going to have a fan gurl crush on someone, he is prob one of the better people, if not the best.
The other thing, I wanted to touch on was the fame factor. I think what many of us are struggling with is it's like discovering U2 before they were U2 or REM, they were really good underground bands, then they hit it big. It's like having this cool obscure secret and secret community that ain't so secert anymore.
As for his love life, I truly hope that he has someone special in his life. And from what you described, she sounds like a pretty amazing woman teaching Shakespeare to inmates!!! The thing that would turn me off would be if he turned up with a super slick starlet. Again, I refer to Hugh Jackman who has been married for many years to a woman who knew him when.
As a happily married woman with an incredible crush on this Renaissance man, who also wants said man to have happiness in his personal life as well as success in his professional life, I can truly say I'm glad Annabel is still part of his life. She's someone who's known him long-term, through the ups and downs; she seems a truly nice person beyond the talent and intelligence (I would love to hear that "haunting voice") and even if their romantic relationship didn't work out for whatever reason (I've wondered if his hectic work schedule and long periods working away from London in Hungary and South Africa weren't an issue for her), it seems they still have a friendship, a bond. And surely that is a good thing. We need those relationships.
Agree with above comment, if he started showing up with the latest trout-pouted starlet on his arm everywhere, then I would be bothered. Because I have a high estimation of Mr. A, and Annabel seems to give it validity.
I like him, I admire him, and I want him to be happy and fulfilled in every avenue of his life, much as I do a beloved single co-worker of mine who is something of a Renaissance Man himself (I love ya, Michael). Whether it's Annabel or someone else who can bring that into Richard's life, then bring it on.
Well now, where to start?
First, I am a little confused about the angst (less here in your blog than in some others I've read) about "violating his privacy" at the after-party. Good Lord people! It was an event open to the public, to anyone who could afford the ticket and the time to go! This was not a private, invitation-only event where privacy and confidentiality might be expected. I find it difficult to believe that an actor attending the after-party would think (unless perhaps if half in a vodka bottle and totally knackered)that this was the place to find a stranger (a member of the public or an actor they've never met before) and bear one's soul. This was a work event!
2) Annabel: When the pictures first came out I thought that was her. I think that if it is, good for her and good for him! I am happy that he would have had someone who, at the very least, must be a long-time friend, to connect with at this event, even if just to chat with. Being alone at social things is something I dislike intensely- no matter how much of a butterfly I am I need to land in "safe" territory periodically through the night.
And it must be good for her career too to mix with the gala crowd (maybe easier since she does more theatre).
So blessings to both of them whatever their relationship. I simply pray for him not to be lonely.
And servetus no matter how wonderful someone is, chemistry is important, it may not be anyone's fault if it doesn't work out.
3) servetus, a liken your analysis of my lovely Mr. Armitage's work, with its focus on his body and voice, to an in-depth literary analysis wherein every aspect is combed through to find meaning and symbolism. The body and voice are the tools he uses and they exist for his use and manipulation outside of the quality of a script. I am amazed at how expressive his eyes are and I can't get enough of comparing his use of that expressiveness among his various roles. I see no reason for guilt, angst or self-doubt. And its ok to say, "He's really pretty and looking at him brightens my day." God gives all sorts of ways to cope, beauty is beauty, avail ourselves of it while it exists.
Yes, he is the friend I've just never met, I wish him love and success which means I'll be keeping tabs as much as I can to see how he's doing. I would seriously think about a trip to the stage door to see for myself the blue of those eyes, the velvet of that voice instead of relying on others descriptions. firsthand observation is very important in research! Someday!
BTW; Can I apply for the Sir Guy of Gisborne chair? Now that I've let him out of his box he's very demanding! 🙂
Ann Marie,
Sometimes–and this is just my view–I think some fans get a little too possessive of/obsessive about Mr. A and begin to see themselves as his ever-vigilant defenders in every bloomin' aspect of his life. And that seems like too much to me. They are so very SERIOUS. And that's just not my personality.
The event clearly was a public one and I don't think his personal privacy was invaded by photos taken or even the video at the bus stop, although I agree the flashes going off in his face had to be annoying–but I guess it's one more thing he has to get used to. Now, if they had followed him into the bathroom or someone had secretly taped his conversations at the after-party, OK, now that's too much!!
I don't go to C19 (or RAC or AA, for that matter–see, I am clearly NOT as crazed as some of you are LOL I am kidding, kidding!!) and never would have realized that even was Annabel in his presence if I hadn't stumbled upon it here.
I think it was at RAnet that I first saw her photo with RA a while back, and while curious about a possible significant other for RA, I haven't made any exhaustive search trying to find out more. I am a nosy reporter type, but I also know when and where to draw the line, I think.
I see where you are coming from in terms of empathizing with her; I guess such situations can never be easy. BTW Didn't Richard once say in an interview he would never marry an actress?
Wow! You really spilled your guts, didn't you? Very brave.
I think that you represent quite accurately what goes through the minds of quite a few admirers, the ones who have self-awareness. It's almost as if they're in so deep they are not sure where the boundary is. That's how this post seems to me. What a struggle!
My response got so long, and this post was so thought-provoking, that I'm going to wait and finish it on my blog later on. Am just on my way out the door.
Meanwhile, "consuming Armitage product". Did you really mean to put it that way?
@Ann Marie, I'm not exactly sure but as he has said that he wants to keep his personal life private, they could be doing so to respect that. Especially when people start making not-so-nice comments about her. So, I'm guessing it's best to avoid the subject altogether.
That said, the post Servetus has written is not like that at all. In some ways and also from reading the comments, it helps others get to know AC a little better.
Re afterparty, I don't think he intended for the public to know he was going with someone. If he did, he would have taken the publicity photos with her. I think he just wanted to be around familiar company in a social event, and who can blame him really. But, I suppose he is aware that there is a possibility for something this to happen. Again, I am happy that she was there with him, but I do think it would have been better for him if those pictures weren't 'published'.
@Riv, I don;t have feelings one way or the other about the photos, he may not have even been "with" her but a shared common event to meet up at may have been the thing. I do that all the time with friends. we may not arrive together but if we know the other is also going we arrange to link up there. No big deal. I think we speculate too much about everything. I mean, really, the man must be able to talk to someone at a party, and yes, pictures will be taken because it was after all, a public event which is what my point is. There was an alumni dinner at school and tons of photos were taken…it happens. Yikes.
"I think we speculate too much about everything"—oh, yes.
Amen, and amen.
Let's stop gazing at our navels so much, girls, if you know what I mean.
@ Riv, I think I can explain what I mean a little more clearly. I think where I may differ with what you may e thinking is here: I don't think this event (because it was part of his professional appearance at the theatre) falls under "private life"…it was a public event that people bought tickets to attend.
What I would consider to be "private life" and therefore would hope people would respect and not publish pictures about are things like, "being out and about (non work related) by himself, with a friend, talking on a cell phone, being in a grocery store, etc. That's were I draw a line. The people who are going to say unkind things about Annabel are going to say them no matter what, the venue is irrelevant.
I think that events like these are de rigeur for actors. I think that private lives should be respected and we should appreciate the public glimpses we are provided.
I agree that this was a public event (though a "VIP" event) in contrast to a private party for friends and family only. They have attended low-profile public events together before and while it seems that they did never seek out photographers they didn't ran away from them either. It could have happened at any of the events they attended that a picture of them got printed in the press. It is only because the press is still very much not interested in Mr. Armitage's private life that this hasn't happen yet but the more famous he gets the more likely it becomes.
So I don't think posting pictures and mentioning her name and what is available about her is out of bounds. But that is were it ends in my opinion. As servetus says, very little can be concluded about the nature of their relationship or about the potential ups and downs of their relationship and this new appearance together actually adds no new information. What we should in my opinion respectfully stay away from is jumping onto any conclusions that might be totally wrong and base our judgements onto what is nothing but speculation.
I think for the moment, and as long as the press is content with that, it is the easiest to stick with officially single to avoid further questions and potential digging. It may very well be true but I seriously doubt that he would announce anything publicly until things are very serious and even then only within the context of an interview to promote a new project, hardly on twitter!
I do wonder how he feels about the increased interest in his person that the Hobbit will bring with it.
@Ann Marie, I definitely agree that it isn't wrong at all because it is indeed a public event. And for what its worth, the photos were sort of accidental, they were posted by the owner out of kindness to his fans who were missing out on the party. She certainly didn't know who AC was. So, I don't think she is at fault. Since it's already out there, it is very fair to talk about it.
I was just trying to explain why some people would rather not talk about it especially after the aforementioned bloodbath. And, I think it is for the reasons servetus mentioned above in reply to my saying I didn't know what happened. Also, like RAfrenzy said, AC could equally be a private person like RA. She may have gone to support him, but it doesn't mean that she wants to be seen with him.
I think all of us draw the line for violation of privacy differently. To me personally, I would see publishing photos of RA with AC without their acknowledgement of the photo being taken, even in a public event, as a violation. (Again, this time, she didn't know and I am actually thankful for her generosity to us who weren't there at the party and loved her blog entry.) But, I personally wouldn't go as far as to insult the people who brought it up because I know that it is not actually wrong, other people might not perceive that as a violation, and discussing the issue helps some people get it out of their systems. 🙂
Hi there. Thank you for linking to my blog article on RA.
Hey, FM,
Thanks again for your wonderful blog entry about meeting and talking with Mr. Armitage and welcome.
As ever I'm grateful to you, Servetus, for being brave enough to explore thoughts and actions I find hard to own myself.
I've been curious about AC too – had exactly the same guilty reaction to the 'Isn't that Annabel Capper?' C19 post. If RA is a fantasy object then she's a potential rival (crudely put) – but it helps that she seems to be a good thing, by anyone's criteria. What's not to identify with?
I've often wondered what it's been like for her as Richard's career has taken off. In a cruel and competitive business like acting, it must be hard to watch success happening to someone else – whether friend or lover. You'd have to be a saint not to feel at least a stab of envy .
I'm impressed by the way she seems to have cultivated an alternative path for herself instead of succumbing to resting actor syndrome. She's carved out her own territory almost in opposition to his, so she doesn't seem defined by her relative lack of success – on the contrary. Perhaps the fact that she's got the richer experience in theatre (which he clearly aspires to) has meant there's less tension. In fact she's ideally placed to mentor his attempts to get back on the stage – that's partly how I read her presence at the Old Vic. She'd be able to guide and support him at a scary time.
RAF, I agree that she hasn't put herself up for scrutiny in quite the same way as him – but she has appeared in public with him, and she seems pretty savvy. She must know what the deal is?
For information: AC's cv mentions that she has a part in 'Operation Mincemeat'. This is airing on BBC 2 TV at 9pm next Sunday (5 Dec), and will be available on iPlayer for those who can access it.
Great post, Sev!
Brave topic, since I was present (merely reading) when that particular 'bloodbath' took place.
As I remember most didn't exactly have one opinion or another about her or their relationship – whatever it may be. I'm more annoyed by certain fans who want to dictate how every person should experience their admiration for him. There is no standard mold, there are no set rules how one should act or think. Or even where our curiosity needs to be curbed.
Of course I'm not talking about (near) stalking practices and whatnot. I remember how one fan used her work to access an actor's home address and literally knocked on his door with a friend. Now that is seriously crossing the line.
Curiosity is very much part of being human, so it is quite natural to want to know more. Yes, I have no doubt he's a very private person, but people seem to be confused about what it means. To me it means predominantly: not willy-nilly sharing what my true thoughts and feelings are. Keeping certain aspects of my personal life to myself and only share with a few.
However I venture out there. What I would like to keep private at times simply isn't. When that happens, it happens. Sometimes it gets noticed and people will talk, other times no one even bats an eyelid and is pretty much ignored. Whether I like it or not, I have absolutely no control over what others may think or say.
Ok, his public outings are far more scrutinised than any of ours, but this whole stance of "This is private! Clearly a No-Go area!!" is at times equally as ridiculous. Sometimes it does feel like the emperor's new clothes.
I just noticed my comment is more about the reactions & behaviour around him, than it is about him or him & AC. Probably because I think he'll continue to do his own thing and act according to what feels right.
And regarding Ms. Capper, I just find I'm curious, but nothing more.
CC, that's me–curious about AC, but not possessing any great need to know MORE.
Something that I have observed: there appear to be certain fans who seem to want to put Richard on a very high pedestal–which he has clearly indicated through his comments isn't something he is comfortable with–and treat him like a sort of saint or god. But when and if he says or does something they don't like, or doesn't do or say something they expect, they seem ready to take him to task and write angry letters to his agent, massively whinge, et al. ready to knock him off the pedestal he didn't ask to be put on in the first place. He IS a real person, as hard as it is to believe sometimes, considering his awesome beauty, talent, charisma and general niceness, and we all need to remember that, and respect that.
Oh yes, and who don't seem to appreciate and tolerate any critical notes on him and their own behaviour. However when one doesn't seem to toe the line, oy vey!
"I remember how one fan used her work to access an actor's home address and literally knocked on his door with a friend."
Oh goodness me. That would be against any sort of confidentiality agreement and most likely also be a breech of the Data Protection Act as well, at least if it was here in the UK. And that's ASIDE from it being morally repulsive!
If you're in a callcenter and get phoned up by a celeb, then you may gush "OMG guess who I just spoke to!!" to your colleagues and/or your partner when you get home, but noting down the celeb's details for "private use" and especially seek them out, spew no. That would be gross misconduct.
She even boasted about it, as if it's a truly great achievement. I think most of the fandom were just dumbfounded by her actions when it came to light, and most did disagree with her. Sending fanmail is one thing, but standing at one's doorstep is another!
But the ultimate payback was when the actor discussed the incident in interviews later on. The ladies in question were even slightly indignant when he wasn't flattering them or the incident.
Can't possibly imagine why. 😉
Hah, talk about the ultimate burn! Serves them right!
Is it crazy to post X # words about an actor? Of course it is! Including exhaustive analysis of wardrobe and tailoring; exhaustive analysis of form and feature; exchange of recipes in regard to what would we feed this (in the perception of many) paragon? Absolutely. And fun, and informative and thought-provoking. Commenters have been stimulated to bring not just their PHWAOR reactions, but their varied backgrounds, skills, writing, analyses to the discourse.
The question of intrusiveness and invasiveness is complex. The "bloody internet" stimulates extraordinary awareness of anyone who has a degree of public profile. The issue of how far to delve into one's fangirling is always going to be a complex dilemma for the blogger, as it also involves how much of herself is the blogger comfortable of revealing of herself. The ethical dilemma being that of how to use the public information to interpret the actor. Is this invasion of privacy? I don't think this blog, or that of Nat's (which is witty and hysterically funny) quite constitutes a WikiLeaks situation. It is a personal decision on the part of the blogger – and I doubt any of us can apply a complete, across-the-board solution. We each have to find it within our personal codes of what is inappropriate or harmful or offensive to ourselves to either read, or comment on a blog.
As for Ms Capper, the lady has a marvellously individual face, and whatever role she has the life of Mr. Armitage, she has clearly accompanied the actor to situations in which photogs will inevitably pop up from the woodwork.
Post whatever you are comfortable with, servetus (or not entirely comfortable with). The feedback is part of it, and the ensuing discussion is valuable to all who read.
Another fantastic post, servetus. There's a discussion on another board I frequent about what it means to treat a celebrity as a "normal" person. For example, if you and RA had a mutual friend would you introduce yourself to him as "friend of so-and-so," assuming you would do that with a non-celeb friend of a friend. And then there are stories like this one
and this one
that feed our collective imagination.
I'm thinking more about this (and rewatching Daffy Duck as, uh, research) and will post more later.
Loved reading those posts. The one about John Hughes just about made me cry. Definitely wonderful food for thought and the imagination, jazzbaby1.
And how is Daffy coming along? *grin* Suddenly craving seeing the one where Bugs visits Sherwood Forest and dubs the sheriff
Sir Loin of Beef . . . Can still hear Little John saying, "Never Worry, Never Fear, Robin Hood Will Soon Be Here!" And then Errol Flynn appears in the trees.
Ah, Errol–now THAT is what Robin should look like.
I've probably seen that Bugs but can't recall it. I wonder if that's where the Urban Legend about how sirloin came to be named sirloin came from.
Great post Servetus. I don't have much to add, but I am reading it with avid attention. There is so much food for thought. I also started thinking about my fan-attitude, especially after Calorexa's remarks. But I am far less astute at wording all these thoughts, so I am very grateful to you and all the commenters. It's hugely interesting.
servetus, easier to define deed vs. thought. Up to a point.
Well, 1984 came and sort of went. Sort of. "intent" and state of mind are long a part of the justice system. Profiling has been around for a long time. Technology is fervently working toward "reading thoughts". Is the issue that of how a thought is expressed publicly? Then we get into the entire free speech debate.
A couple of times on a blog, I've expressed a less than kind opinion of an actor/actress, and afterward, felt that it was unkind, and I ought not to have expressed it in writing. (RIP Tynan) As opposed to private conversation. Which is probably silly. So, the internal debate goes on.
How can we not have thoughts and mental/emotional reactions to anyone? How does the thought express itself in deed? Especially, how to express that in a public and written (words do live on…) manner? I knew all the answers to everything in my 20's and 30's. Since then, fuggaboudit. Still searching. No advice to offer; who wants advice anyway, just expanded points of view to help reinforce our individual fundamental sense of right and wrong. Which can be very grey along the way.
I really like what you've said here, fitzg, especially this.
"A couple of times on a blog, I've expressed a less than kind opinion of an actor/actress, and afterward, felt that it was unkind, and I ought not to have expressed it in writing. (RIP Tynan) As opposed to private conversation. Which is probably silly. So, the internal debate goes on."
For me it depends on what the comment is. On another post just recently I said that I thought Daffy Duck was a better Robin Hood than JA. I don't know anything else about him as an actor, I've never seen anything else he's ever done, but I think he was out of his depth acting against RA and KA. I just didn't buy his performance. That kind of criticism — harsh though it may be — I think is valid. I'm not ripping on Jonas, I'm ripping on his performance. It's different to tear JA or Annabel or any other human apart for their humanity but at the same time it's a very human instinct — jealousy, for example — that drives sucha response.
Man, my head is spinning! I've tried to read all comments but am going to have stop here as I have A Very Important Person's birthday cake to finish by tonight…she's turning 5.
My first reaction is "HUH?" Then I kinda wonder if I need to weed out some of my thinking on this. You guys are right about the validity of internet comments and their effect on others and yes, we should be careful what we say. But then there's the old thing that my Mama always threw at me, "It's not WHAT you said that got you into trouble, but HOW you said it." It's really, really hard to convey that thru typing out words on the internet, the emotions, the state of mind, the background, etc.
But then, I'm new in these parts and yes, RA has had an effect on me that I haven't really experienced before. Let me just say this. I've been involved a group of fans that is based on a mid-90's TV show, who meet once a year. In the beginning, it was a little nerve-racking to think about meeting TV producers, writers and actors. I mean, this is big time! Not. They were/are regular people (for the most part) who were very friendly, accommodating to some admittedly nutso fans ( not me, of course *snort*). Some of them were as genuine as they could be…some were not. I learned that most of them were people with whom I had very little in common and if they lived in our little town, I probably would have no more than a nodding acquaintance. But that does not diminish my respect for them as fellow human beings or my honest interest in them as a friend. And the truth is, what I saw during the time we were together (2-3 days per year) might have been what my Mama calls "puttin; on". Was that person that I may have spent 10 mins with showing me the real him/her?! Probably not. But then, was I showing my true self? Heck no! I sure don't want anyone to know that sometimes I lick my fingers when eating fried chicken and I've got a real hang-up about the correct direction of toilet paper! And you don't want to even see me get really aggravated when Dear Hubby tracks mud into the house. (his mud usually includes cow poop)
Bottom line is: we're here to learn from each other. To broaden our horizons. Peer into a world that we've never imagined much less participated in. Yes, we must be diligent to filter out what's not good for us or what is "too much". I think G-d puts in each of us an alarm for the Too Much alert. At least He has with me. It's up to me/us to listen for the alarm.
I had an interesting conversation with one of my daughter-in-laws last week. She was trying to deal with "a friend" who was being intrusive with her phone calls, visits, etc. (DIL works from her home via computer and has 3 children under 6 and helps with our family business. She's a busy gal!) She wanted to know what to do about it and IF she should do anything about it. I told that I had faced similar circumstances many times and it all came down to: Is this person/thing/job/whatever intruding on my family time? Am I neglecting to spend time w/my own children and/or husband? Does this person/problem invade my time with G-d?
We each have responsibilities to meet every day and we like to think we do our best in meeting them. Anything that interferes with that, in my case, has to be disciplined and examined. Not easy sometimes but required, again, in my case. I have to be careful because I'm pretty much an All or Nothing kind of gal. But I wouldn't trade the friendships and learning experiences I've had here and at other sites. If not for those "other sites", I would never have learned the Jewish reasoning for not writing out the complete word for Jehovah G-d! When my internet Jewish friend explained it to me, I was humbled and amazed. What a notion! That G-d is so sacred that we can't write out His name! Now that's a true WOW!!!!!!!
Love to you all!
@NovemberBride, it was good to see you post. Has your Lords of the North arrived yet? Also, please know that when I write out God's name I am not being disrespectful to Him or do not consider it sacred for I do. It is the way I was taught in my religion.
(taking lunch break with icing hanging off my nose and in my hair)…NOOOOOO! It hasn't come yet altho my mail lady is praying for it to come as quickly as possible, not that I'm harassing her or anything. Just as friendly reminder, I returned Mr. Royle's email 2 days ago by thanking him for the courteous phonelady's assistance in ordering said CDs! *wink* I added that upon its receipt, I planned to listen to the reader's rendition of the book with extreme anticipation. Heck, hubs might even like to hear it?! We'll see….
And No Ma'm, no disrespect noted! You type God, I type G-d. I may be a Babtist (yes I know how to spell it, I'm just goofy that way) but I love exploring the whys of others' view of G-d and the Bible. Another eye-opener for me was the crossing of oneself. Who knew the history and reasoning for it? Obviously not me! Whole new respect for the practice.
See that's the beauty of this whole deal. I probably would've never known much less thought of asking anyone about such things. I was brought up in a VERY conservative family/home and you just didn't question some things. So I hit upon the internet and places like this and a whole new world opened up for me!!
And by the way, I just touched (in the above comment) on a couple of points that Servatus and the rest of you examined. Many more that I could go over, but won't. However, re the RA/AC relationship, I just have 2 questions: Does he send her roses? Does she feed him good? Anything else, I don't need to know! Unless, someone wants to tell me…:)
@NovemberBride, two great points of yours: HOW you say it! and how difficult it is, to express the emotion/intent behind it, without facial expression, tone of voice. I'd love it if WordPress allowed comments with italicising, underlining, etc. I find this helpful in e-mail…
You can, but you have to use the HTML tags and type them in, like for italicized etc.
Thank Servetus for a different perspective on Ms.. Capper. I always thought of her "happy girl", I hope it is for Mr.. RA is also a friend. Indeed, much of their links, because even a common interest in art. As for privacy, RA – it is natural that every fan wants to learn as much about his idol, and from our fans, depending on how much further to go in collecting information about him. I think it's wonderful that RA does not share your privacy. On the other hand, every artist, whether painter, musician or actor does not exist without its addressee (the fans). And I was always curious, what shaped it such a sensitivity. After looking at the roles of RA, each man clearly shows, even the bad characters are not bad until the end, just make mistakes, such as John Mulligan in the Moving On
The ritual of crossing oneself is interesting. The last of my ancestors – the Irish side – to be Catholic, declared about three hundred years ago "What! Lose our lands? We're Protestant!" (how principled…)
Yet, I (non-practising Anglican) viewing the glory of a cathedral in England or Normandy, have found myself quietly making the sign of the cross. Whether atavistic, or respectful awe for the urge and the faith to create such beauty, it precludes outright atheism for me. Creativity and beauty must derive from a source. One can hold to/practise within any denomination, or not; but the sense of faith expressed through beauty and respect for the beliefs of the creators (the menorah is one of the loveliest, most graceful expression of faith) is an anchor.
Ahhh, nicely put, fitzg!
[…] succinct and thus always worthwhile pi provides her promised reflections on the question of the limits of her Armitage fandom. She gets me exactly right when she writes: […]
well isn't this creepy.
[…] may also differ from the author perspective. The most obvious category for searching for the most viewed post on this blog (by a factor of four) has only eight mentions. (Not because I wouldn't write about it more, but I've run out […]
[…] someone solely for his beauty seems shallow — even as I felt it was a false dilemma, as acting is to no insignificant degree the successful employment of one's physicality to move an…. Eventually, I argued that four factors working together in a relationship of combinations […]
[…] I observed on the boards. Someone — who likes it — once described this blog as a virtual water cooler. I think "bar" might be a better metaphor. Some people stay away entirely on the […]
[…] "me + annabel capper: or, the limits of Armitage fangrrling, almost a year in." December 1, 2010. With four times as many hits as the next post on the list, this one still […]
[…] are a few remarks I made in response to a post on Me + Richard Armitage last December, when the topic was about his fame, his friendship with an actress and the fandom […]
[…] pursued the point, though, and I remembered that I had made that point once upon a time myself, in a long discussion of Annabel Capper that's still the most viewed post on this blog, even if I don't think about it much any more. (Poor Annabel Capper, to have her available […]
[…] topic than anyone who reads publicly available sources already knows). A long time ago, I wrote a speculative text on what a particular answer to this question would mean to me if I knew it were t… (a text that labels itself as such, throughout, by the way) but reliable data simply do not go to […]
[…] will probably surprise no one to learn that it is this one. By a factor of at least three above the next most viewed post. The text has been picked up in […]
[…] 1995-98. The combined total of their known public appearances together and overlap is traced in this post. In 2009-10, they were spotted in public three times together: at the Carrie's War premiere, […]
[…] been skirting writing about this for a while. My first attempt was about a relationship that if it ever existed, was in the past by the time I wro…, and therefore safer, although the post has been used to indict me and associate views with me that […]


text:
|Martin Maechler
|Martin.Maechler at R-project.org
Robust (or "resistant") methods for statistics modelling have been available in S from the very beginning in the 1980s; and then in R in package stats. Examples are median(), mean(*, trim =. ), mad(), IQR(), or also fivenum(), the statistic behind boxplot() in package graphics) or lowess() (and loess()) for robust nonparametric regression, which had been complemented by runmed() in 2003. Much further important functionality has been made available in recommended (and hence present in all R versions) package MASS (by Bill Venables and Brian Ripley, see the book Modern Applied Statistics with S ). Most importantly, they provide rlm() for robust regression and cov.rob() for robust multivariate scatter and covariance.
This task view is about R add-on packages providing newer or faster, more efficient algorithms and notably for (robustification of) new models.
Please send suggestions for additions and extensions to the task view maintainer .
An international group of scientists working in the field of robust statistics has made efforts (since October 2005) to coordinate several of the scattered developments and make the important ones available through a set of R packages complementing each other. These should build on a basic package with "Essentials", coined robustbase with (potentially many) other packages building on top and extending the essential functionality to particular models or applications. Further, there is the quite comprehensive package robust, a version of the robust library of S-PLUS, as an R package now GPLicensed thanks to Insightful and Kjell Konis. Originally, there has been much overlap between 'robustbase' and 'robust', now robust depends on robustbase, the former providing convenient routines for the casual user where the latter will contain the underlying functionality, and provide the more advanced statistician with a large range of options for robust modeling.
We structure the packages roughly into the following topics, and typically will first mention functionality in packages robustbase and robust.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Knitting Books (5)
Whether your looking to expand your skills, learn more about your craft or enhance your pattern library, our collection of Knitting Books is perfect for you!
Knitting Books make great gifts and are tools you can share with future generations. Expand your knitting repertoire with one of our book categories below or browse or general collection for wonderful project and technique ideas!
Baby & Toddler | Reference | Socks | Sweaters


text:
A few weeks ago, I wrote about how much I was enjoying R. A. Scotti's Vanished Smile, a new historical true crime book about the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa. At the end of her tale, Scotti revealed that an early scene had been based on newspaper article that might have been entirely false, so questionable was the reporter's credibility. This technique is very different from the one normally favored by true-crime writers — withholding some facts — and undermines the book. It's one thing to dole out clues carefully and it's another to insert material that may be fiction. The belated revelation that this had occurred cast much of the earlier material in the book in a new light that flattered neither Scotti nor Vanished Smile.
April 29, 2009
Second Thoughts on R. A. Scotti's 'Vanished Smile'
Leave a Comment »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI


text:
Our Character-themed Merry G'Daymas Koala Green Kid's T-Shirt featuring G'Day Koala from Little Mo & Friends is made from a soft-feel, quick-dry, non-wrinkle polyester blend so you can finally have the day off ironing.
This kid's t-shirt will be your child's favourite, and will last as a pass-me-down with never-fade Italian ink and gorgeous colors.
Merry G'Daymas Koala Green Kid's T-Shirt Details
- Quick-Dry, anti-wrinkle polyester blend
- Double hem stitching
- Printed with Italian never-fade ink
- Anti-wrinkle, anti-pilling, pre-shrunk
- Durable and light-weight 110GSM fabric
- Exclusive to Little Mo & Friends, Not Found In Stores
Care Instructions
Cold gentle machine wash with like colors before first use. No not soak or rub. Do not bleach. Rinse well. Do not tumble dry. Low iron on reverse. Do not dry clean.


text:
Adobe today launched the first products and services in its Edge suite of HTML5 development tools. Adobe Edge Animate 1.0 aids Web developers and designers in the creation of animation and interactive content; Edge Inspect (formerly called Shadow) provides simultaneous cross-mobile-device previewing and debugging. The third product to go live today was Edge Web Fonts, a new font service offering more than 500 free fonts including two new ones from Adobe.
The company also demonstrated two other Edge tools that are currently in development. The first is a design tool, Edge Reflow, designed to facilitate the development of so-called "responsive" pages that alter their layout depending on the size and resolution of the device they're being viewed on—a technique that is becoming more popular as a way of handling the ever-increasing number of different form factors in common use. The second is Edge Code, a more programmer-oriented code editor with live previewing and the ability to expand and edit CSS and JavaScript from within the HTML view, rather than having to jump between files.
As well as these Edge tools, Adobe announced the release of PhoneGap Build. This cloud service takes HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript, and combines them together to produce applications for iOS, Android, Windows Phone, webOS, BlackBerry OS, Bada, and Symbian.
Edge Animate will cost $499 for a perpetual license or $14.99 per month for a single application subscription. Edge Animate is also being added to the full Creative Cloud subscriptions ($49.99 per month paid annually, or $74.99 per month on an ad hoc basis). For a limited period, the $499 price is being waived, and Edge Animate will be free.
Edge Inspect and PhoneGap Build are all being offered as services to Creative Cloud members. With free Creative Cloud accounts, PhoneGap Build users will be able to perform 100 builds per month, and can develop one paid app and an unlimited number of open source apps. Paid Creative Cloud accounts bump this up to 25 paid apps and 1,000 builds per month. Developers needing more PhoneGap Build capacity can also pay $9.99 per month for the same 25 paid/1,000 build limit. Edge Inspect's pricing is similar; free Creative Cloud accounts will be able to test on a single device, with unlimited devices available for $9.99 per month, and also bundled as part of the paid Creative Cloud subscription.
Edge Web Fonts are available for free, with no apparent limitations on the number of sites or pageviews. For those not wanting to use the free fonts, Adobe continues to offer services from Typekit at a range of price points. As with everything else, paid Creative Cloud subscribers also have, as part of their subscription, access to Typekit's $49.99 per year tier.
Adobe is currently trying to engage in two transformations at once. First, there's the move from Flash to HTML5. Second, there's the move from perpetual software licenses to subscription services.
With Flash, Adobe was world leader when it came to producing the tooling and software for developing rich, interactive Web content. Flash's biggest competitor, Microsoft's Silverlight, never came close to rivaling Flash's ubiquity or abundance. Even today, with HTML5 being the preferred tool of choice for many developers, Flash has a clear lead when it comes to both the capabilities of its design and development tools, and the maturity of its development model.
Adobe is working to establish the same position in the world of HTML5 development tools with the Edge range of software and services. Early indications look promising. The company has a long history of producing tools that are used and enjoyed by non-programming designers and with Edge Animate it is bringing that expertise to the HTML5 world. Edge Animate uses offers timelines, events, and a library of animations to allow creating animated and interactive content without requiring programming skills (though for those who do want to edit the code by hand, it's all powered by jQuery). In this way, Edge Animate is filling important tooling gaps that exist for HTML5.
Edge Reflow appears that it will similarly address a gap: responsive design is arguably an important approach to addressing smartphones and tablets, but it's one that's poorly supported with current development tools.
The introduction of new products and services also makes Adobe's subscription pricing more appealing. The paid Creative Cloud subscription already gives you access to more software than even the $2,599 perpetually licensed Creative Suite 6 Master Collection, and the addition of the first Edge extends that advantage. On top of that, the subscription provides access to Adobe's online services, including the new Edge services, which is something that the company values at several hundred dollars per year when taken together.
Depending on exact needs, the perpetual licenses still may be better value, but plainly the company wants its users to adopt the subscription scheme. Adding in extra, relevant capabilities is instrumental in winning people over.
As well as these transitions, the company is also embracing, in a limited way, open source. The two new fonts it's including with Edge Web Fonts both have open licenses and are available in the company's GitHub repository. Edge Inspect is built on top of and around the open source wienre, and Edge Code is powered by the company's open source brackets code editor.
Edge Animate and Edge Inspect were well received during their beta periods. If they prove successful now that they're commercial products, Adobe could be well on its way to making lemonade out of the lemons of Flash's fall from grace: a better, more diverse product line that manages to be no less important to the Web design and development communities. The company hopes the line manages to be popular, too.


text:
Let me grant you a wish... a Starbucks Coffee 2010 Planner!!!
Just like magic, happy holiday tunes starts to play putting everyone in a better mood as they make their Christmas lists.
In a couple of weeks, watch as friends and family exchange gifts over a delicious spread of only the season's best.
Best of all, the RED cups are HERE!!!... and they're here to stay up until January 6, 2010!!
This year, Starbucks Coffee is bringing back three of our well-loved holiday beverages namely, the Dark Cherry Mocha, the Peppermint Mocha and my personal favorite, the Toffee Nut Latte!
In addition to these highly sought-after drinks, be sure to try a couple of their plenty holiday food items such as the Creme Brulee Cheesecake, the delectable Chocolate Molten Cake, Paul's favorite the Christmas Turkey Chicken on Cranberry Bread and some returning favorites such as the Peppermint Brownie and the Toffee Nut Loaf.
There are actually 14 holiday food items according to Celine Clemente, who's a dear friend and Starbucks Coffee's ever-talented R&D specialist. It's a good thing that we have more than a month to enjoy them one by one as all of these items were carefully created to complete your coffee drinking experience at Starbucks.
The 2010 Planner
Of course, the highlight of celebrating Christmas at Starbucks Coffee here in the Philippines is the one and only..or shall I say, the three and all so pretty looking planners that are available beginning November 4, 2009!
Yes, beginning today, you can now indulge in your favorite holiday beverage, munch on one of the yummy food items and earn a sticker or two to be a couple of steps closer in bringing home one of the three Starbucks 2010 planners!
The planners comes in three lovely designs that features the different stages of the coffee bean. Browsing through the inside pages, you'll see the different things that I love about Starbucks Coffee: the beverage, the history, the partners, the innovations created and their global responsibility towards the environment, education, culture and the arts.
As an additional treat, this year's planner comes with a small booklet of coupons that you can use in certain months throughout the year!
The planner promotion is from November 4, 2009 to January 6, 2010. One sticker is awarded for each Starbucks beverage purchase. Customer must accumulate a total of seventeen (17) stickers (nine (9) Christmas beverage + eight (8) core beverages except bottled drinks) to redeem (1) Limited Edition Starbucks Coffee 2010 Planner.
Of course, for every redemption of the Limited Edition Starbucks Coffee 2010 Planner comes a donation to the continuous relief efforts for the Typhoon victims and to SparkHope – Starbucks flagship program for early childhood care and development in partnership with UNICEF.
Pretty easy huh?
A Wish Granted : Frannywanny's Christmas Treat
Christmas is truly just around the corner and as my way of saying THANK YOU for all the support and love that you have sent my way, I would like to give out ONE (1) Limited Edition Starbucks Coffee 2010 Planner to a lucky reader!
The mechanics is easy, simply leave a UNIQUE comment below and tell me why you truly deserve to win!
Contest will run from November 4 to November 30, 10PM. I will announce the name of the winner no later than December 5, 2009.
Of course, we just have a couple of rules:
1) Readers can only leave one UNIQUE comment in a day. This means, you can leave a comment ONCE every single day provided that you have not posted the same thing before. Submitting one UNIQUE reason per day will give you 26 chances of winning!
2) Please include your name and email address in every comment. This is the only way where I can contact you and tell you the wonderful news at the end of the contest period!
3) Unleash that creative spirit in you! Post a link of a photo, an artwork or your very own blog entry!
4) I will be choosing the best comment at the end of the contest period.
*planner shot (three designs) courtesy of Starbucks Coffee Philippines


text:
We never stop improving and that's why we're successful. See how we're improving facilities, programs, patient safety and patient satisfaction.
We're the most recognized community hospital in the state and it's our people who make us great. See hospital and staff awards.
Winchester Hospital was the first community hospital in the state to achieve Magnet designation, recognition for nursing excellence. Learn why.
Our tremendous staff gives back to our community by coordinating free health screenings, educational programs, and food drives. Learn more.
A leading indicator of our success is the feedback we get from our patients. See what they're saying about their experiences.
Poor sleep
habits can have a negative impact on your thought process, heart health, and overall wellness. About 67% of US seniors reported difficulty in getting
proper sleep
. They are more likely to experience problems because of changes in medication, health issues, and lifestyle.
disorders can also decrease sleep ability. Current sleep treatments include lifestyle changes, medication, and supplements. A common sleep supplement is
. It is a hormone made in our brains that triggers our wake and sleep cycles. Pharmacological treatment and melatonin are common approaches to managing sleep issues, but there are safety concerns.
Two recent studies reviewed these approaches for elderly recipients. Researchers at the Sleep Medicine and Research Center at St John's and St Luke's Hospital reviewed the effects of a drug called zolpidem . In the study, published in the
American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
, zolpidem did show promising results in helping seniors achieve a more effective sleep. Researchers at the Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience reviewed the benefits of melatonin and the effect of environmental light in elderly with dementia. In this study, published in the
Journal of the American Medical Association
, melatonin did help with sleep but increased withdrawn dementia-related behavior. The results improved when given in combination with a bright light environment.
The zolpidem study was a randomized control study. It involved 205 patients aged 65-87 years. They were split into two groups. One group received zolpidem (6.25 mg extended release) every night. The second group received a placebo.
Baseline measurements were taken for both groups. At the end of 21 days, compared to the placebo group, the group that took the zolpidem reported:
In general, the zolpidem group reported a better overall sleep. Negative reports (eg, headache,
, somnolence, nasopharyngitis) were about the same for both groups.
The melatonin study involved 189 elderly patients, 87% had dementia. All participants resided in assisted care facilities. The patients were randomly assigned to one of the following groups:
Melatonin did help to improve onset of sleep and sleep duration by 27 minutes. However, it did cause unwanted side effects of increased withdrawn and depressive behavior in patients. The good news is the bright light therapy was linked to improvement of cognitive deterioration and depressive symptoms, and increased functional abilities and activities of daily living.
The combination of these two therapies seemed to produce the best results. There were decreases in nighttime restlessness, agitation, and aggression. The bright light environment seemed to counteract negative effects of the melatonin.
Adequate sleep is important to everyone's overall health. Sleep solutions need to complement any current medical support you may have. Although both zolpidem and melatonin with bright light therapies showed positive outcomes it is important to understand the possible side effects as well.
Pharmacological drugs and supplements can both have significant adverse effects. Research continues to understand the benefits and risks of both. This study has revealed a caution against using melatonin for dementia patients because of the negative side effects. Talk to your doctor if you or someone you are caring for is having difficulty sleeping. Together you can develop a plan that may include lifestyle changes or medical interventions.
American Family Physicianhttp://www.aafp.org/
National Sleep Foundationhttp://www.sleepfoundation.org/
Riemersma-van der Lek RF, Swaab DF, Twisk J, et al. Effect of bright light and melatonin on cognitive and noncognitive function in elderly residents of group care facilities: a randomized controlled trial.
. 2008 Jun 11;299(22):2642-55.
Walsh JK, Soubrane C, Roth T. Efficacy and safety of zolpidem extended release in elderly primary insomnia patients.
AM J Geriatr Psychiatry
. 2008 Jan;16(1):44-57.
Winchester Hospital 41 Highland Avenue, Winchester, MA 01890781-729-9000› View All Locations


text:
Miners drop home contest to Falcons 64-40
The Yreka Miners were certainly in the game during the first half against Northern Athletic League opponent Central Valley.
The second half was another matter for the Miners. Trailing by two after one quarter and by six at the half, Yreka looked like they would be in the game in the second half.
But, the Miners scored only two points in the third quarter from two separate free throw attempts as Yreka ended up losing the contest 64-40.
The Miners were competitive in the opening quarter against the Falcons. With 22.2 seconds left in the quarter junior Kaden Culp made two free throws to cut the Central Valley lead to 14-12, which is how the quarter ended. In the second quarter, the Miners, while being unable to take the lead, still played fairly well and trailed 27-21 at the half.
In the second half, the Miners started to turn the ball over more and could not get any points on the board. Yreka did not make a single basket from the floor, only scoring two points from the free throw line as they trailed 43-23 after three.
In the fourth quarter, Yreka started to make baskets more consistently, but the Falcons were able to maintain a good sized lead to come away with the 24- point victory.
The Miners fell to 8-15 overall and 1-6 in the NAL. Central Valley improved to 14-11 overall and 5-2 in the NAL.
Ty Currie led Miner scorers with 15 points, two assits, a steal and three rebounds. Culp also scored in double figures with 10 points, two assits, two rebounds and two steals, Cody Griffith finished with five points. three rebounds and a steals , while Tyler Johnson had four points, four rebounds and a steal. Vandara Pom scored three points, and Quaid Blanchard had two points and 10 rebounds. Tevin Cadola finished with two point and three steals.. Kevin Berry had one point for Yreka. On Friday, the Miners end the regular season on homecoming night versus Anderson.


text:
Looking to travel between Paris and Nimes? Going by bus is a great choice and is often the cheapest method of transport. With tickets from as low as £10 on this route you are guaranteed great value. Bus travel is low emission, meaning you're doing your bit for the environment as well as grabbing a super deal. All our bus operators maintain modern, well equipped fleets, offering comforts including wi-fi, electric outlets, WC, and reclining seats.
We recommend booking as far in advance as you can in order to secure your seat. Seats on the Paris to Nimes route sell quickly, so to secure a fare as low as £10 book now.


text:
6654 Apache Circle Madeira, OH 45234One : 4209715,
Two : 521257924,
Three : 2097152,
Four : 536870912,
Five : 0,
Code : 65536
- 3 ##Beds##
- 2 ##Baths##
- Single-Family
To manage reports, go to your Dashboard.
The data relating to real estate for sale on this web site comes in part from the Broker Reciprocity™ program of the Multiple Listing Service of Greater Cincinnati. Real estate listings held by brokerage firms other than Huff Realty are marked with
the Broker Reciprocity™ logo and detailed information about them includes the name of the listing brokers.
This data is up-to-date as of 03/20/2023 06:02 PM PST.