Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
My husband is slowly falling in love with San Diego
Yeah, but Gekko, it seems to me that this is a pretty easy criticism, although I would personally admit that it has some truth to it, depending upon who you hang out with: "In my opinion, SD has become a mini-burb of what LA represents; superficiality, wannabees, self entitlement, and narcissism." When we are unhappy,we tend to see things in one shade (pardon, AG). I may be unhappy with San Diego's lack of a coherent arts scene (poor Jeff Smith has zilch to review for theatre!), but what's a poor guy to do when all he has to work with are shades of singing plaid? Let's not forget that our surroundings are largely colored by the level of our ambition in life. You can live in one part of SD and think you are in absolute monochromatic apartment hell; or live in another, and it is a material paradise, with a rainbow of interesting folk around you who have traveled the world, but can simply afford, through whatever means, to stay here--and stay here well. "Brown" --or orange, or saffron yellow (all of those yummy shades of the 70s shag carpet for apartment 'homes')--are potentially anywhere and everywhere you go!— September 29, 2009 2:16 p.m.
Refried v. Lunacy
"He says he will get back to refried when he's done dusting." Where is that? I saw his 'I must needs off to my weekend' and refried's reply, and that's it.— September 29, 2009 2:15 a.m.
Chick Lit
Thanks for the typo correction, Fishikins. Several of us should be shot on sight for it. Luckily, no one can see us :) I have not read Mansfield Park, but like P&P for its dead-sharp construction. Speaking of baths, reminds me: Did you know she had an unfinished novel set at an English spa (as in taking the waters, mineral)? Wasn't very good, and have forgotten the name. refried, I like the pilot analogy. Burroughs was quite a cut-up, wasn't he? [Ah, nooooo, she didn't!] I know little about him, and nothing about the Mexico link. Tell?— September 29, 2009 1:59 a.m.
Wnen The EKG Goes Flatline...Was It Worth It?
--a free-range chicken, with Philippe Petit-like skills.— September 29, 2009 1:45 a.m.
Wnen The EKG Goes Flatline...Was It Worth It?
With an unconditional, universal love, and an assistant, and a kind Chinese gentleman, I may one day be so lucky as to have a chicken balance on my head. Upon that day bells will ring, children will sing, and the Reader will award me $500 for those electric red Christian Louboutins :)— September 29, 2009 1:43 a.m.
My husband is slowly falling in love with San Diego
"He is a Refried a**hole, as is SDaniels." Hmm. Welp, tried to offer some understanding and a hand up on your latest, Mindy/thestoryteller, but you are still apparently obsessed with pointing out my nether regions; shoes, humps, bumps. I guess it makes sense, since you've had zero to say to the thinking parts of me. For posters' reactions to you--for yes, it is all about you: Might be wise to read Shizzy's comment on your latest, antigeekess's Wiki link to histrionic personality disorder, and maybe reread that advice about bridges above.— September 29, 2009 12:53 a.m.
Everybody always wants to throw glass in stone houses and, sooner or later, someone's going to lose an eye!
Borges lovers unite! Bring it to the "Chick Lit" thread, Pike. I am behind--need to comment on yesterday's fine ad as well. Forgive me for letting this commenting work 'build' up :)— September 29, 2009 12:27 a.m.
Chick Lit
refried: It makes no sense that you would not read Carver. I am still scratching my head over that one. Your inclinations would seem to naturally lead you to him. Of course, we mentioned the whole issue with Lish a few months ago--which may be the reason you don't want to read 'him?'— September 29, 2009 12:20 a.m.
Chick Lit
nan: You met Tom Robbins? Had sex with him? I think we know what your next blog is going to concern--or should, lady! For the record, I do like Robbins. Still Life With Woodpecker springs to mind--great fun. I just don't think he stands out as better than really good mass consumption stuff--like David Lodge.— September 29, 2009 12:18 a.m.
Chick Lit
Gringo: It's hard to understand how you are such a fan of Bukowski, yet can't stand Burroughs. Explain yourself, sir. I shall drub you thoroughly later in the week re: Nabokov. You have apparently missed the major metaphorical conceits of Lolita. Fred: "Jane Austin... A bunch of self-obsessed social climbers nattering on about their maneuverings..." Ah, but if you can look at the structure of her work... A lot of folk think Emily Dickinson is just about bees and butterflies--and even god--until they realize the razor sharp and dizzying scope of her philosophical wanderings. She figured out Kant before Kant. That is how I feel about Austin--she's like a steel trap, but you have to be willing to enter this structure for a bit, and look around at it. If you like the potential to exploit concepts related to computers and the info age, Jane Austin is to 19th-century social structure what these cyberpunks and postcybers are to Second Life and the vast metaphor of the network.— September 29, 2009 12:14 a.m.