FO: Boring Vest

Alright, just because Beth insisted, here I am posting.

At least I have something to show for myself!

A vest!



Sorry the picture sucks - it's 6 degrees celsius and drizzling outside (snow yesterday!) and I had to take it quickly while Hubbus was on his way out the door this morning.

The vest is made out of the same 50% wool / 50% alpaca "Alpafina" yarn I used for the body of the Fair Isle 101, which I had loads of leftover of. Now I have about 20 yards left, at most. Score! (Yes, those last few inches of knitting were nerve-wracking.) Those of you keeping score will note that Hubbus has gotten more than his allotted one sweater per year this year. I think it was the idea of not having to bother with sleeves that got me. I don't wear vests myself, so I'd never thought to make one, but when he mentioned (100 or so times) that he'd really really like a hand-knitted vest, it finally sunk in that this would mean I wouldn't have to make sleeves. Awesome. So I did it. It went remarkably fast, though on US#2 needles - I did almost all of it either while walking by the river last weekend during a warm spell, or while reading a certain now-infamous thread in the Ravelry forums about the MCY scandal (I hope none of you have bought anything from Mystical Creations Yarns in the last year or so? If you have, you might want to read that).

I had browsed Ravelry for a pattern, and didn't come across anything with the very simple shape that Hubbus requested, so I ended up winging it (only to find, literally while the vest was busy blocking, this pattern which is almost exactly what I ended up doing). I made EZ phoney seams for the first time ever, and quite like them. There was miraculously little problem with the knitting - I didn't have to frog a thing!

And since then I've already finished the first sleeve for a cabled cardigan for myself out of the brown Russian wool that I got as a gift from my in-laws when I first arrived. I'm making this one up, too, since even if I could find a satisfactory pattern online, it'd be a pain in the butt to print it, and I was too lazy. It's fun making up the cable patterns - let's hope it doesn't end up being hideous....

FO: Fair Isle 101

I finished it!



Actually, I finished it three full weeks ago, and have been dying to try it on and show it off but couldn't until now. What's my excuse this time, you ask? Actually, for once I have a good one: I got a hideous case of food poisoning AND strep throat at the same time and was completely out of commission until a few days ago, and even now I'm still not eating regular food (chicken broth, baby!).

The good news is I lost about 15 pounds and by the time I could finally try the sweater on, the weather had gotten nice enough to actually take pictures of it outside!

Look - spring!



The down side of the illness - aside from the pain, wretchedness, immobility, nasty medicines and boredom of course - was that I almost completely missed my absolute FAVORITE time of year to be eating in Russia. My illness almost exactly coincided with Velikii post, or the Great Fast on the Orthodox calendar. The stores fill with delicious vegetarian foods - after a winter of kolbasa, potatoes and carrots, I live for Velikii post. There are beet pancakes. Stuffed peppers. Lentil cutlets wrapped in eggplant. It's heaven on earth...and this year I missed it. Well, okay, I've been sneaking bites of all these things in the last day or two, along with the chicken broth, and not paying too heavy a price. But...how completely unfair! I could have been stuffing myself with vegetarian deliciousness for almost a month! My birthday also happened in the middle of all this, and on the first genuinely warm day of the year, and I couldn't even get myself out of bed, much less outside. Very sad. However, don't feel too sorry for me - I figure, karma-wise, I was in for a period of bad luck after the absolutely phenomenal luck I had in every way this fall on the job market - in the balance of things I still come out way lucky, so oh well.

Anyway, until a few days ago I was even too sick to knit (gasp), but I had literally just blocked the Fair Isle 101 sweater as the fever and..um...other symptoms first hit me three weeks ago. Here's the Ravelry link for the project. I modified it to such a degree that really only the colorwork chart and the general inspiration are really from the IK pattern. The rest is an Elizabeth Zimmermann EPS raglan in a completely different gauge (fingering weight yarn), with my own personalized measurements for the sleeves (the EPS numbers always seem a little big to me) and short-row bust shaping and waist shaping (above and below the colorwork, so it didn't interfere with the chart). The Alpafina 50/50 wool/alpaca yarn actually ended up blending very nicely with the leftover KnitPicks Palette sampler yarn I used for the colorwork. The sweater is light and thin but very warm. My only dissatisfaction is that the rounded-squarish neckline was supposed to be much lower - that was part of what I liked about the design - but I was so neurotic about where it should go that I overcompensated and it ended up too high. Since I was being equally neurotic about where the bust shaping should land and actually got that part exactly right, overall I'm happy - it could have been worse! And it still sits nicely over a button-down collared shirt, as I intended.

More pictures:











Meanwhile, in the last few days since I've been feeling better, I figured out that I could spin from a near prone position with a supported spindle. Good to know.

I finished the last of the Navajo plying with the mystery fiber I was experimenting on. You saw this before, but now there's more of it!



I've also finished spinning, but not quite finished plying, some of the grab-bag wool I got at the Allegan fiber festival, which is destined to go into the handspun socks I'm working on for Hubbus



I also started another pair of plain vanilla Hubbus socks, out of fitful boredom, using in-house cashmere from School Products, which there isn't much of, so these will be bedsocks.



In a separate and only slightly less random fit, I also started a pair of migraine socks for myself.



What the heck are migraine socks, you ask? It's something I've been thinking about for a long time - I think I bought the yarn at least a couple of years ago. When I have a migraine coming on, my fingers and especially my toes get icy cold - it's some kind of circulation thing. When it's warm out, though, it's uncomfortable to wear heavy wool socks when it's just my toes that are icy and the rest of me is hot. So I've fantasized for a long time about socks that have very warm toes and very breezy everything else. The sample pack from Lanaknits Designs inspired the rest of the plan - I have a mini-skein of wool/hemp yarn (warm wool, hemp helps keep the warmth in) and a mini-skein of 100% hemp (wicks away moisture and heat). The wool blend is for the toes (I may do a double layer; haven't decided yet) and the pure hemp is for the rest in a very open YO, k2tog pattern (except for the heel which will be short row stockinette). I love hemp.

Finally - a news bulletin: I have trained my mother to buy me fiber! This is truly extraordinary, because she knows nothing about knitting, spinning or fiber, doesn't really want to know, and has hitherto expressed only fear and uncertainty when I mention that yarn is really all I want, because she things she doesn't know what to buy. I'm not really ungrateful that this was the case for so long, since she's a genius at buying me really nice clothes and I'd be walking around looking like a bum if it weren't for her. However. Look what she sent me for christmas (yeah, it just got here now):



You're looking at some yummalicious pure alpaca right there. Even mom admitted it was pretty enough to eat. She got it through a work friend who knew somebody who he'd heard had some alpacas. Neither mom nor her friend had any clue what they were buying, but they sure did alright, didn't they!

Addendum

Sorry to continue with yet more politics, and yet more apologizing for politics, but I want to put here my answer to a very good question that Beth posed in the comments on the last post. You are forewarned to skip along (again) if the whole reason you're reading knitting blogs is to avoid politics. (It's getting harder every day, isn't it? Sorry!)

Although - quick! - before you leave, I want to announce that I just got to the raglan decreases on my fair isle 101 sweater! yay! It's finally going fast. Okay - you can go now.

Before getting to Beth's question, here's a bit of funny - remember I mentioned the lunatic-zombie-undead candidate in the Russian elections, Zhirinovsky? For those who don't know what he's like, this is him:



Okay, so, in the comments on the last post, Beth asked this:

I talked to my sister about my waffling and she said she was kind of getting used to the idea of Obama being president until she saw him in Somali dress. She is quite angry about it. She was in the military and a photographer at the time of the huge war. She went in and had to photograph the dead Red Cross Workers who the Somalis killed. She told me that blew it for him. If he would have chosen any other tribe or African ethnic dress she wouldn't have been so offended...but she is so mad she was yelling at me.
Any comments?
You know I just want more links, right?

Excellent question. Far better than the simple-minded "but he looks like a muslim! maybe it's a secret conspiracy!" crap that the media is running with like a bunch of hamsters. But I have to say that I know almost nothing about Kenyan/African politics. I do know that Obama's father was Kenyan, and he has family there today, and since I trust him, I also trust him to know more about the realities there than I do, but that's not really a good enough answer for anyone who doesn't already have reasons to trust Obama, obviously. So I'll do the best I can to explain his reasoning about other cases that resemble the Somali issue (which is what makes me trust his judgment), and hope that it's useful. I emailed this to Beth, then realized that it might be useful to others, so here it is.

He talks to bad guys. He believes in talking to bad guys. He does it for a purpose, and it's not to show support in any way for guys who do bad things. It's because he believes that, in some cases, talking and making small gestures toward the bad guys can be just what's needed to put us in the position we need to be where we can STOP them. If you just say, "you're evil (or the "Axis of Evil") and I won't have anything to do with you," your opponent then has no reason to do anything at all other than to say, effectively "f--- you back" - you have just removed any incentive they had to even pretend to play nice. We go from dealing with someone who may be basically evil, but who is trying to be taken seriously, to dealing with someone who has nothing left to lose. See what I mean? If, on the other hand, you make a very small gesture of actually talking to, and getting to know, "the enemy" - even trying on their outfits for example - you put that enemy in the position of owing you something. Of owing you respect, and favors in return. Of simply having to listen to what you have to say. And it's all done on a public platform, with public accountability. Sure, they may renege on the deal, but if so you're in no worse a position than you were before, except that you also understand them better, and knowledge is power. The other strategy (which is Bush's, and McCain's), leaves you *certainly* in a worse strategic position than you were before, and without any more knowledge than you had going in. Logically speaking, it's a no-brainer.

Also, there's nothing inherently evil about Somali dress. Or even Somalis as a people, though many of them have done irredeemably evil things. To me, it's like the Serbs, about whom I know a lot more. As far as I'm concerned, there were a lot of Serbs who essentially acted like Nazis, and I have zero, I mean zero, sympathy for the evil bastards. My blood pressure goes up just hearing the word "Serb." But I know there's more to is, because of my field of study and having a lot of friends who work specifically in former Yugoslavia, I know some context about that situation that tells me the Serbs are, despite my feelings, worth talking to. First, Milosovic was, personally, the puppet-master behind most of the evil. I think pretty much anyone is capable of evil acts if they are truly desperate enough, if they have absolutely nothing to lose, and if someone is evil enough to whip them into a fury with lies and misdirection. Declaring all those "little" people who carried out the deeds evil - while true - doesn't change the situation (and doesn't change the fact that not all Serbs, by any stretch of the imagination, did these things, to the degree that calling the perpetrators "Serbs" just isn't right). What *does* change the situation is removing the evil leader with his lies and misdirection *and* altering conditions on the ground so that the regular people carrying out this evil do have other choices, and do have something to lose (for example, the new boundaries being drawn now are really not fair to Serbs, and not helping the situation), and so that regular people who have *not* become part of the evil don't get forced into a corner where joining in or supporting the evil is the only option they have left, because they're being treated as though they already have joined in. That's Obama's strategy for these kinds of situations in a nutshell, as I understand it. But the other part of it is that, if we're going to make Serbs (or Somalis) stop doing evil things, we have to stop saying "you're evil people - so evil I won't wear your traditional dress." We have to make intelligent distinctions between superficialities associated with evil, and actual evil. The act of killing, of raping, is evil. Clothing and non-violent, peaceful tribal traditions are not. If you lump it all together and say it's all evil, you give those people no choices, no alternatives, and nothing to lose (and every emotional reason to hit back at you, since you've just dismissed a people and their entire history wholesale based on the discrete actions of some of them). If you say, "you are a good people, with good traditions, but some of you have nonetheless chosen to do something evil, here in this time and place, and that choice is unacceptable" then you give them space in which to back up, and change. And you give the people within that population who are not supporting the worst acts an incentive and the political opportunity to take the lead.

A lot of Obama's thinking on this is in common with that of Sergio Vieira de Mello, a man with an incredible track record, through the UN, of actually making a positive difference in places where no one else could. Samantha Power, one of Obama's foreign policy advisors, wrote a biography of him (he was killed in Iraq). I put these links in a previous post, too, but there's an article about her and her book here. And extended interviews where she explains exactly the policy thinking I summarized above, here.

I can explain the thinking another way, in domestic policy terms. Obama was in the Illinois legislature when that whole death penalty debacle happened. You probably remember, when DNA tests showed that 13 people on death row were innocent, and the governor put a moratorium on executions. What to do? The stalemate between equally uncompromising pro- and anti-death penalty people has been going on forever without changing a thing. The Chicago police absolutely refused to admit to any fault in their methods, and were adamant that anything that hindered their ability to do their jobs meant making people less safe. We want to be safe, and we certainly are dependent on the police. But none of us wants to see innocent people put to death by mistake, obviously. What Obama did was (a) recognize that the police had a point - that both sides had a point, and (b) talk to the cops. He literally went and smoked cigars and played poker with the cops (similar, in my mind, to trying on the Somali outfit), and listened, really listened, to their concerns. And, eventually, he explained to them his concerns. And he changed their minds. By acknowledging that they had a real need (to have their work respected and not essentially hindered), and by not treating them like monsters (even though I'm pretty sure a few of them probably did some monstrous things if that many innocent people did end up on death row), he was able to give them space in which they could honorably and confidently make the rational choice. He introduced a bill to have all interrogations in capital cases videotaped, and it passed UNANIMOUSLY.

His policy towards the situation in Kosovo is similar -- he knows damn well what the Serbians have done. But he also knows that life has become so desperate in many parts of former Yugoslavia that it's pretty much dog-eat-dog, and standing up and saying "you're a bunch of dogs! I won't talk to you anymore" isn't going to help. Instead, he's advocating doing what we can to improve conditions for everybody (offering a better alternative than violence), while insisting on independence for Kosovo* and international inspections (to minimize the practical opportunities for violence). He's giving the evildoers space in which to act differently, instead of just calling them evil, slapping them, and hoping they'll change, or go away.

To be honest, I get incredibly frustrated with the superficiality of judging someone's policy based on something like what they're wearing (whether a tribal outfit, or a lapel pin). You have to judge the reasoning of real actions, and policy, and to do that, you have to acquire some knowledge of the context. And you have to make meaningful distinctions instead of generalizations, qualifications instead of leaping to conclusions. For example: yes, patriotism is good, and presidential candidates should both feel it and exhibit those feelings openly. BUT - is a lapel pin the best or only way of exhibiting those feelings? How about actually living, moment to moment and word for word, the values of our Constitution? How about hammering out legislation and getting support for legislation that makes life better and safer for Americans instead of lining one's own pockets? Yes, you can do all that and wear a lapel pin too. But what if you see people wearing lapel pins yet denigrating our Constitution and lining their pockets at the expense of the safety of Americans? Isn't, in that case, the most patriotic thing to do to make a statement to the effect that patriotism should run a lot deeper than a lapel pin? Sometimes choosing not to wear a lapel pin can be a *statement of patriotism* (also a matter of practicality - do we honestly expect people to walk around with a flag, a yellow ribbon, a red ribbon, and a pink ribbon, all at the same time? If someone doesn't walk around with all of that, do we assume they're not only unpatriotic, but also troop-hating, pro-HIV, and pro-breast cancer??)

Of course, all of us regular people have real jobs and real lives and we don't normally have time to investigate every one of these issues. That's why there's this profession called journalism - those people are paid to do this for us, so we can be reliably informed by taking only an hour or two of our day to catch up on news. But they're not doing it. They're transcribing whatever they've been told without questioning it, they're reporting what sells instead of what's important, they're deliberately simplifying difficult issues so that we think we're getting more than we're really getting. It's unconscionable. But until it changes, my only strategy is to avoid the mainstream media outlets and get as much information from people who cite their sources and explain their reasoning at length as we possibly can. That's what I do, but I'm lucky that I have the time for it right now.

*Personally, I have very mixed feelings about independence for Kosovo. I think Kosovo needs international recognition and support, but I don't think constantly re-drawing borders helps. It's BS. It's always been BS. Eastern European history is a nightmare because of this idea that re-drawing borders can somehow resolve substantive conflict. But, right now, there doesn't seem to be another political option. I'm hopeful that Obama in the White House might have the power to explore other, more productive strategies, but it's all unknowable at this point. Except that with any *other* US President, nothing will change in our policy at all.

THIS JUST IN: I don't understand why this is apparently being reported only on Canadian TV, not in the US, and why it all happened right on the eve of the Ohio primary. But watch here to see how the whole Canada-NAFTA thing was manufactured out of thin air to make Obama look bad so that Hillary can take Ohio and stay in the race. I'm sure it'll get cleared up - but too late to make a difference in Ohio. As far as who's behind the lovely timing - take your pick. Funny how well Hillary's working with the Republicans lately.

Untangled

I Navajo-plied on my turnip spindle:



Contrary to expectation, I did not end up forever tangled in hopelessly screwy singles as a result of this experiment. I actually ended up with yarn. Hunh.

And now for some more political linky-linky (which is very different from "hanky-panky" thankyouverymuch):

• If anyone was wondering precisely why I stopped reading the serious, topical Ravelry forums (in favor of the non-stop silliness at CPaA and LSG, the spinning groups, and, oh yes, the two groups I mod, all of which I still enjoy immensely): today someone said very effectively what I was too frustrated, hurt, disappointed, and (possibly) polite to say.



• Have you met Derrick Ashong yet? I totally have a crush on this guy: watch this, then this, then this.



• (News to Bill Maher: it's not that "young people don't vote." As if they're some sort of alternate species that lacks the voting gene. It's that young people haven't been voting. Because there hasn't been a candidate that moved them. Until now. They voted when it was JFK. Many of them (us) voted for Bill, though some of us had to hold our noses a bit because he was just a little too much like our parents, or our parents' friends. And we're voting for Obama because, unlike Bill Maher, either Clinton, and many others of that generation, he's actually living in the present.)



• Here's a nice summary of this week's events in Obama world.



• Info for those who plan to canvass (if you haven't been canvassed and want to be, just read that).



• Because character does matter.



• To my great joy, Obama and Neil Gaiman met, figuratively, here. (Wondering what Neil Gaiman thinks about his words being used in a political campaign? He explains here.)



• Lisa Ling is cool.



• And because we could all use some laughs this season, here's some of the funny I've been collecting:
  
  
  
  
  • Jack
  
  
  • Chess
  
  
  • Meep meep
  
  
  • "He's got Will Smith's ears and a beltway booty" Or is it "boogie"??
  
  
  • Many thought the best part of this video was the end, but I actually thought it didn't need to go over the top like that.
  
  
  • Again, a little harsh, but ouch, there's a lot of truth here.
  
  
  • Did I mention that the candidate himself has a sense of humor? Very refreshing. (I'd love to include his appearance on Conan before he was running, when Conan asked if he used his famous oratory on his kids at home, and Barack immediately deadpanned, with arms raised, "My fellow Obamas!" But sadly the network took the clip off YouTube.)
  
  
  • Bush weighs in
  
  
  • Snape, Snape, Sev-er-us Snape. (Wait, that had nothing to do with the elections. Sorry.)
  
  

And in other news. Yesterday was the day of the Russian Presidential election. And it turns out Mr. Medvedev won by a landslide of about 70%. I'm shocked - shocked. {Note dripping sarcasm please - you may want to wipe your monitor} With a "record" turnout of over 69%. Zyuganov, the Communist candidate, did rather surprisingly well with almost 18%. That's kind of frightening, but I guess when the "protest vote" options are limited to one...all the protest vote goes to him. Although there was one other guy on the ballot, of course, the undying lunatic zombie candidate Zhirinovsky, who got the same 10% he always gets in every election. Nice to know exactly how many certifiable crazies there are in the country, you know?

There had been two reasonably rational, democratic candidates, but they both ended up off the ballot for reasons best left to one's imagination. They wouldn't have gotten many votes anyway, possibly even if the election had really been done properly, and possibly even if the media weren't controlled by the kremlin (which we are precisely 4km away from, I recently learned).

I read a poll that said most Russians assume democratic candidates are pro-Western/Westernized. This is not good for a candidate in Russia. Many Americans don't realize this, but Russian "man on the street" attitudes toward America pretty much did a 180 in the course of the 1990s (from almost delirious pro-America love right after regime collapse in 1991 to...well...no need to spell it out). There are two main reasons for this, which are connected enough to be maybe one reason.

The first half of the reason: Harvard economists. A bunch of them came here in the early 90s to create a market democracy, according to their own pet theories. The result: utter failure, chaos, severe hardship for regular people, out-of-control corruption, and a slide into increasingly "authoritarian" politics. Not that this was all the fault of the Harvard guys - a lot of it probably would have happened anyway, and they couldn't foresee everything. Actually, that last part was maybe their only real mistake - they thought they could foresee everything, and they couldn't.

The other half of the reason is that the pro-Western, pro-democratic guys in power at the time (Yeltsin and his crew) invited these Harvard guys in, and helped to make all these mistakes (it should be noted that a lot of this crowd of Russian politicians had actually been educated in the West).

I think it's all summed up by "Bush legs." In 1990 and 1991, the Moscow and Petersburg markets were flooded with Tyson chicken. Bush^1 did this - it was part of our oh-so-generous charity package to poor little Russia. Tyson got rid of surplus, and got huge tax breaks, and the Russian markets got chicken. A good thing, right? Not so much.

First, the chicken never made it out of Moscow and Petersburg (this was presumably the fault of Russian corruption and/or distribution problems), and it wasn't needed there, ever. Second, the chicken was mostly old and nasty. I saw it, still in the markets, in 1998, by which point it had become a very old joke - always referred to as "Bush legs" because it was usually packages of chicken legs only. There'd be a nice, fat, perfectly acceptable local chicken sitting there at the deli counter, and next to it a forlorn package of Tyson chicken, already aged when it arrived, and priced considerably higher than the local one.

This is what most Russians I know think of when they hear about "Western aid." Not that that's all the aid amounted to, and not that the corruption of Russian officials wasn't really the worst obstacle in getting basic needs met for most people in the 1990s, but nevertheless, many people here think of "Western aid" as "Bush legs."

If democratic candidates ever hope to make their way into parliament, never mind the presidency, here, they'll have to do it by distancing themselves from the West, while also - of course - not completely alienating the West, since that of course could have some unpleasant consequences of a different kind. So, if you were wondering why Putin won in a landslide...it's true the elections weren't fair, it's true that the media is state-controlled...but it's also probably true that Putin's guy would have won in a landslide anyway.

It's depressing enough to make you go back to the American elections with relief, isn't it? At least we've got Beltway booty.

Beats Dobby the House-elf any day.

Bah!

Politics again. I can't help myself. Skip it if that's how you roll.

I haven't been in the mood to say much lately. (I know - shocker!) I've been getting a lot of work done at the historical library (yay!) and some spinning (yay!) and also spending way too much time following election coverage and figuring out ways I can support the Obama campaign from afar (can't wait to get back home and get involved up-close and personal, but that's still a little ways off). I've also just been on such an emotional rollercoaster.

On the one hand, I think I'm seeing one of the most wonderful things ever to happen to American politics in Barack Obama's slow, careful, steady, brilliant climb to the nomination and then the Presidency. It's happening. It's not only exactly what we need, but the only thing, I think, that can save us. Not because of who we're going to elect (though that's im por ta nt), but because of how we're electing him. People are getting excited about politics, about progressive change, about literally, personally, doing something to help. People are getting involved. For the first time ever, in many cases (like mine - though I toyed with democratic politics in my teens and 20s, it was a cyclical exercise in disappointment and disillusion until I finally gave up on it when I went to grad school). What's so special about the Obama campaign is that he's winning not because he's the least of any evils, but because he actually represents exactly what so many of us want, and it's us, the supporters, who are making it happen. Obama doesn't take money from lobbyists or PACs - his money, which is a lot, has come in very small increments from almost 1 million people. It's unprecedented, and many are saying that this alone will change the way future campaigns are run.

How many of us said, as recently as a few months ago, that political campaigns suck but how can it ever be changed?

Then there's the other hand. Two people whom I have deeply admired, with reservations but sincerely, throughout my adult life, two people who have done an enormous amount of good in the world in their careers (along with some very questionable stuff, too, but undoubtedly there's a lot of good there)...these two people have horrified me over and over and over in the weeks since it began in South Carolina. And the worst part is that it's all utterly pointless, and they're plenty smart enough to have seen that. But they're doing it anyway. They achieve nothing, and the price we all pay for their blundering is a more difficult battle in November, and the loss from the future political landscape of two figures who could have continued to do so much more good, and to be a part of real, positive, grassroots, popular change for the better. But who have, instead, chosen to commit unnecessary political suicide while taking down as many innocent bystanders as possible on their way to an ugly flame-out.

But the worst part, really, is this.

This is the one factor that makes it unforgivable. This is the part that has been burning me up inside for weeks, that made me pretty much stop hanging out in the Ravelry forums (still love the Rav! just needing a break from some of the forums.) There are no excuses, and there is nothing left to be said (except maybe this), as far as I'm concerned.

While watching all this from afar, there's been one particular issue that I've followed with obsessive closeness. Since it's one that's not considered particularly big by other Americans, and which I have some (limited) expertise on, I also wanted to mention it here. It's about how Kosovo declared independence recently, how the US and most other major countries recognized their independence, while Russia and China were pissed off. Why should this matter? Well, for several reasons. First and arguably most important is that Russia and China should matter to us in general. Both countries have the potential to be very, very threatening to US security interests in the not terribly distant future. We ought to learn from past mistakes and pay attention before it's too late. Part of doing that is to notice when and how we piss off these people, and above all, why. Not because we need to pander our foreign policy to their wants, but because we live in a world with others, and a smart way to handle that is to find ways we can all live here without anybody getting so pissed off or desperate that they start blowing up other people. Another reason we should care about this latest kerfluffle is that the issue of independence in Kosovo intersects with just about every issue that makes the world scary right now: terrorism, ethnic/religious conflict, stability in developing countries, and separatism. Accurately understanding and responding to what is happening in Kosovo is a microcosm for what has to be done world-wide in the coming years. Finally, the Kosovo issue, because of its importance as a touchstone for the greatest security concerns of the coming decade, is one more way to help us decide whom we want to put in the White House. (One might also add that there's an argument for why foreign policy is a better means of comparing Presidential candidates than domestic policy anyway.) Here's an analysis of the statements made by Obama and Clinton in response to Kosovo. I don't claim to be an expert on Kosovo or on current US-Russian relations, but I do pay a lot of attention and, obviously, I'm accredited to teach, at the college level, the history of US-Russian relations (among other things). The analysis I just linked to NAILS IT. I link because I could not possibly say it better myself. I've been enthusiastic about Obama since '04 for many reasons, but even I was blown away by the brains and poise and diplomacy with which Obama and his advisors are thinking about Kosovo, and Russia. Blown AWAY. What Clinton said was not terrible[footnote] - it was merely utterly unsurprising and typical of how every American President has looked at Russia - there's been very little partisan difference in US foreign policy overall, really, and certainly not as relates to Russia. I never expected to see any, but I did hope that Obama would at least be seen and talked to differently by others - by foreign statesmen - because of his uniquely un-cowboy-like and un-insular background. Now I'm seeing so very much more than that.

Where does this amazing vision come from, btw? One of the things I like about Obama is that he recognizes talent when he sees it, and knows how to inspire that talent to want to work with him. One of the people on his foreign policy team is this really brilliant and knowledgeable woman. You can get to know her better through her extensive interviews on Charlie Rose.

(BTW, I recognize that at this point in the proceedings we should really be comparing Obama to McCain, not to Clinton. All I have to say there, relating to Kosovo, is that here's what McCain's party has managed so far, and McCain himself is so irredeemably and irrationally hawkish in all matters - and he seems to think there really isn't any difference from one international issue to another - that the prospect of his Presidency literally makes me want to build an underground bomb shelter. Literally.)

[Footnote: What Hillary Clinton said about Russia that is "terrible" is this. Putin's response is here. I am not remotely a fan of Putin - in fact, that's kind of my point here - but he is right in that a President sure as heck ought to be smarter than that. Honestly, that comment was so out-of-whack, uncharacteristically stupid, and pointless that I get this weird, creepy feeling that Karl Rove figured out how to possess Hillary Clinton's mind and body with George W. Bush's soul (to speak of souls). There's really no other way to explain it. In fact, that theory would explain quite a lot of things lately. UPDATE: another "terrible" note and still more evidence that Hillary Clinton has been possessed by the soul of George W. Bush: watch this clip from the most recent debate, in which Clinton utterly fails to remember the name of Russia's next President (Medvedev) and seems to be confusing him with Lebedev. And she's supposed to be the hard-working, wonky one who knows every detail? WTF? It was embarrassing in 2004 when John Kerry called Lubyanka Square in Moscow (headquarters of the KGB and site of a prison where many political prisoners were tortured in the 1930s, especially) with "Treblinka Square" (there is no such thing, but Treblinka was a WWII concentration camp). But that's nothing compared to this flub. Hillary expects to be President in 2008 and doesn't know the NAME of the Russian President she'd have to deal with? Honestly, this is a W moment, and I couldn't believe my eyes. Yes, it's true, Putin will continue to pull the strings, but Medvedev is no stooge (he's intelligent, competent, and entirely capable of going on his own if he decided to - Putin seems to have chosen him because he trusts him to be loyal, not because he's an idiot who wouldn't know how to be otherwise), and the fact that Clinton doesn't remotely have a clue even what his name is and clearly hasn't bothered to learn anything else is deeply disturbing. If we can all use Wikipedia, why can't she? Finally, because I can't resist, this made me laugh out loud. Put it all together and: what a bloody embarrassing way to destroy a legacy.]

Now, so that the post is not all politics, I'm officially going to try inserting a video for the very first time. This was taken this morning, when the snow was blowing so hard that we not only couldn't see the University building, but hardly anything else, either.



Here's hoping you're all warm and snuggly and surrounded by wool (unless you're allergic, in which case I hear bamboo, silk, tencel, hemp, and cotton are also nice).

EDITED: one last time (sorry) to add two important links: this blog post about the grassroots aspect of Obama's campaign and how he's offering real tools for collective action, not just rhetoric (though let's all remember that rhetoric is vastly important in politics and that there's no universe in which Hillary Clinton could have done any better than Gore or Kerry before her (and probably worse, since half the country violently hated her even before this campaign) because she just doesn't have the charisma and rhetoric that moves people to vote), that post references this very important article about the nature of Obama's fundraising. Also, to those of you who liked my links - yay! It makes my swollen bookmarks folder worthwhile. If you want more, there's always the "shared items" in the Google Reader box in my sidebar. I read a lot of Obama and Leftist blogs every morning, and share the best posts there. Also, there's a link in the sidebar to my del.icio.us bookmarks - click on "politics" there and you'll get more than you bargained for. With a slant, of course! I'm going to try to go back to just knitting and spinning in future posts here, really!

Fair Isle and Food

I've been knitting and knitting and finally I have something other than a black blob to show you:



It's my modified Fair Isle 101 pullover and it's actually pretty far along - the sleeves are already done. I did most of the colorwork part yesterday, during what Hubbster Hubbus and I declared our "khoziaistvennyi den'" or designated day for not leaving the house, instead doing things like laundry, cleaning the stove, and resting. This was partly because it was -22C with windchill yesterday. Brrr. Saturday we'd been out in the burbs with Hubbus' family and while it was a really nice time, I think we're still not quite warmed up from that long wait for the bus in the freezing wind. So, between laundry loads, I knitted fair isle and listened to history podcasts. Very satisfying.

Also satisfying has been my recent trips to the historical library. It's so much more pleasant a place to work than the archives, let me tell you. I positively like the babushki who work there - it's a miracle. Oh, and I've been finding really good material, too. I'm starting to hit that phase where I'm no longer obsessing about procedures and whether anything they're offering in the buffet (pronounced "boo-FYET") is edible, and instead panicking about how I'm going to copy everything I need before it's time to leave. Oh, plus I'm supposed to be writing an article and co-organizing a conference and revising the diss and making up syllabi for the fall and...oh, crap.

Before I leave you for today, though, I offer a few more "travel" pictures that I've had saved up here for a while.

One of my professors once said that she "likes everything about Russia except for the government and the food." I actually kind of like the food. The trick with Russian food is to not eat it in restaurants. If you're going out in Russia, you have to have Caucasian or Central Asian food, which is ubiquitous and delightful. But for Russian food, it should be homemade. We just had an awesome feast on my in-laws' yesterday, with golubtsy and fried potatoes and my two favorite salaty (salads) - vinagret and oliv'e (see below). You haven't really tried any of these dishes until you've had them homemade.

Most of what we eat here is really simple, because we're usually too tired to deal with cooking, because the oven has to be lit with a match and it scares us a little, because our budget is very tight this year, and because while you can get just about anything in Moscow, there's not all that much variety in what we can get easily and affordably in our neighborhood. But while I do miss the variety of relatively cheap ethnic restaurants we have in NYC and while I did have a dream about peanut butter one memorable night, for the most part I really like these temporary periods of eating almost exclusively simple Russian food while I'm here for research trips. Here are a few things we've had lately:



This is the vinegret salat I mentioned. Beets. I love beets.



This is Oliv'e, or Olivier. Probably presumed to be based on some French salad, but somehow it doesn't say "French" to me. It's tasty, though, I have to admit. Here's a recipe - it's the third one down. The last recipe on that list is also a favorite of mine.)



One simply doesn't go without one's kolbasa around here. At least, not if one is married to Hubbus, who can't go three hours without some kolbasa. He has to go to the fancy store to get it, too, even though there's perfectly good kolbasa sold everywhere (but then I'm an American cretin who can't tell one kolbasa from another).



Okay, so chocolate cheese spread is not a Russian food, but...who wants to take bets on whether this stuff will turn up in a dream or two when I'm back in NYC, like the peanut butter does now?



You can't get more Russian than bliny with red caviar.



Just as Russian but not as famous: syrniki, made from tvorog (farmer's cheese), with sweetened condensed milk on top. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, breakfast.



This is not Russian at all, but I made it up while here, out of readily available ingredients, and we've been having it at least once a week, so I suppose it counts. It's basically a ham and bean soup. A small chunk of smoked ham which is sold everywhere here ("sheika"), with lentils, frozen green beans and mushrooms, red beans, onions. Mmm. The Russian word for soup is the same as the English, but when you really like your soup, and it's cold outside so you're feeling even more affectionate about it than usual, you call it "supchik." This is supchik.



Speaking of Russian strategies for battling the cold. Food is not the only one. This is a balzamchik of which we have become particularly fond. It's similar to this famous one, but slightly different in spices and a lot cheaper. There are actually many, many different kinds of balzam, all of them delightful and dangerous.



Especially when combined with drop spindling.

And this Wednesday, we're off to the 17th annual All-Russian Honey Fair at an exhibition hall right next to the kremlin. The fair is also held outdoors in the fall, and I've been to that one twice, but we weren't here for it this year, so we're going to this indoor, downtown one instead. The honey fair is one of my favorite things to do in Moscow - you try a little plastic spoonful of each kind of honey until you're sick to your stomach and a little dizzy, and then you lug home enough to last you the next year. Except it never actually lasts more than a few months. Which is my theory as to why there's an annual fair every fall, and then again every winter.



Finally, here's my recommendation for an English-language Russian cookbook. And a Georgian one, too, because...well. Much as I like Russian food...have you tried Georgian??

Today is Super Tuesday

And I'm so excited I can't sit still.

I can't even knit.

This is all I have to show you, in all the time since I last posted (or the time before that, and before that, when I think I last showed any knitting):



On the left is the soy yarn I found here. 100% soy. It's cute. Thinking I might make socklets. Or something. Don't really know. On the right is the hem of the Fair Isle 101 - I got a replacement needle, then realized I could possibly fix the KnitPicks one. The cord simply pulled out of the tip, and once I got it free of the knitting, I put it back in and it stayed. I have to be veddy careful, though.

Anyway.

As I think this picture suggests, I haven't really been knitting much. I have been doing a *little* work, and lots of errands, but mostly I've been *excited*.

About the most exciting election of my life (and I'm a political junkie who likes to follow these things even when they're depressing), and the first candidate ever who I am completely, unreservedly *behind* in every possible way. The whole thing has this weird *fate* vibe about it, to be honest.

I don't like the idea of trying to tell anyone how to vote. Too much like proselytism to me. But I'm a really, really big fan of voting, in general, and I know that everyone can use a timely reminder and maybe a little information/inspiration. So I hope everyone can take this post in that vein, and if it squicks you out in any way, please just move on - I'll be back to regularly scheduled programming soon.



If you don't know whether you're supposed to be voting today, check here for the list of state with primaries/caucuses. Check your candidate's web site (like this one) for reference details - they are usually very anxious to help. :-) Party organizations and campaigns usually have people on call to offer rides, even, as well as directions and details on what you need to bring with you for ID, etc.



Why vote for Obama? The image above kind of represents everything for me. So does this one:



But you might want some more information, if you're still deciding.

First, yes, I'm a feminist, and yes, I was thrilled to see a woman - any woman - win New Hampshire for the first time. But I'm also in favor of human rights, in general, and I'm every bit as thrilled to see a black man about to win the Democratic nomination. But more than anything else, I believe in voting for the right human for the job, and that their genitals and skin color are irrelevant. I also believe that a responsible vote is not for the candidate who most resembles me, but for the candidate who I believe can best represent and serve everyone.

It's not a matter of who they are, it's how they see others.

But I understand that many of my fellow feminists have waited all their lives for a woman Presidential candidate, and they're having trouble voting for anyone other than Hillary. I understand, and I've been a strong Hillary supporter since 1992. Personally, though, I think that - for reasons beyond Senator Clinton's control - her candidacy would actually set back that cause by many years (sad, but true). I think a successful Obama Presidency is actually the best possible recipe for opening up the field for future diversity in candidates. I've been convinced for a decade that the first woman President would come in my lifetime, and that she would be from a generation following the boomers. I still think that's true.

Still hesitating? This Ravelry post by the Kitchener Bitch does an excellent job of summarizing a whole lot more reasons, more concrete ones, with good links, too.

If you'd like still more information, there are two threads in Ravelry that discuss at length the differences between Hillary and Barack. This one, in the "Stitching Liberally" group, and this one in the "Knitters for Obama" group. There's also the introduction thread in the Obama group, where I and others explained at length why we're supporting him.

Worried about disturbing rumors you've heard about the candidates? Check out the facts at Snopes.com or FactCheck.org. Both are independent organizations. (Hint: don't believe everything that arrives in your inbox =] )

I've come across some other Obama-supporting posts in the knitblogosphere that I'd also like to recommend. Here's Go Knit in Your Hat and Welcome to My Closet, Here's a Black Dress. (Both blogs well worth checking out for the knitting content, btw, if you don't already subscribe.)

And, of course, there's the Raffle (prize list and details on Ravelry, here). I've donated money to the Obama campaign, which marks the very first time ever that I've given money to any political entity. I wasn't able to give much - we're driving on fumes until my new job starts in the fall - but every bit helps. Unlike Hillary, Obama didn't take any money from lobbyists. Unlike {cough} others, he's not a personal billionaire. Obama's campaign has been financed by people like me and you (okay, and a few movie stars! =] ). It's a real, old-fashioned grass-roots campaign, and it's *working*.

I know that for many Americans of my generation, it sort of feels like nothing really ever changes, except for the worse. That has been our experience. But I'm also a historian - my profession is the study of change over time. And it's always interested me to pay attention to how *good* change comes about. I think there are two ways. The first happens gradually - the slow change of attitudes and mentalities - and the mechanism for that is the dissemination of information and experience. Education. The second kind of change for good can happen overnight, or at any rate quickly. What brings that kind of change? It's a tricky combination of leadership - which can come in different forms - and *collective action*. Collective action with no driving force tends to disintegrate. Leadership without the tiny contributions of many, many people who make the effort can't accomplish a thing. It's the combination of the two that can accomplish just about anything.

It's the combination of the two that brought us all the rights and privileges that we mostly take for granted today: democracy, political independence, civil rights for all adult humans, the social safety net that (increasingly less frequently) allows old folks to die with dignity and cancer victims to not go bankrupt and laid-off workers to survive through the few months it takes to get a new job.

We have more resources than any other country on earth, which should make it easy to do these kinds of (much cheaper) things for our collective good without even hurting our pocket books. If we can afford Iraq, we can afford *productive* campaigns to actually help our own people instead of obliterating other people.

We have some problems facing us right now that require major, progressive change. And the sooner the better. The environment. Our dependence on oil which is crippling us politically, economically, and environmentally. A healthcare system that profits insurance company executives and screws over *everybody else* - all non-executive employees, medical professionals at all levels, and above all, every one of us who could, at any moment, need medical care that the insurance company might lose money on. And let's not forget our tanking economy, the middle class that is slipping rapidly into financial no-man's land, the thousands dying in Iraq for no reason whatsoever and the thousands of future terrorists being generated in the Middle East every day by this irrational, destructive and pointless war.

I think it's safe to say that there is more at stake in this election than there has been in any other except Lincoln's, in the middle of civil war, and FDR's, in the midst of Depression. Both of those times, Americans chose the person who we now know to have been uniquely capable of bringing us out of crisis. Big parts of the reason we are so often arrogant in our patriotism, now (or were, until the current administration) is because of the great, difficult choices made by these two Presidents. In both of those elections, the choice was incredibly difficult to make and both candidates were very unpopular with the political establishments of the time.

I would also add that both Lincoln and FDR had less experience in public service than Barack Obama has now, and when they took office, Lincoln was 51, FDR was 50, and Obama will be 49 (Bill Clinton was 46 when he took office, and Teddy Roosevelt was 42).

Barack is ready. And we need him.

Back to knitting, next time. Promise.

Edited to add: Here are a couple of fine assessments of where Obama is right now in the race and what we should expect from the results today.

Edited to add (2): Okay, if you watch nothing else, watch this video by Lawrence Lessig.