Their yellow legs are widely spaced, which gives them an aggressive and jaunty stride on the ground. They are great imitators, and I have my suspicions that they are the source of the spurious telephone noises that sometimes rouse me from my slumbers.
The sun is shining brightly, but an Antarctic gale is blowing. The Nip is in the Air. Autumn is with us.
The Pack is well. Beagie the Beagle, now convinced that he is a Big Dog, is now part of the furniture. In fact he has taken over Alfs Chair and lying on his back with his long silky ears draped artistically on the arm rests, he even looks like part of the furniture.
We went off to a Dog Show recently to put the Pack through their paces.
Jones is doing very well with his training. He is now seven, and consistently disproves the maxim "You can't teach an old dog new tricks". He is always up to new tricks.
The show in Question was a "1001 Dalmations" thing put on by the Dalmation Club. However, there was an Obedience section open to "other" breeds.
Dalmations do "beauty" type stuff. This involves running around in a circle with Owners on a leash and tails at high port. The entertainment is provided from watching the Owners, usually Female and of Junoesque proportions, running round the ring. As the elimination heats progress and another cycle of running round in circles ensues, the owners become more and more unstrung and haggard.
The Obedience event was "Good Citizenship". This involves tests for how well "socialised" the canine competitors are.
The basic rule appears to be "Don't bite the Judges". As one of the tests is an inspection of the teeth (and Jones has very large teeth in excellent condition) all I can say is that the Judges are very brave.
Jones' father was a Bernese Mountain Dog and his mother was a Pitbull. So he has ended up as a short haired dog with Bernese colouring from his father and Terrier characteristics from his mother. Both his Bite and his Bark are considerable.
The essentials of "Good Citizenship" appears to be putting the dogs through a series of tests while people ride bicycles, wheel teddy bears in prams, make noises by banging pots together, interrupt and shake hands with the owner and other general larking about.
The point is that the dog must keep cool and not be distracted.
Needless to say, the Stars performed beautifully. Although Diva, the beautiful German Shepardess, was seen to yawn in apparent boredom at the height of all the mayhem.
So Jones and Diva now have elegant Blue Rosettes with "Good Citizen" engraved on them.
While all this was going on, I walked Beagie around on his lead, as he is still too young and inexperienced to be in shows yet. But he is learning fast.
And all this in beautiful surroundings, lush green lawns, stately oaks and entertainment provided by watching the antics of 200 odd dogs and their even odder owners.
Although Jones did cause something of a stir while we were eating our elegant lunch (finished with black cherries and ice cream) when he attempted to eat the waiter.
Ah, the joys of living in the Mink and Manure belt, amongst the mad Horsey/Doggy people.
The Plovers are doing well. Petrus/Petronella, the latest addition, is now fully grown.
As I surf the Net, desperately trying to catch up with the burgeoning Y2k information, the TV blares in the background and allow me to subliminally ingest the wonders of the Kiddie Shows.
I am rather fond of Dudley the Dragon, a large Green Thing with Sneakers.
We should donate a Y2k T-shirt to Dudley. He would be an ideal Y2k Mascot. Big, Green, Dinosaur-like and Dumb (maybe we should say Mentally Challenged), but nevertheless, Cute.
I have long felt that Sesame Street and the Muppets are wasted on the Young. A certain mature experience is needed to appreciate the deep dark depravity of Cookie Monster's addiction. The essential Gatesian Yuppiness of Kermit. The New Age Feminism of Piggy. The Unfounded Optimism of Fozzy. The Debauched Uselessness of Gonzo. Thankfully Big Bird seems to have emigrated somewhere. No doubt working on Y2k remediation for Big Bucks in some remote spot.
Y2k is going through a Silly Season. Awareness is trying to peek through but is being beaten on the head on all sides. A lot of work is going on, but little progress is being seen.
Being of a naturally choleric disposition, I am in the process of amusing myself by writing a series of Rants on the Subject. If I can't stop the Silliness, I might as well enjoy grumbling about it.
Here is a sample.
Y2k RANT 001: What's in a Name?
The first in a (probably very long) series of Y2k related Rants.B>)
There are many names being given to the Y2k phenomenon.
Millennium Bug, Century Bug, Year 2000 Computer Problem, Y2000 virus, Y2k and so forth.
The Third Millennium and the 21st Century begin on January 1, 2001.
So, strictly speaking, it is incorrect to associate the words "millennium" or "century" with a Year 2000 event.
Y2k is a 20th Century phenomenon.
It is not a virus.
"Bug", in the sense of a programming error, almost fits, but implies a very limited scope to the problem.
Because there are all sorts of things that contributed to the phenomenon; Failure to apply standards, Failure to provide for International usage, parochial date formatting preferences, Operating System design flaws etc, etc.
Use of the term "Millennium Bug" attempts to be cute and hip, but it implies total cluelessness and ignorance of the real nature of the problem on the behalf of the user. It is, to say the least, "uncool".
We are stuck with it, but understand that only Idiots will use the term.
"Year 2000", with the "Y" capitalised, is the most common usage.
"Y2k", the specific abbreviation coined to define "Year 2000 Problem" uses the greek suffix "k" (lower case) for "kilo" or "thousand".
Not to be confused with the "other" k suffix used in describing computer storage which is based on binary arithmetic (powers of 2) and means "1024".
Why do we need to be so pedantic about the name?
Well have you tried doing a Web Search for any of these terms? The problem is that "2000", "millennium" and "bug" are ambiguous. You pick up a tremendous amount of noise.
Only "Y2k" is specific. You know that you are not dealing with Millennium Madness or generic woffle about other things happening in or around the year 2000.
There are some subtle linguistic forces at work. It is absolutely correct to say "the first Y2k event occurred in 1972".
The hackles rise if one hears "the first Year 2000 event occurred in 1972" or "the first Millennium event occurred in 1972". It sounds wrong. In your mind you reject such statements even though they may be factually true. Subtle.
This entire topic is somewhat moot, as the damage is already done. Our sloppy human habits of speech and thought have once again proved to be a liability in dealing with the computer world.
So if you have the choice, use "Y2k". Otherwise "Year 2000". Let's leave "Millennium Bugs" to the politicians and other clueless dome-building party-animal Low Life.