As you’re possibly aware, I report my boiler as broken at the end of December: and had the repair man turn out, on Wednesday.
He told me that I’d need extensive repair work: so extensive, that a replacement boiler could well be a better option … and that he would be recommended what’s called a DRC survey from a superior.
So that a senior person from his company can issue the relevant approval.
I was going to phone the contractors, yesterday to arrange that: once I got back from the Job Centre.
Except that they managed to phone: at 8:30, yesterday morning.
And arrange the visit for this morning: between eight and one.
The sooner the better, I hope.
The sooner my boiler’s repaired, the better.
~≈¥≈~
Can I make a confession?
I’m a Terry Pratchett fan: one who thoroughly enjoy Good Omens, when it was released.
And pleased to know other are, as well: now it’s being aired on BBC2.
However?
I’ve seen stuff go past about The Watch, BBC America’s take on Sir Terry’s work.
I’ve seen news of the various bits of casting, go past.
Seen some of the publicity shots.
Frankly?
BBC America is making a show I’m planning to go nowhere near.
It’s a travesty.
~≈¥≈~
Let’s move on, shall we?
Yesterday’s Teaser saw Olga* and Debbi† putting in their answers: with both scoring five out of five.
Let’s see how everyone does with today’s questions, shall we?
* I really couldn’t tell you about the song, Olga. Thankfully, Taco hasn’t shown up! Equally? I’m thankful that the contractors phoned, yesterday, to arrange the visit for today. Someone’s learning: quite who, I don’t know. As for planned obsolescence? You know, I think the BBC’s had something about that, recently. And I can remember when — here in the UK — the various bits of legislation about green lightbulbs came in. I seem to recall that a few epileptics, and migraine sufferers complained: as the new green bulbs could act as a trigger!
† It’s worth a go, Debbi, it really is: and the ending makes perfect sense, given it’s part of the Batman universe. It’s very dark, though.
Q1) 1904 Q2) Moscow Q3) Anton Chekhov Q4) Konstantin Stanislavski Q5) Well, now that depends. It seems Chekhov intended it as a comedy, but Stanislavski turned it into a tragedy, and it’s defined as a drama. I’ve watched it on theatre a couple of times (one with Angela Rippon on it, another with Vanessa Redgrave, yes, both great versions), and there is a bit of both, although I’d say it’s quite a melancholic play, but it depends on the production. I love Chekhov (and not only because one of the characters in The Three Sisters is called Olga…) Good luck with the boiler. I know it’s been a long time coming, but one can’t but hope…
Rick has gotten so down on the whole Gotham-Batman thing. I think it kind of depresses him. :)
1. 1904 2. Moscow 3. Anton Chekhov 4. Konstantin Stanislavski 5. Um, both? According to Chekhov, it was a comedy, but Stanislavski directed it like a tragedy. It has a dual nature that directors continue to debate. Does that answer the question? :)
I love it when someone comments. But, having had anonymous comments I feel may be libellous, actionable or just plain offensive, over the years?
I’d appreciate you* leaving your name — with a link to your website or social-media profile†, for preference — before you post a comment.
Should you choose to use a pseudonym/name, I’d appreciate it if that name were to be polite and inoffensive. I’d rather you kept it clean, and relatively grown up. Comments left with a pseudonym will be posted at my discretion: I really prefer a link.
Contentious, actionable or abusive posts left anonymously will not be posted. Nor will comments using offensive pseudonyms or language, or that are abusive of other commenters.
Thank you.
* I know many value their online privacy. I respect that. But hope you respect my wish to see who’s commenting on my blog: and my wish for you to introduce your self to me, and to your fellow commentors.
† Your Facebook, X/Twitter, Blogger, Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn profile are acceptable. I also like seeing folks webpages.
Q1) 1904
ReplyDeleteQ2) Moscow
Q3) Anton Chekhov
Q4) Konstantin Stanislavski
Q5) Well, now that depends. It seems Chekhov intended it as a comedy, but Stanislavski turned it into a tragedy, and it’s defined as a drama. I’ve watched it on theatre a couple of times (one with Angela Rippon on it, another with Vanessa Redgrave, yes, both great versions), and there is a bit of both, although I’d say it’s quite a melancholic play, but it depends on the production. I love Chekhov (and not only because one of the characters in The Three Sisters is called Olga…)
Good luck with the boiler. I know it’s been a long time coming, but one can’t but hope…
Rick has gotten so down on the whole Gotham-Batman thing. I think it kind of depresses him. :)
ReplyDelete1. 1904
2. Moscow
3. Anton Chekhov
4. Konstantin Stanislavski
5. Um, both? According to Chekhov, it was a comedy, but Stanislavski directed it like a tragedy. It has a dual nature that directors continue to debate. Does that answer the question? :)