My New Shirt

I found my new favorite T-shirt. I went into Hot Topic to look around and I spied this:


We all know Buffy would've kicked Edward's butt without breaking a sweat, so I knew I had to have it. It's exactly how I feel the books should have ended. No, not books. Book. There should never have been more than one. Everything that happened in the subsequent books could have easily never happened at all. That's my story and I refuse to budge. That's why I'm very adament about not reading any of the other books.

Well, that and I just couldn't get through the first five pages without falling asleep. It was nails on a chalkboard for me. Most "Twilight" fans don't appreciate the shirt, but anti-Twilight folks (like me) think its hilarious.

Percy Jackson & The Olympians

Can I say just how excited I am to see this movie? I think I'm more excited than the next Harry Potter movie! I was already looking forward to it for 2 reasons. The first:

Kevin McKidd. Seriously, I've been drooling over him since I first saw him in Rome, one of my favorite short lived shows. He was on Grey's Anatomy and I watched a few episodes just because he was in them. And I really can't stand that show. Actually, I pretty much despise that and all other hospital dramas. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I hate hospitals to begin with.
The minute I found out he was playing Poseidon I was all about going to see the movie. There's just something about him. I can't quite explain it. Maybe it's the accent.

The 2nd reason I can't wait to see the movie is this:

I finished reading the book this past weekend and I absolutely loved it! It's very rare that a book can suck me in so quick, but it did. I'm already on book 3. When I was younger I loved reading about mythology, so this was right up my alley. I was going to see the movie anyway, and I probably didn't have to read the book to enjoy the movie, but I have a habit of reading a book before watching the movie because the book will be ruined for me if I watch the movie first. Anyways, it's a great read.

What's In a Name

I find it funny. These days we name our children anything that suits us, whether it's Apple, Jennifer, or my own personal favorite, Brynn. We find a name that fits and goes well with the rest, and off we go with their names. We all pick and choose somewhat carefully, sometimes a little more worried about how unique the name is.

I've been watching a lot of TV set in times long ago (none of these shows are entirely accurate and I'm not expecting to watch The Tudors or Rome on the History channel anytime soon) and if it's interesting enough, I pick up some books and do some research. It's a habit of mine that at times winds me up with a lot of books. Basically, I'm full of a lot of information that only comes in handy when I play "Jeopardy". (Even then, I'm still not the most know-it-all player)

Anywhoo, back in the old days, baby names weren't quite so creative. Take Henry VIII's era, most kids were named after other people, usually kings, queens, or any member of the the royal family. There were a lot of Henry, Mary, Elizabeth, Anne, Charles, Edward, and William's running around. And as you can see, when it comes to the royal family, things haven't changed much.


Another example is Ancient Roman days. Most daughters were given their father's last name as a first name (in feminine form, of course). Like Marc Antony, 2 of his daughter's were named Antonia Major (older) and Antonia Minor (younger). I think it'd be more than a little confusing having 2 kids with the same name, like George Foreman's sons all named "George". It just seems a little self-centered to me, but that's just my opinion. Did each kid get their own nickname, like "Toni" or "T"? Just some of the things that go on in my head.

There wasn't any point to this blog, I just find things like that extremely fascinating and that I felt like writing about.