Two Unrelated Things

I've got two things today. Here's thing one:

This is my website. I've traditionally been vague about what exactly it is. Is it a journal? Not really; I don't always talk about my day. Is it a blog? Nah, I don't think so. Is it an electronic magazine? Nnnnno.

Now, I've got this bit that you're reading now (hello!) and I've also got a Livejournal, which I started a little over two years ago. And if you're determined to read everything I write, you should technically be reading both.

You see that thing in the upper right? The set of tabs? Up until yesterday, it had a link to the Livejournal that said "journal". That makes sense, right? Livejournal? Yeah. And the link to this thing here (the website) just said "current", on the theory that it was a link to the current post.

But that's all pretty vague. And I was never 100% convinced anyone knew what was going on. There's a chance you've been reading this site for years and had no idea about the other section. But I've noticed that there's now a standard among websites sort of like mine. Terribly Happy, Squishy, Fresh Hell, Pound, Gwen World, Frolic and Detour, -- seems like half the sites on Damn Hell Ass Kings have both journals and blogs. So that's good enough for me. If everyone with "a place for longish pieces" and "a place for shortish pieces" says the first one's a journal and the second one's a blog, then so be it.

I've changed the tabs up at the top of the page (which you've, um, already seen, so it's not all that dramatic an announcement), and I hope this will make more sense. I'm a little leery of the fact that I actually post more "Journal" than "Blog" pieces, but I guess that might change. Anyway, there you have it.

In other news, I just got back from seeing Phantom of the Opera. It was okay. I wasn't thrilled, partly because I'm not that big a fan of it, and partly because there were a lot of technical problems. The spotlights weren't always where they were supposed to be, a coupe of people's microphones weren't working, and in the fancier songs (like "Prima Donna") I couldn't understand the words. And, frankly, the singers blew a few notes.

On the other hand, my seat was great. Tenth row, maybe a yard off the center of the house. If I'd been any farther forward, I wouldn't have been able to see the chandelier.

So I had a fairly good time. It made me want to see the Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera. And read the book. And if possible, go to Paris and get a tour of the Opera House. But when the audience gave the cast a standing ovation at the end, I stayed seated. I may have looked like a bit of a jerk (although not as much as the people who left during the ovation), but I believe a standing ovation is for when you've seen a triumph. And you probably don't get that out of a National Tour, especially for a play that's remained essentially unchanged for over 15 years.

Incidentally, I'm getting pretty tired of always seeing understudies. This performance had four, including the Phantom and Raoul. Actually, the understudy who played Carlotta was really good. But that's not my point. It's probably the price I pay for waiting for national tours to come to Seattle. I've considered flying to New York once a year to get caught up on Broadway plays, but that seems like it might be weird. It'd be cool, though.