beboots

 Good evening, everyone! Happy Valentines day, for those of you who celebrate it! 

First, a brief link recommendation. If you've never heard of Postsecrets, you should definitely check them out: essentially, people send in anonymous postcards with their secrets on them. Some are sad, some are quirky, some are touching, and all are absolutely awesome. This week they have a Valentine-themed series of postcard secrets for you to look at. This one was my favourite: 


Furthermore, the Edmonton Journal (which, along with the National Post, I read almost every day to keep up with news about the world) apparently held a contest for the best Edmonton-themed Valentines cards, most of them poking fun at the city. This particular one was my absolute favourite, mostly because I had to cross that bridge five days a week to get to Fort Edmonton this past summer. It was murder during rush hour when it was down to one lane. >_<; It's been under construction for at least two and half years.

For more, see here!

As a side note, I did celebrate this Valentine's Day as a single person. Here's hoping that I shall find my true love in the coming year! :) I should mention that I mostly enjoy Valentine's Day because it also doubles as my dearest mother's birthday! We have flowers and chocolate about the house, then, regardless of the state of our personal lives. :) Happy birthday, mother mine! Now, tomorrow is the holiday I look forward to even more than the events of St. Valentine... Cheap Chocolate Day! Celebrated: wherever chocolate is sold!

On a final note... I actually began writing this post in response to the lovely surprise left for me at atla_valentine. I hadn't realized that people would leave me messages! :)  They made me smile. Therefore, my original plan had been, in response to people writing lovely flattering things about the history dorkery that goes on in this journal, to write a post about some of the crazy little tidbits I've been learning about in my History of Translation class... which just so happens to be what I'm studying for at the moment (even as I procrastinate reviewing for the midterm to write this post). I'll get around to that very soon! It will still happen!

I did, however, just have a thought. Maybe I could do something completely and utterly crazy and unprecedented. I could... do a history meme. I want to share the love with you guys. I love telling historical anecdotes; I like to think I got quite good at it while working at Fort Edmonton. Maybe no-one will want to play with me. I will still tell crazy history stories to the world! Just give me a direction, guys. :) What do you want to hear?

It shall be a shameless effort at trying to emulate the cool kids (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE), only instead of fanfic, it will be random history tidbits, in the style of the posts that have appeared in this journal before.

THEREFORE, what I resolve to do is ask you, the readers, for history prompts! Ask me a historical question: anything you like. For instance: "who is your favourite member of European royalty and what was the most interesting thing they ever did?" "What do you think is the silliest reason a war ever started?" "What is the most unusual historical artifact you have ever seen in person?" "What can you tell me about Canada's participation in such-and-such a war?" It can even be something like "tell me the craziest thing you know about the 17th century/the bubonic plague/aboriginal history/etc., etc., ad nauseam." I shall even search for an appropriate image to accompany the historical blather! 

If I don't know the answer to your question, I resolve to use my research skills and access to university databases to find the answer! You may get more coherent history squee if I've heard of the topic before, though. I have studied European history across the ages, some East Asian history, and lots of Canadian and American history, but still, don't let that limit your selection! I suspect that if you ask me something about the history of medicine or the French or English languages you will get extra-long anecdotes. Indulge your curiosity, and I will try to be interesting in return! :) 

 Well, I've returned to university! For those just tuning in, I'm in my fourth year in the honour's history undergraduate programme at the University of Alberta. 

What better way is there to celebrate my return to academia for the autumn than a senseless discussion of academic styles? I encourage anybody on my friends list (or anybody else reading this who has had experience with such things) to put in their own two cents. 

My question is this: what is the best citation style?

Inevitably, during the first lecture or two, the question is brought up: how do you want us to cite our sources in our papers, professor? Inevitably, the professor gives a very specific answer - something they clearly want the student to use - but, of course, reluctantly admits that such-and-such a style would be (only barely) acceptable, if you must. (The last part must be spoken with at least a hint of disguised distaste.)

Perhaps it's merely a matter of which one you learn to use first. Rather like a native language, anything other that that first style seems stilted and, well, foreign. Cumbersome to use, even. 

What am I talking about? MLA vs APA vs Chicago vs anything else I've missed vs, well, chaos. Some professors will accept anything "as long as it's an actual style." 

Personally? I'm a huge fan of the Chicago Manual of Style. (As much as anybody can be a "fan" of such things, of course.) Why do I feel so strongly? Well, I had to learn how to use MLA for an English class that I didn't particularly like, and I've had to use APA for a psychology class before, but, well, quite frankly? In-text citations look UGLY to me. 

I have no idea why English majors and English professors don't insist on Chicago style. Aren't they all about the flow of language and such? When you  have to stop a sentence to stick in a huge set of dates and authors' names and such, you can't just skip over.

It's not that the Chicago style isn't clearly citing one's sources... it's that we're just not obvious about it. No, we're subtle, discrete, even. It's all in the footnotes and endnotes. Tiny little numbers, barely visible, but with informative footnotes just within easy glance. A random date and even a name tells me nothing. But a footnote can contain FAR more information in a much more stylish way.

My mother tells me (rather like a horror story) that in the style she must use at the hospital where she works (I think it's APA style), one can't shorten a list of authors in-text to "et al" until after five or six names. And with all of these modern, empowered and educated women (with, of course, hyphenated last names to show that they're married but still modern, empowered and independent women), well... That doesn't look graceful at all.

Is it just a matter of placing the authors one's citing front and center? Is it all about narcissism after all? 

(Isn't Chicago style the best?)

What say you, f-list? 

(And that's it for your daily dose of dweebery. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming. :P )