In this modern era, the days of dial-up internet are fading fast for most people. It seems that almost everyone has the high-speed these days, which lets them do incredible things online. It is a useful tool, and something I would like to get someday, but at present it is beyond my reach.
Yes, I still use dial-up. I expect that puts me in the minority (at least in the industrialized world), but there are several factors that keep me tied to the antiquated form of internet access.
The first issue is my location. There are no lines capable of delivering high-speed to my home, or my town. We are somewhat behind the times in sleepy little Robbinston. The cable lines end at the town line on either side, so we are a dead zone. That's not the worst of it. Even if someday this town gets high-speed lines, I'm half a mile off the main highway, so I suspect the company running the upgraded lines would skip me. It wouldn't be financially sound for them to run half a mile of line just for me.
There is satellite internet service, which gets me to my second factor: cost. Yes, it might be possible for me to have a satellite internet connection, but to do that I'd need to spend money, and at present I have limited funds. Not only would I need to upgrade my computer equipment, I would end up spending more than twice what I currently pay for the monthly service. If some book publisher showed up on my doorstep to hand me a nice, fat advance, I'd be able to upgrade. Or maybe some studio would like to turn The Rogue Investigations into a television series? Nah, I don't see that happening anytime soon. So, I'm stuck.
The third factor ties both of my first two factors together, and it's something I can't even know for certain until the day I spring for satellite internet. There are a lot of "dead zones" around here, where a connection to the satellite is impossible. There could be a hill or a patch of trees in the way that would block my ability to get high-speed. This possibility is another thing which dampens my eagerness to invest in new equipment. I might spend a bunch of money and find out it's of no use, after all.
Dial up is my gift and my curse. On the plus side, my system seems to be too slow to catch most of the modern viruses (or maybe I'm just lucky). On the downside, there are a lot of things I can't do. Downloads take forever, and don't even think about watching media. Youtube is impossible to access, and even audio stuff is tricky. Sites with a lot of graphics take a long time to load, and there are some I simply don't visit because of the insane amount of time it takes to view them. Even Facebook is trouble now and then.
Someday I will be liberated from the sluggishness of my internet connection, but not today. I hope somebody remembers those of us who have fallen through the cracks on the internet superhighway.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Cynical Stupidity (Minstrel Mondays)
Picking through my collection of songs and poems starting with "C," I find very few. I don't have a lot of material starting with the third letter of the alphabet for some reason, but I did find this quirky little ditty I wrote down over ten years ago. It's weird and wacky, so don't expect to get much out of it.
One day when I was feeling mellow
I went to the beach and let out a bellow.
The sky was quite green and the sea it was yellow
just like some nice old jaundiced fellow.
Was that mellow yellow I saw there?
I didn't think to really care.
I had a head full of long, like hippy, hair
but I certainly swear, I was not bare.
I'm the kind of guy who screams
while in the middle of a mellow dream
just to liven up the scene.
Does it make me mean?
Just a touch of cynicism
mixed with moribund stupidity...
Next Monday, we'll be dealing with "I" and I have something much more poetic planned. For sure, it'll make this look like roadkill.
One day when I was feeling mellow
I went to the beach and let out a bellow.
The sky was quite green and the sea it was yellow
just like some nice old jaundiced fellow.
Was that mellow yellow I saw there?
I didn't think to really care.
I had a head full of long, like hippy, hair
but I certainly swear, I was not bare.
I'm the kind of guy who screams
while in the middle of a mellow dream
just to liven up the scene.
Does it make me mean?
Just a touch of cynicism
mixed with moribund stupidity...
Next Monday, we'll be dealing with "I" and I have something much more poetic planned. For sure, it'll make this look like roadkill.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Ballingers of South Jersey
To coincide with April's "A to Z challenge," I'm moving my family heritage columns to Saturday. I'm planning to skip Sundays for this month, unless something particularly exciting hits my keyboard. Six columns each week should satisfy my more devoted readers, and still leave plenty for those of you who drop by less frequently.
This "Family Saturday" is all about Ballingers, or rather the Ballingers who are related to me. On my father's side, it seems I'm related to half of Cumberland County, NJ (however distantly), and today we're going to explore one of the principal lines in that relationship.
My research has taken me as far back as James Ballinger, born around 1800. He married Sarah Sutton and they had at least 2 sons, Benjamin (b. June 15, 1827) and William (b. October 1828).
William married Caroline Facemire on December 31, 1855, and together they had two daughters Harriet (b. 1858) and Ella (b. May 1864). William was working as a "waterman" in 1880 (according to the census), while Harriet was a milliner, a seller of ladies' hats. Ella was single and living at home in 1900. She probably never married.
In 1866, Caroline died, and William got remarried to a woman named Sarah Hider in 1867-68. Together, they had at least one daughter who grew to adulthood.
Benjamin Ballinger married Sarah Hires, a cousin of Charles Hires, future "inventor" of root beer (but that's a story for another day). Among other things, Benjamin was apparently a coal dealer, and in 1880 was listed as such on the census. Benjamin and Sarah had several children who died as infants, and for clarity I'll only name the three children who actually survived (that I know about). The oldest was Charles W. Ballinger (my great-great-great grandfather, born August 1853). The others were Amanda (b. December 10, 1855) and Joseph M. (b. November 18, 1862).
Amanda married Martin Rammel Pedrick in 1880. I don't know if they had any children.
Joseph M. Ballinger was working as a store clerk by age 17, though I'm not sure what else he did for a living. He married Lizzie Mickle, and they had at least 1 daughter (Maude M. Ballinger, b. April 1883).
Charles W. Ballinger married Rebecca Henderson (b. 1853) on September 2, 1874 in Bridgeton, NJ. It appears they only had one daughter, Nellie D. Ballinger (b. February 1876).
Things get a little interesting when we get to Nellie (my great-great grandmother). She married Joseph B. Robinson on October 24, 1895, and six months later their daughter, Effie K. Robinson, was born. It was apparently a shotgun wedding, and the marriage didn't last long. By 1900, Nellie and Effie were both living at home with Charles & Rebecca. Nellie never remarried, and was still living with her parents in the 1920s.
Effie Robinson married Raymond W. MacCain in 1917, and they had a son (Ray Jr.). Effie divorced MacCain sometime in the early 20s, and on March 2, 1926 she married Edward S. "Ned" Ingham, who adopted my grandfather and gave him the Ingham name.
So there's where I get my Ballinger heritage. I have to say, it seems there aren't that many descendants from this branch of my family. Are there other Ballinger cousins out there who I don't know about?
This "Family Saturday" is all about Ballingers, or rather the Ballingers who are related to me. On my father's side, it seems I'm related to half of Cumberland County, NJ (however distantly), and today we're going to explore one of the principal lines in that relationship.
My research has taken me as far back as James Ballinger, born around 1800. He married Sarah Sutton and they had at least 2 sons, Benjamin (b. June 15, 1827) and William (b. October 1828).
William married Caroline Facemire on December 31, 1855, and together they had two daughters Harriet (b. 1858) and Ella (b. May 1864). William was working as a "waterman" in 1880 (according to the census), while Harriet was a milliner, a seller of ladies' hats. Ella was single and living at home in 1900. She probably never married.
In 1866, Caroline died, and William got remarried to a woman named Sarah Hider in 1867-68. Together, they had at least one daughter who grew to adulthood.
Benjamin Ballinger married Sarah Hires, a cousin of Charles Hires, future "inventor" of root beer (but that's a story for another day). Among other things, Benjamin was apparently a coal dealer, and in 1880 was listed as such on the census. Benjamin and Sarah had several children who died as infants, and for clarity I'll only name the three children who actually survived (that I know about). The oldest was Charles W. Ballinger (my great-great-great grandfather, born August 1853). The others were Amanda (b. December 10, 1855) and Joseph M. (b. November 18, 1862).
Amanda married Martin Rammel Pedrick in 1880. I don't know if they had any children.
Joseph M. Ballinger was working as a store clerk by age 17, though I'm not sure what else he did for a living. He married Lizzie Mickle, and they had at least 1 daughter (Maude M. Ballinger, b. April 1883).
Charles W. Ballinger married Rebecca Henderson (b. 1853) on September 2, 1874 in Bridgeton, NJ. It appears they only had one daughter, Nellie D. Ballinger (b. February 1876).
Things get a little interesting when we get to Nellie (my great-great grandmother). She married Joseph B. Robinson on October 24, 1895, and six months later their daughter, Effie K. Robinson, was born. It was apparently a shotgun wedding, and the marriage didn't last long. By 1900, Nellie and Effie were both living at home with Charles & Rebecca. Nellie never remarried, and was still living with her parents in the 1920s.
Effie Robinson married Raymond W. MacCain in 1917, and they had a son (Ray Jr.). Effie divorced MacCain sometime in the early 20s, and on March 2, 1926 she married Edward S. "Ned" Ingham, who adopted my grandfather and gave him the Ingham name.
So there's where I get my Ballinger heritage. I have to say, it seems there aren't that many descendants from this branch of my family. Are there other Ballinger cousins out there who I don't know about?
Friday, April 1, 2011
Arrogance
Long, long ago, I wove a short story about the end of the world. It was a time not so distant from now, and it followed a few survivors of the human race, hiding underground during those final years when the sun was entering a premature Red Giant phase. The protagonist was a cocky, jaded fellow, who was given the chance to escape, flying away on the final shuttle mission to a lunar base. During his flight, he ran into powerful aliens, the beings responsible for the Earth's destruction, and they set him straight on a few things, including humanity's true influence and understanding of the universe.
It wasn't the most original tale, and it's one I never completed to my satisfaction, so it still remains unmarketed and unpublished.
When I wrote the story, I was still in my teens; young and idealistic. I looked out at the world, and was discouraged by the arrogance exuded by people in general. Whether from religious radicals or arrogant scientists, it seemed there were a lot of people proclaiming the "end of days," and it's all mankind's fault. This is nothing new. Since the dawn of time, the world was going to end tomorrow, though today we have a lot of theories to justify our doomsday prophecies.
I don't see that humanity has omnipotence over his surroundings at this time, and any credible expert will tell you that there is still a lot we don't know about the universe. But, somehow, people don't want to believe it. Perhaps it is a natural evolution of our survival instincts which lead us to believe we have a far greater impact and importance than we really do. Recognizing that aspect of human nature is bound to make me a heretic among men. "He's a doomsday denier! Burn him!"
My advice to everyone is sleep easy. The sun will come up tomorrow, and the Earth will not be a flaming ball of greenhouse gasses or a radioactive cinder. Beware false prophets, both religious and scientific. Their data is often skewed to get them greater attention.
And remember; don't bring a pitchfork to a gunfight.
It wasn't the most original tale, and it's one I never completed to my satisfaction, so it still remains unmarketed and unpublished.
When I wrote the story, I was still in my teens; young and idealistic. I looked out at the world, and was discouraged by the arrogance exuded by people in general. Whether from religious radicals or arrogant scientists, it seemed there were a lot of people proclaiming the "end of days," and it's all mankind's fault. This is nothing new. Since the dawn of time, the world was going to end tomorrow, though today we have a lot of theories to justify our doomsday prophecies.
I don't see that humanity has omnipotence over his surroundings at this time, and any credible expert will tell you that there is still a lot we don't know about the universe. But, somehow, people don't want to believe it. Perhaps it is a natural evolution of our survival instincts which lead us to believe we have a far greater impact and importance than we really do. Recognizing that aspect of human nature is bound to make me a heretic among men. "He's a doomsday denier! Burn him!"My advice to everyone is sleep easy. The sun will come up tomorrow, and the Earth will not be a flaming ball of greenhouse gasses or a radioactive cinder. Beware false prophets, both religious and scientific. Their data is often skewed to get them greater attention.
And remember; don't bring a pitchfork to a gunfight.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
April's Magic Number Giveaway
Okay, it's March 31st, and we are sadly short of the 25 followers goal I placed two weeks ago for the "Luck of the Irish" giveaway. We're getting closer, and if by some uncanny miracle 6 more followers jump on board before the end of the day, the drawing will be held. However, that is highly unlikely, so let me tell you about the next giveaway.
31 is the number to match or beat in April. Why that seemingly random number, you ask? Quite simple, this is the month that I will be turning 31, so I feel it's only fitting to shape the contest around that momentous occasion.
April's "magic number" giveaway will be slightly different from March's contest, as we won't be waiting until the end of the month, if the right number of followers is reached. The day this blog hits 31 followers is the day the copy of Virtual Wiles will be given away. Whether that happens in a few days, or it takes until the 30th, whenever there are 31 people openly following the blog is the day their names will go into the hat, and one will be drawn at random for the win.
I know, getting the word out is a painstaking task in this era of unlimited competition, but we can do it. It's time to move forward. Here's your second chance to win. Spread the word, and let's get 31 people following before April is gone!
31 is the number to match or beat in April. Why that seemingly random number, you ask? Quite simple, this is the month that I will be turning 31, so I feel it's only fitting to shape the contest around that momentous occasion.
April's "magic number" giveaway will be slightly different from March's contest, as we won't be waiting until the end of the month, if the right number of followers is reached. The day this blog hits 31 followers is the day the copy of Virtual Wiles will be given away. Whether that happens in a few days, or it takes until the 30th, whenever there are 31 people openly following the blog is the day their names will go into the hat, and one will be drawn at random for the win.
I know, getting the word out is a painstaking task in this era of unlimited competition, but we can do it. It's time to move forward. Here's your second chance to win. Spread the word, and let's get 31 people following before April is gone!
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Early Critics and The Guns of Mars
Back in 2009, when the Guns of Mars was a semi-finalist in the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award contest, it received quite a bit of praise, but there were some detractors. Most of the negative comments came from fellow contestants, who thought they could improve their chances by writing up negative comments about their competitors. Of course, those reviews were only based on the first 5,000 words (the free excerpt Amazon displayed), so the negative reviewers often had to stretch their imaginations and make wild assumptions about the book's content.
In response, I threw together my own review, combining all of the negative comments and weaving them into a lampoon of those critics. I repost it here for those of you who haven't seen it before.
You suck! (1-star)
That sums up what I think of this writer in a nutshell. His writing is just so abhorrent I don't know where to begin. Let's start with chapter one. What the heck is going on? We're dumped right in the middle of the story, where Morgan (a guy with a girl's name?) is stranded on Mars. There's some kind of conspiracy going on, but we don't know how or why (lack of information is annoying here). He rambles on about missing his wife (hello, Elton John?), and then goes to sleep. We're told briefly about some interesting technology, like a space heater and a fancy pressure tent, but there's no technical schematics detailing how this technology works. Perhaps he is too stupid to describe the physics behind a "carbon scrubber?"
Next, we move into chapter two, which throws us back to the start of the story. Morgan sits in a classroom, learning about going to Mars (boring). A childish "colonel" comes in and acts like a prima-donna teenie-bopper, not a real military officer, and we discover she's somehow uncovered the secret to aging and reversed it? What does that have to do with Martian colonization? We also find out that Morgan is from the past, and there's virtual reality technology around? What? Too many plot threads are cropping up to confuse the feeble minded.
To wrap this excerpt up, Morgan goes home and has dinner with his wife (more boring), and we're left wondering what the heck he'll do next. Like I care!
This excerpt was boring, lacked technical detail, didn't have any gunplay (hello, Guns of Mars?), and the writer spent way too much time on character development. Who cares what these people think and feel? Let's get some action, and blow things up!
This book also looks way too complicated to be good. I mean, every complex story with such varied plotlines ends up sucking, just like that Dune series by that Herbert guy, and don't get me started on Heinlein. This writer does too much, and not enough at the same time. Not only that, but I bet he smells like turnips. Just my impression.
Such a scathing critique! It was very entertaining to throw this together back then, and I think it still stands up today. I had quite a few people complain that I spent too much time on character development, so it struck me by surprise when a recent review claimed I didn't do enough in that respect.
Well, I hope you've enjoyed this little blast from the past. Tune in next week for another adventurous review.
In response, I threw together my own review, combining all of the negative comments and weaving them into a lampoon of those critics. I repost it here for those of you who haven't seen it before.
You suck! (1-star)
That sums up what I think of this writer in a nutshell. His writing is just so abhorrent I don't know where to begin. Let's start with chapter one. What the heck is going on? We're dumped right in the middle of the story, where Morgan (a guy with a girl's name?) is stranded on Mars. There's some kind of conspiracy going on, but we don't know how or why (lack of information is annoying here). He rambles on about missing his wife (hello, Elton John?), and then goes to sleep. We're told briefly about some interesting technology, like a space heater and a fancy pressure tent, but there's no technical schematics detailing how this technology works. Perhaps he is too stupid to describe the physics behind a "carbon scrubber?"
Next, we move into chapter two, which throws us back to the start of the story. Morgan sits in a classroom, learning about going to Mars (boring). A childish "colonel" comes in and acts like a prima-donna teenie-bopper, not a real military officer, and we discover she's somehow uncovered the secret to aging and reversed it? What does that have to do with Martian colonization? We also find out that Morgan is from the past, and there's virtual reality technology around? What? Too many plot threads are cropping up to confuse the feeble minded.
To wrap this excerpt up, Morgan goes home and has dinner with his wife (more boring), and we're left wondering what the heck he'll do next. Like I care!
This excerpt was boring, lacked technical detail, didn't have any gunplay (hello, Guns of Mars?), and the writer spent way too much time on character development. Who cares what these people think and feel? Let's get some action, and blow things up!
This book also looks way too complicated to be good. I mean, every complex story with such varied plotlines ends up sucking, just like that Dune series by that Herbert guy, and don't get me started on Heinlein. This writer does too much, and not enough at the same time. Not only that, but I bet he smells like turnips. Just my impression.
Such a scathing critique! It was very entertaining to throw this together back then, and I think it still stands up today. I had quite a few people complain that I spent too much time on character development, so it struck me by surprise when a recent review claimed I didn't do enough in that respect.
Well, I hope you've enjoyed this little blast from the past. Tune in next week for another adventurous review.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
I Am Not A Communist!
In my life, I have been called many unwarranted things. Whether it was "groundhog" from child antagonists, or "neocon" from miscreants who didn't like my political take on things during the Clinton/Bush years, I have often been the target of slurs and insults. However, this week my detractors hit a new low.
I received the following "comment" on last Friday's "Talkin' DMV Blues' post: "Your such an anarchist. Watch out it doesn't conflict with your commie leanings." (Copied verbatim, bad grammar included.) It was left by an "anonymous" poster, and I declined the chance to publish this comment at the time, because I didn't feel it was appropriate. However, it is useful as an example of some misconceptions that have apparently started to flow as of late.
Please be assured, I have no sympathies toward Communists or their ideology of conformity and central control. The confusion comes from my subtle jokes, which some people have taken seriously. Anyone who knows me personally in most any respect can tell you that I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party (I so solemnly swear, Mr. McCarthy). I am truly a capitalist American pig, and proud of it!
I hope this has put your minds at ease (unless you are a Communist, in which case I'm sure this has saddened you greatly). God Bless America!
If you haven't read the United States Constitution, or The Bill of Rights lately, do it today. It could change your life.
I received the following "comment" on last Friday's "Talkin' DMV Blues' post: "Your such an anarchist. Watch out it doesn't conflict with your commie leanings." (Copied verbatim, bad grammar included.) It was left by an "anonymous" poster, and I declined the chance to publish this comment at the time, because I didn't feel it was appropriate. However, it is useful as an example of some misconceptions that have apparently started to flow as of late.
I also heard a comment from someone else about several of my posts last week. They wondered what I was doing, slipping in the subliminal communist messages, such as "spread zee wealth," and putting a picture of Stalin and Company on Thursday's post. This reader (you know who you are) was "concerned" that I might be criticized and mistaken for a member of the Red Menace. Lo and behold, it turns out they were right, after all.
Please be assured, I have no sympathies toward Communists or their ideology of conformity and central control. The confusion comes from my subtle jokes, which some people have taken seriously. Anyone who knows me personally in most any respect can tell you that I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party (I so solemnly swear, Mr. McCarthy). I am truly a capitalist American pig, and proud of it!I hope this has put your minds at ease (unless you are a Communist, in which case I'm sure this has saddened you greatly). God Bless America!
If you haven't read the United States Constitution, or The Bill of Rights lately, do it today. It could change your life.
Monday, March 28, 2011
This Poetry Sucks! (Minstrel Mondays)
I've been going over my various pieces of old poetry lately, as I prepare these pieces for Minstrel Mondays, and this weekend I couldn't help but be disgusted by my own work. It seems that half of them are mushy love ballads which make me blush, and the others are bitter bitch fests, which decry the improprieties of society or individuals. I had to question my personal depth after reading such trifles.
Then, it dawned upon me. That's what poetry is, for the most part. It's either peace and love, or waaa, waaa, waaaah, nag, nag, nag! The truth of the matter is, poetry is about emotions, and the most obvious ones are love and hate. Poets are often found singing their love for someone or something, or they're complaining about how horrible things are. It's a flighty form of writing, based on limitless passion.
So, taking a couple of minutes out from my busy writing life, I threw down my feelings on the subject, though as latter lines explain, it is only a temporary emotional reaction. Next week, I might have a totally different outlook. That's poetry for you.
I love you,
I hate you
I need you,
Go away!
That's all I hear when I read what you say.
The flakes of emotional breaks.
It's what I get from
Everything we place on our screens,
The psychotic scenes of
mental masturbation for wordsmiths.
It's bitter,
It's beautiful
Eye of the beholder.
The poems they drip with
Sugary vinegar.
Whatever you feel,
It flows on the page
Like bibliographic vomit.
I tried to wade through
The cesspool of poetry
From a plethora of pedantic poets.
Yet it was no use
I felt it was abuse
Of my mind's eye and my writer's sanity.
Should I despise it,
This art form of failed expressions?
It's everything and nothing,
The ultimate art
For those who cannot draw.
Is it any wonder I could never make
A million bucks at weaving words
Which I held in contempt?
Do I really despise poetry?
It is a fair question, but
My answer could never be honest.
Name the day, and my view will change
For ours is a love/hate relationship.
To see the best rhyme, or freestyle slime,
It may seem the best candy
Or the sourest battery acid on the cerebrum.
Take these words for what they are,
A waste of time for your mind's eye
And maybe there you will find their worth.
Goodbye.
Then, it dawned upon me. That's what poetry is, for the most part. It's either peace and love, or waaa, waaa, waaaah, nag, nag, nag! The truth of the matter is, poetry is about emotions, and the most obvious ones are love and hate. Poets are often found singing their love for someone or something, or they're complaining about how horrible things are. It's a flighty form of writing, based on limitless passion.
So, taking a couple of minutes out from my busy writing life, I threw down my feelings on the subject, though as latter lines explain, it is only a temporary emotional reaction. Next week, I might have a totally different outlook. That's poetry for you.
I love you,
I hate you
I need you,
Go away!
That's all I hear when I read what you say.
The flakes of emotional breaks.
It's what I get from
Everything we place on our screens,
The psychotic scenes of
mental masturbation for wordsmiths.
It's bitter,
It's beautiful
Eye of the beholder.
The poems they drip with
Sugary vinegar.
Whatever you feel,
It flows on the page
Like bibliographic vomit.
I tried to wade through
The cesspool of poetry
From a plethora of pedantic poets.
Yet it was no use
I felt it was abuse
Of my mind's eye and my writer's sanity.
Should I despise it,
This art form of failed expressions?
It's everything and nothing,
The ultimate art
For those who cannot draw.
Is it any wonder I could never make
A million bucks at weaving words
Which I held in contempt?
Do I really despise poetry?
It is a fair question, but
My answer could never be honest.
Name the day, and my view will change
For ours is a love/hate relationship.
To see the best rhyme, or freestyle slime,
It may seem the best candy
Or the sourest battery acid on the cerebrum.
Take these words for what they are,
A waste of time for your mind's eye
And maybe there you will find their worth.
Goodbye.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
A Fistful of Forthmans
This "Family Sunday" post is all about the Forthmans. My mother's mother was one, so I can relate what I've been able to learn over the years, and from recent research.
The name originates from Germany. Common variants are Fortmann and Vortmann. The earliest ancestor that I've found in my particular line is Christoph Gebhard Forthmann, born sometime during the latter half of the 18th century in Lower Saxony, Germany. He married Anna Cathrine Brummerloh and they had a son also named Christoph (born circa 1804) in Bremen.
Christoph Forthman married Margaretha Schmidt (born 1806), and they had at least 7 children (Generation 3):
Christoph Gebhard (b. January 28, 1831)*
Frederick Christian Heinrich (my 2x great grandfather, b. June 9, 1832)**
Anna Margaretha (b. November 6, 1834)
Lucie Wihelmine (January 6, 1837),
Christoph (b. April 2, 1841)*
Ludwig (b. August 23, 1843)
Johann (b. February 23, 1845)
*The fact that two different sons were named Christoph may allude to the elder's early death, though I have not been able to determine if this is the case. There are instances where multiple children are given the same name (like Heavyweight Champion George Forman's 5 sons, all named George, but with different middle names). I have found that it was a common practice in many families to name their younger children after ones that had previously died. It no doubt helped them to cope with their loss.
---
**Recent discoveres have shed doubt on the lineage of Frederick Forthman. There were apparently 2 men of the same name born in 1832 in Lower Saxony, so I cannot say with certainty that the above data pertains to my line. The below data is more concrete and assuredly my family. I welcome further insight into the origins of Frederick Forthman.
Okay, getting back to the Forthman family history...
Sometime before 1850, Frederick Forthman came to America from Lower Saxony. He first settled in Maryland, around Hagerstown, where he met and married Ann Creager. Ann died during the 1870's and Frederick then married Sarah Ellen Keefer (b. 1853) before 1880. He was working as a Hatter at that time.
I do not know how many of Frederick's siblings also immigrated, as I have not been able to positively identify any of them. It is possible they "Americanized" their names when they moved here, which only makes it harder. There was a "Christopher Fortman" living in Baltimore, MD in 1860, born circa 1832 in Hanover. This could be a match for Christoph Gebhard (census data is often imprecise), though there is insufficient data to tell for certain.
I do know that Frederick's mother, Margaretha, did move to the States at some point, as she was living with him in 1870.
Generation 4:
Anna M. (b. 1860)
Mabel Leona (b. February 2, 1885 /Died February 2, 1965)
Samuel Earle (b. February 28, 1887 /Died February 1970)
Lynn Keefer (.b August 29, 1892 /Died July 1975)
Ethel O. (b. January 5, 1901 /Died April 1, 1988)
Winslow (b. March 31, 1913 /Died September 4, 1990)
Frederick F. (b. 1917)
Lynn Keefer Forthman married Genevieve Harrison (b. February 14, 1898 /Died July 1974) and they had several children.
Generation 6:
Mary Nadine Forthman married John Julius Kirton (b. February 4, 1918 /Died April 1967) and they had three children:
Clifton Wesley (b. August 8, 1944 /Died April 21, 2003)
Diana Elizabeth (my mother, b. December 8, 1945 /Died August 13, 2010)
Stephen (March 13, 1947 /Died September 19, 1998)
I have some interesting stories about Uncle Stephen, which I'll be sure to share at some point.
This is not the most comprehensive list, and like all of my other gene lines, it is a work in progress. Anyone with additional information is welcome to share it with me, as I continue to piece together my family history.
The name originates from Germany. Common variants are Fortmann and Vortmann. The earliest ancestor that I've found in my particular line is Christoph Gebhard Forthmann, born sometime during the latter half of the 18th century in Lower Saxony, Germany. He married Anna Cathrine Brummerloh and they had a son also named Christoph (born circa 1804) in Bremen.
Christoph Forthman married Margaretha Schmidt (born 1806), and they had at least 7 children (Generation 3):
Christoph Gebhard (b. January 28, 1831)*
Frederick Christian Heinrich (my 2x great grandfather, b. June 9, 1832)**
Anna Margaretha (b. November 6, 1834)
Lucie Wihelmine (January 6, 1837),
Christoph (b. April 2, 1841)*
Ludwig (b. August 23, 1843)
Johann (b. February 23, 1845)
*The fact that two different sons were named Christoph may allude to the elder's early death, though I have not been able to determine if this is the case. There are instances where multiple children are given the same name (like Heavyweight Champion George Forman's 5 sons, all named George, but with different middle names). I have found that it was a common practice in many families to name their younger children after ones that had previously died. It no doubt helped them to cope with their loss.
---
**Recent discoveres have shed doubt on the lineage of Frederick Forthman. There were apparently 2 men of the same name born in 1832 in Lower Saxony, so I cannot say with certainty that the above data pertains to my line. The below data is more concrete and assuredly my family. I welcome further insight into the origins of Frederick Forthman.
Okay, getting back to the Forthman family history...
Sometime before 1850, Frederick Forthman came to America from Lower Saxony. He first settled in Maryland, around Hagerstown, where he met and married Ann Creager. Ann died during the 1870's and Frederick then married Sarah Ellen Keefer (b. 1853) before 1880. He was working as a Hatter at that time.
I do not know how many of Frederick's siblings also immigrated, as I have not been able to positively identify any of them. It is possible they "Americanized" their names when they moved here, which only makes it harder. There was a "Christopher Fortman" living in Baltimore, MD in 1860, born circa 1832 in Hanover. This could be a match for Christoph Gebhard (census data is often imprecise), though there is insufficient data to tell for certain.
I do know that Frederick's mother, Margaretha, did move to the States at some point, as she was living with him in 1870.
Generation 4:
Frederick and Ann had the following children:
 |
| William E. Forthman Circa 1940 |
Frederick Bennard (b. October 17, 1861)
William Edward (my great grandfather, b. July 26, 1863 /Died 1947)
Ida May (b. December 6, 1865)
Sally (b. 1870)
Frederick and his second wife, Sarah Ellen Keefer, had the following children:
Ella Keefer (b. November 1, 1880 /Died March 23, 1884)
Ethel Adella (b. April 21, 1882)
Samuel Earle (b. February 28, 1887 /Died February 1970)
Lynn Keefer (.b August 29, 1892 /Died July 1975)
Generation 5:
Anna M. Forthman married Theodore W. Fahrney, and it doesn't appear they had any children.
William Edward Forthman moved to Chicago and married Anna Louise Littlefield (b. 1880). They had the following children:
 |
| Anna L. Forthman, w/ William, Ethel, Anabell, Kathryn, & Ruth 1911 |
Anabell (b. January 22, 1903)
Ruth (b. September 18, 1905)
Kathryn Creager (b. October 6, 1906 /Died August 27, 1992)
William Edward, Jr. (b. August 7, 1910 /Died January 2, 1998)
Mary Nadine (my grandmother b. 1919)
Ethel Adella Forthman married William H. Burhans (b. 1884) and they had 3 sons:
William H. Jr. (b. September 11, 1909 /Died February 10, 1994)Winslow (b. March 31, 1913 /Died September 4, 1990)
Frederick F. (b. 1917)
Lynn Keefer Forthman married Genevieve Harrison (b. February 14, 1898 /Died July 1974) and they had several children.
Generation 6:
 |
| Ethel Forthman Rassmusson holding baby Ethel, Christmas day, 1922 Houston, Texas. |
Ethel O. Forthman married Harold Rassmusson, and they had at least one daughter, Ethel D. Rassmusson (b. November 13, 1922).
Kathryn Creager Forthman married Frank Porlick (b. September 18, 1894 /Died October 2, 1930). They had at least 2 children:
Renee Kathryn (b. September 10, 1928 /Died 1963), married Jack Carroll Dillon, Jr. (b. August 19, 1925 /Died 1997).
Robert (b. 1927)
After Frank Porlick's death, Kathryn married Blair Watson (b. February 18, 1899 /Died April 1965). After Blair's death, she married John Frederick "Fred" Kimball (b. March 16, 1912 /Died April 18, 1999). Though I never had the chance to meet Aunt Kathryn, I did have the opportunity to meet Fred back in the early 90s.
Mary Nadine Forthman married John Julius Kirton (b. February 4, 1918 /Died April 1967) and they had three children:
Clifton Wesley (b. August 8, 1944 /Died April 21, 2003)
Diana Elizabeth (my mother, b. December 8, 1945 /Died August 13, 2010)
Stephen (March 13, 1947 /Died September 19, 1998)
I have some interesting stories about Uncle Stephen, which I'll be sure to share at some point.
This is not the most comprehensive list, and like all of my other gene lines, it is a work in progress. Anyone with additional information is welcome to share it with me, as I continue to piece together my family history.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Off The Top of My Head
I didn't have anything planned for today, so I'm writing on the fly (no, that doesn't mean I have my pants unzipped, get your mind out of the gutter!) and I realize that there has to come a time when I get a day off from blogging. I have a few different writing projects to finish in the coming weeks, and every little bit of time I spend writing this blog is less time I have for that.
I still intend to keep this going, though, and in April I have signed up for the A to Z challenge, which will have me posting every day except Sundays. I will be moving my Family Sunday posts to Saturday for the month of April, to fit the challenge parameters, which will leave me with Sunday for a break. It's just as well.
I still intend to keep this going, though, and in April I have signed up for the A to Z challenge, which will have me posting every day except Sundays. I will be moving my Family Sunday posts to Saturday for the month of April, to fit the challenge parameters, which will leave me with Sunday for a break. It's just as well.
 |
| This really has nothing to do with today's blog post, but it was just too fun and wacky to exclude! |
So, what's coming up this week on the blog? I can't be certain. It is mostly empty slots at the moment, but you can be assured there will be a fresh family column tomorrow, followed by Minstrel Monday. I have been dedicating Wednesdays for reviews of one sort or another, and there should be some talk about one writing project or another before the weekend.
So much work, and so little appreciation. Yep.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Talkin' DMV Blues
Everyone likes to complain about the Department of Motor Vehicles, though I ran into a fairly unique problem a few weeks ago when I went to get my driver's license renewed. It's not the sort of situation most people would encounter, though the rules for renewal have certainly changed in recent years.
When I first got my license, all you had to do is show a couple of forms of identification (birth certificate, social security card, etc...). This made sense, as you needed to prove you were a real person, and that you were legally in the United States. I had no problem with this sort of simple verification, though it used to only be for the initial application. Once you had a license, it became valid identification for renewal, since you had to show the other documentation to get it in the first place.
No longer can things be so easy.
At present, every time you go to renew a driver's license in the State of Maine, you have to show all of the original documentation, again! How redundant is that? Well, that's not where my strange problem arose. I had the documents to prove who I was. My dilemma came when they wanted to see proof or residency. Never mind that I am a US Citizen with a certified birth certificate, social security card, current driver's license, etc... They wanted some certified document telling them I actually lived at my physical address.
I know most people don't run into this sort of dilemma. Most people have their physical address stamped on all sorts of legal documents, like mortgages, contracts, and so on. But I don't. I have a PO Box, and that's all I've needed to use for virtually all of my previous dealings. The last time I had my Maine driver's license done, that's all they put on the license! There was no pin-pointing of your physical address required back then. But now they want to know exactly where you live, and they want somebody else to tell them that, via third-party documentation.
If you think this isn't an overbearing regulation, just think of this: I know for a fact that it isn't this hard to vote! I've seen people show up to the polls with an envelope and say "here's a piece of mail the post office delivered to my new address, sign me up!" The mail is used as proof of residency for voting purposes, but that won't cut it for the Maine DMV!
It may seem strange that I don't have a bunch of documents outing my address, but I've spent most of my life living halfway off-the-grid. My father's attitude about government and personal privacy sort of rubbed off on me, so I don't think it's their business where I live or what I'm doing in most cases. The fact that I'm a US Citizen should be enough to get me my new license. Who gives a damn what house I'm living in?
Ranting aside, I had to go down to my Town Clerk and have her type up a notation on the town's official letterhead, stating what my legal address was according to the 911 system. The lady at the DMV assured me this would serve as adequate proof of residency, as it apparently meets the new bureaucratic standards.
I'm sure I'll get ripped from both sides on this topic, because people have been conditioned to think it's somehow necessary or good that this sort of bureaucratic runaround is in place. It's supposed to make us safer or keep things "fair," but I personally don't like the idea of the government keeping tabs on everyone's home. What's next, are we going to get barcodes tattooed on our forearms, or computer chips stuck in our foreheads? Don't laugh, it's in the works. Maybe not today, but in another generation or two our kids and grandkids will think it's a good idea, because they've been slowly conditioned to accept the omnipresence of the State. Show us zee papers, please!
Do I sound too much like one of those greasy hippies of the sixties? Well, I guess they weren't totally wrong. Oh, I'm such a radical sometimes.
When I first got my license, all you had to do is show a couple of forms of identification (birth certificate, social security card, etc...). This made sense, as you needed to prove you were a real person, and that you were legally in the United States. I had no problem with this sort of simple verification, though it used to only be for the initial application. Once you had a license, it became valid identification for renewal, since you had to show the other documentation to get it in the first place.
No longer can things be so easy.
At present, every time you go to renew a driver's license in the State of Maine, you have to show all of the original documentation, again! How redundant is that? Well, that's not where my strange problem arose. I had the documents to prove who I was. My dilemma came when they wanted to see proof or residency. Never mind that I am a US Citizen with a certified birth certificate, social security card, current driver's license, etc... They wanted some certified document telling them I actually lived at my physical address.
I know most people don't run into this sort of dilemma. Most people have their physical address stamped on all sorts of legal documents, like mortgages, contracts, and so on. But I don't. I have a PO Box, and that's all I've needed to use for virtually all of my previous dealings. The last time I had my Maine driver's license done, that's all they put on the license! There was no pin-pointing of your physical address required back then. But now they want to know exactly where you live, and they want somebody else to tell them that, via third-party documentation.
If you think this isn't an overbearing regulation, just think of this: I know for a fact that it isn't this hard to vote! I've seen people show up to the polls with an envelope and say "here's a piece of mail the post office delivered to my new address, sign me up!" The mail is used as proof of residency for voting purposes, but that won't cut it for the Maine DMV!
It may seem strange that I don't have a bunch of documents outing my address, but I've spent most of my life living halfway off-the-grid. My father's attitude about government and personal privacy sort of rubbed off on me, so I don't think it's their business where I live or what I'm doing in most cases. The fact that I'm a US Citizen should be enough to get me my new license. Who gives a damn what house I'm living in?
Ranting aside, I had to go down to my Town Clerk and have her type up a notation on the town's official letterhead, stating what my legal address was according to the 911 system. The lady at the DMV assured me this would serve as adequate proof of residency, as it apparently meets the new bureaucratic standards.
I'm sure I'll get ripped from both sides on this topic, because people have been conditioned to think it's somehow necessary or good that this sort of bureaucratic runaround is in place. It's supposed to make us safer or keep things "fair," but I personally don't like the idea of the government keeping tabs on everyone's home. What's next, are we going to get barcodes tattooed on our forearms, or computer chips stuck in our foreheads? Don't laugh, it's in the works. Maybe not today, but in another generation or two our kids and grandkids will think it's a good idea, because they've been slowly conditioned to accept the omnipresence of the State. Show us zee papers, please!
Do I sound too much like one of those greasy hippies of the sixties? Well, I guess they weren't totally wrong. Oh, I'm such a radical sometimes.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
It's All About The Numbers
Last Week, I announced my "Luck of the Irish" giveaway. I'm pleased to see some new followers on board, and that we're getting closer to the 25 member threshold for the contest. With one more week to go, there is a good chance we'll make it, and the free copy of Virtual Wiles will be given to one of those lucky followers. Keep spreading the word, and make this freebie a reality!
8 people. That's the magic number at the time of this writing. If 8 new people start following, the book will be given away on March 31st. That may seem like a small number, but it may not be attainable in a single week. Maybe I just don't have enough gravitas to draw in a horde of groupies. If not, I'll just have to settle for quality rather than quantity.
8 people. That's the magic number at the time of this writing. If 8 new people start following, the book will be given away on March 31st. That may seem like a small number, but it may not be attainable in a single week. Maybe I just don't have enough gravitas to draw in a horde of groupies. If not, I'll just have to settle for quality rather than quantity.
 |
| Assemble the great masses of the people, Comrades. "Follow blog, or we will bury you!" |
Rest assured, if we don't hit 25 followers by March 31st, there will be another chance to win this book. April is a very special month, and I'll have more details coming up. There's still hope, so invite friends, family, and even the drunken hobo down the street who occasionally foregoes a bottle of Wild Irish Rose for an hour at the local internet cafe. Together, we can do it!
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Drifter -By William C. Dietz (Review)
If you're looking for a fast-paced science fiction story without a lot of subtext, Drifter by William C. Dietz is for you.
The story primarily follows Pik Lando, a dashing smuggler who is hired by a group of religious pacifists known as "The Chosen" to haul a very special cargo. The Chosen take the idea of religious pacifism to the extreme, kind of like the Amish of Space, and it turns out they've settled on a planet that is half-owned by an "evil" mining consortium, which wants to drive them off. The passive Chosen can't bring themselves to fight back in a straightforward manner, so they've devised a plan to peacefully defeat the mining company, but they need Lando's help to complete it.
There is a bit of melodrama in this, and a romantic fling between Lando and the young lady who recruits him to help The Chosen. This meshes with the overall theme of the story, and it doesn't get too sappy.
This was the first book I ever read by William C. Dietz, and it was enjoyable. The story was pretty straightforward and sometimes predictable. It's a fun little space opera, with all the action & adventure a Sci-Fi fan could ask for. One thing that could have been improved is the setting, which is left quite vague. We know the characters live in a universe where there is a human "empire" colonizing space, and there are various aliens and cyborgs mixed in here and there for flavoring, but the background of society is mostly left to the reader's imagination.
Overall, I'd set this book at 3.5 out of 5 stars. It's good, but nothing really special, and I found the two sequels to be much better.
I picked up my copy of Drifter for $1 at a used bookstore, and I see there are some affordable used copies on Amazon. I was shocked to see the Kindle version of this book set at $9.99, and I would not recommend that anyone pay that kind of money for this. You'll find the Kindle listing for the book to the left, as there are some interesting reviews posted with it, as well as links to the used paperback copies which can be had for a more reasonable price. As a writer, myself, I understand that my fellow wordsmiths and their publishers need to make money, but charging $9.99 for a Kindle book is outrageous. That's just my opinion, and if you feel differently, by all means, buy the expensive version.
The story primarily follows Pik Lando, a dashing smuggler who is hired by a group of religious pacifists known as "The Chosen" to haul a very special cargo. The Chosen take the idea of religious pacifism to the extreme, kind of like the Amish of Space, and it turns out they've settled on a planet that is half-owned by an "evil" mining consortium, which wants to drive them off. The passive Chosen can't bring themselves to fight back in a straightforward manner, so they've devised a plan to peacefully defeat the mining company, but they need Lando's help to complete it.
There is a bit of melodrama in this, and a romantic fling between Lando and the young lady who recruits him to help The Chosen. This meshes with the overall theme of the story, and it doesn't get too sappy.
This was the first book I ever read by William C. Dietz, and it was enjoyable. The story was pretty straightforward and sometimes predictable. It's a fun little space opera, with all the action & adventure a Sci-Fi fan could ask for. One thing that could have been improved is the setting, which is left quite vague. We know the characters live in a universe where there is a human "empire" colonizing space, and there are various aliens and cyborgs mixed in here and there for flavoring, but the background of society is mostly left to the reader's imagination.
Overall, I'd set this book at 3.5 out of 5 stars. It's good, but nothing really special, and I found the two sequels to be much better.
I picked up my copy of Drifter for $1 at a used bookstore, and I see there are some affordable used copies on Amazon. I was shocked to see the Kindle version of this book set at $9.99, and I would not recommend that anyone pay that kind of money for this. You'll find the Kindle listing for the book to the left, as there are some interesting reviews posted with it, as well as links to the used paperback copies which can be had for a more reasonable price. As a writer, myself, I understand that my fellow wordsmiths and their publishers need to make money, but charging $9.99 for a Kindle book is outrageous. That's just my opinion, and if you feel differently, by all means, buy the expensive version.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)