Marie Antoinette's Pearls

Hola darlings! I'm baaaaacccckkkk! It's been a horrendous week at the office, I don't even want to think about it. My poor shoulders and neck were so tense tonight when it was finally 5 p.m. and I was able to unchain myself from my desk that I looked about 10 feet tall as I left the office, I was THAT strung out (my normal height is 5 feet 3 and 3/4th inches, thank you very much). I was stressed; I was depressed; I was upset. Dealing with the B.S. dished out at the office is one thing; dealing with being treated as a dead-beat criminal by AT&T is on an entirely different level. I wanted nothing so much as something that would make me happy. At 6:30 p.m., after tossing out several handsfull of peanuts for the squirrels who were knocking at the patio door just before sundown, I put in the DVD of "Searching for Bobby Fischer." "Searching for Bobby Fischer" possibly is one of the best movies of all time. It is so damn subtle and yet so overwhelmingly beautiful in the story it tells. It never fails to capture me and carry me away. So what if the most of it is "fiction" - ie., not exactly what happened in the real life of Josh Waitzkin; yes, characters were compressed and changed; yes, the timeline was compressed; and yes, of course the "real length" chess games were compressed into exciting shots of what looks like speed chess with suitably dramatic echoes of hands slapping the clock. So fricking what! The story the movie tells is wonderful and awe-inspiring, and it never fails to lift me up. The acting is superb; hell, the casting was superb. Joan Allen as the mom is the height of perfection - well - I don't want to go on and on right now, I may do so, though, at a later time. Suffice to say that after viewing "Searching for Bobby Fischer" (the Man himself should be PROUD this movie has his name in its title instead of bitching and moaning about how the producers ripped him off by using his name without his "permission" - oh please!) the knots in the back of my neck and across my shoulders and down my spine were "untied" and I'd shrunk back to my regular height. I poured myself a glass of cheap wine and wandered upstairs where my computer is. I turned on the upstairs t.v. and turned on the computer not really expecting to be able to get online since I'd discovered earlier at the office that I couldn't even frigging send myself an email (talk about being naive! here I thought the damn things were being cached and would be delivered one I rendered my account into "approved status". Ha! What kind of fool am I....) and lo and behold, the fourth little green light on my DSL box lit up. Well! I didn't believe it. So I tested it out to see if it was really telling me the truth. Lo and behold further, I actually was able to connect to the internet. I'm only missing nearly a week's worth of email because I discovered today, entirely by accident, that any mail sent to my personal home email address evidently was rejected as if the addy no longer existed! I cannot tell you about the amount of steam that poured out of my ears when I discovered THAT about 3:30 this afternoon at the office, when I emailed myself a document that I had been working on for later on work at home, only to get one of the "daemon" return messages about 10 minutes later. ARRRGGGGHHH! AT&T has seen the last of my hard-earned money, it can't be soon enough! Now that I've got my at-home online ability back, I will be able to do more research about suitable alternatives for my situation. Okay - so I'm back, at least for now. Who knows what trials and tribulations I may have to undergo before I finally get a new system of communication installed into the homestead, or how long it will take. I have already started drafting my letter of complaint to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission about the treatment I received at the hands of AT&T. I investigated bringing a small claims action against AT&T to collect a credit for the number of days I was without DSL service (unfairly denied service), and had decided that the cost of the Summons alone, plus the cost of taking a day off work to appear in Small Claims Court wasn't worth it. But that was BEFORE I discovered that an unknown number of emails sent to me by admiring fans and department stores with which I am registered from all around the world were cruelly, most cruelly, REJECTED through the cold caprice of AT&T. I believe that action alone by AT&T constitutes tortious interference with contract, since I am a major partner in Goddesschess.com and my email is my lifeline to the larger world of chess. There is not a question in my mind that AT&T's actions constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress. Anyway, talking about making AT&T pays for its unjustified sins against me wasn't the point of this post - believe it or not. Nope - I actually wanted to post here about Marie Antoinette and her pearls. Here's the story: By Mike Collett-White Thu Sep 27, 12:21 PM ET LONDON (Reuters) - A set of pearls once belonging to Marie Antoinette and taken to Britain by a friend for safekeeping will go on sale in December, and are expected to fetch up to $800,000. Now part of a diamond, ruby and pearl necklace, France's last queen gave a bag of pearls and diamonds to Lady Sutherland, the British ambassador's wife, before she fled revolutionary France in 1792, a year before Marie Antoinette's death. "Lady Sutherland was wife of the ambassador and friends with the queen, and they had children of the same age," said Raymond Sancroft-Baker, senior director of Christie's jewelry in London. "When you are in a dire situation, there are not many people you can trust and the key was to give the jewels to someone with diplomatic immunity," he told Reuters. Marie Antoinette, legendary for her extravagance, did not know her fate at the time, he said, and would have hoped to be reunited with her treasures one day. "Hope springs eternal," added Sancroft-Baker. According to Christie's, Sutherland arranged for clothes and linen to be sent to the queen while she was in prison. "This was reportedly the last gesture of kindness shown to the doomed queen," the auctioneer said in a statement. Marie Antoinette was executed by guillotine in October 1793. The diamonds were made into a necklace, while the pearls were mounted later for the occasion of the marriage of Sutherland's grandson in 1849. Christie's did not specify which of Sutherland's descendants was selling the necklace. "The owner said it just sits in the bank the whole time, and there comes a time for everything," Sancroft-Baker said. He hoped the pearls, which have never been offered at auction before and remained in the same family for over 200 years, would be made available for the public to see. "The Louvre might be interested, for example," he said, adding that the story behind the necklace made it one of the most important sales he had overseen at Christie's. "It's right up there in the top 10 we've ever sold, because its provenance is rock solid, as far as we can be aware. There are documents to go with it and contemporary supporting evidence." The necklace will go under the hammer at the Magnificent Jewelry sale in London on December 12, and is expected to make between 350,000 and 400,000 pounds ($700-800,000). *********************************************************************************** If I had the money, I would bid and bid and bid until I won. And then I would make sure that these magnificent jewels would be open to public viewing and their tragic history well spelled-out. Actually, though, I think it is perfectly disgusting that this Sutherland descendant is attempting to profit from jewels that were, essentially, expropriated by his or her family upon Marie Antoinette's death. Did they never attempt to seek out her heirs? Surely she must have had some! Rightfully, morally, the pearls and diamonds that were handed over to Lady Sutherland all those years ago belong to Marie Antoinette's family, not to the descendants of the Sutherlands!