The Shallow end of the Lipstick*

Source

I was reading this post (do read it, it's very good) the other day and while I know better, I still scrolled down and read the comments.  Some were actually quite nice, others reminded me of something that seems to keep popping up in my life lately: negative attitudes about women who wear makeup.

First, a confession:

In my younger days I did have a negative view of makeup.  No doubt part of it was because I didn't want to be thought of as "vain" or "shallow" - two of the most common words used to describe women who wear makeup.

I’m sure my thoughts were media influenced.  How often do we hear that truly beautiful people don’t care about looks?   How many times have we seen the deep, smart girl who doesn’t wear makeup pitted against the shallow, vapid girl who wears too much.  (Of course in the entertainment industry even “natural” beauties have to wear makeup.)  Then there’s the old classic of the insecure girl who wears “too much makeup” becoming prettier by taking it off - usually at the behest of her beloved who likes her better without. I know it's usually presented as a "He loves me just as I am" but if he truly loved you just as you are he wouldn't be telling you to change.* 

All this got into my head.  I had no desire to flaunt my insecurities or give people the impression that I was shallow enough as to care about my looks.  I’m not going to lie, I do I want to be pretty - but intelligent and talented has always out ranked that. And, of course, this was at a time when I still cared about how other people saw me. 

Now I wear makeup all the time.  Nearly every day.  I think the shift began when I started hunting for the perfect vintage red lipstick.  As part of my hunt I did a lot of research on both historical and modern makeup.  I also started trying different brands and got more savvy at application.  I found I enjoyed the creative aspect. As it became more a part of my everyday life I began to reevaluate my views on makeup.  I realized that wearing makeup cannot make a person "vain" or "shallow" anymore than not wearing makeup can make them deep. 

Back to the article:

When I read about women who went through years of deprivation, worked hard (and sometimes dangerous) manual labor, were bombed out of their homes, volunteered for the war effort, kept families fed, clothed, and alive as best they could while missing family that was either dead or far off and in serious danger the last word I think of is “shallow.”  These women gave up so much that it probably was a relief to know that their country wasn’t going to judge them if they still cared about their looks.  In fact, their country wanted them to go on as they always had and to maintain as much normalcy as possible.

Anyone who considers a woman shallow for putting on lipstick during wartime is probably either an idiot or has absolutely no concept of what World War II was like. I’m not saying I truly do know, nor that I would have been capable of half the amazing things these women did.   What I do know is that the war went on for years.  Despite missing family members and bombings and shortages - people still had to live their lives.  Do the people who consider the women of World War II shallow think that every single person gave up all joy and creature comforts for the duration?  People still made art, sang, danced, fell in love, dressed up to go out, and laughed.  Everyone does all these things in wartime - they have to do them to remind themselves why they are fighting and sacrificing. 

You might as well say the men of World War II were shallow and vain for still shaving.

We all have our morale boosters.  The little things that make us feel better when we are down.  The things that help us maintain our dignity when someone else is trying to chip away at it.  For some of us it may be music or poetry.  For others it just might happen to be putting on makeup. 

And if a little lipstick and rouge is all it took to keep the women of WWII going, I kind of think that makes them superheroes. 

*Yeah the title doesn't really make sense but I thought it sounded cool.
* Using heteronormative language here as I haven't seen such things portrayed about same sex couples.

Then and Now: Cover Girl

source

What I remember:

I honestly completely forgot I saw this movie at all until I watched it recently.  Bits of it were vaguely familiar:  The "Poor John" number and the dancing in general.  The only thing that made me realize I had seen it was the bit about how they kept buying oysters they didn't like or eat to look for pearls.

What I realized:

The plot is dumb.  It's conflict isn't so much based on funny misunderstandings as serious communication issues.  It's best summarized as:  Boy loves girl, girl loves boy, girl wants fame but doesn't tell boy about her chance at fame, boy says he doesn't care if girl goes after fame, girl stands up boy, boy is offended, girl runs off to be famous and marry someone else, almost every other person in the movie conspires to get the two together, big dance and sing.  I'm sure if they do marry it will be awesome - because we all know how good communication screws up a marriage.

Dumb plot aside, the dancing is still top notch.  I could have used more Gene Kelly but I feel that way most of the time.

The costumes are so pretty.  Well the ones on the women.  Rita Hayworth's hair is amazing.  As for Gene Kelly, maybe they weren't sure how to dress him yet?  They put him in a dark brown suit with a dark tie that somehow made him look not nearly as attractive as he was.  I mean, this is a technicolor movie, why put your male lead in a dull brown suit?  He gets gray and blue suits too but everything is rather dull and doesn't really do anything for him.  The best outfit is a stage costume of green pants with a yellow stripe and a yellow and green striped vest.  Yes it's as hideous as it sounds but it's far better than those yawn inducing suits.

Hey, this movie took place during World War II.  Of course when I first saw it I probably didn't know all that much about WW II and the references are vague at times.

This must have been fussy to wear, but it's certainly amazing looking.

And, I totally love Eve Arden in here.  She's plays a no nonsense career woman who doesn't moan over her lack of beau and is just generally fabulous.  She's also hilariously funny and pretty much saves the day for the two leads.  I seriously covet her wardrobe, especially her hats.  Short of Gene Kelly she's pretty much the best thing about this movie.  How could I have totally forgotten this character?

As a final bonus, this film contains Phil Silvers.  I adore him in general but also because he was in one of my favorite musical comedies of all time: Billy Rose's Diamond Horseshoe.  That film is probably ripe for one of these posts as I have not seen it in at least a decade or more.

Checking In

Been a bit, hasn't it?  Since I have been too busy to put together new posts I thought I'd just do a little brief on what I'm enjoying right now.

Currently obsessed with this song:

Am quite impressed with "Astronaut Wives Club".   From the ads I expected it to be frothy fun but as a total space nerd I had to at least give it a try.  Sure it's pretty to look at but there is definitely more going on than pretty clothes and great makeup.  I'm quite excited that it looks like they will be dramatizing the hearings to allow women to be astronauts.  It's a bit of space race history that I'd never even heard of until I took a class in college on the history of space exploration.  A class in which I was, oddly enough, the only female student.  It was a small class, but still very strange that I would be the only female.

Anyway, if you aren't watching it I recommend popping in to give it a try tomorrow.

And while I'm promoting things I just saw these guys last week:

They are amazing.  I listen to a lot of "new stuff that sounds old" (you could even say it's my favorite genre of music) and it can be hard to come off as more than a novelty act.    Artists who are so heavily influenced by a much older style sometimes struggle to create a sound that walks the fine line between classic and fresh.  The Nightowls Seem to hit the sweet spot every single time.  They did some awesome covers in their set when I saw them - but I have to say I like their originals best.

Feel free to share anything you're currently digging in the comments.

Can Vintage fashion improve your body image?

source

I found this article via Trashy Diva and while it's mostly stuff I already know, it got me thinking.

I may have mentioned that before I started dressing "vintage style" I was having some body issues.  Nothing too bad.  I mean, we're not talking needing therapy, but I was really feeling bad about my body.  The main problem was clothing.  Not much fit and what fit didn't fit right.  It made my body look worse than it actually was.  High waisted pants were a revelation to me.  I no longer had to yank my pants up every two steps or wear a belt that cut off circulation.  I found clothing that actually was physically comfortable to wear and bonus - looked better than modern stuff I'd been trying to pull off for years.  A failure which I once blamed on my body.

But that's just basic stuff, right?  Dress to suit your figure.  What this article got me thinking about was that maybe all the time I spend looking at old media helped too.  Yes, I'm looking for fashion inspiration but am I not also reminding myself that the fashionable body has changed and will change again?  That whatever body type is "in" will always only be a reflection of a small portion of the female population? 

And it makes sense, doesn't it?  All we hear about is how our media consumption can have a impact on how we view ourselves and the world.  That's why there is a campaign for real beauty, right?  Sure I am exposed to plenty of modern media but I would say a good portion of what I consume is historical in nature.  Now I am not saying historical media was more inclusive or body positive because it wasn't.  But when you have a general idea of how body shapes fall in and out of fashion it's easier to reject the current ideal.  Bodies go in and out of style just like clothes.  Better to focus on what lasts, right?

Is it possible that seeing all kinds of body types, even idealized versions, may have helped me feel more comfortable about my body?  I will never have the "ideal body" of 2015 (or 1915 for that matter) and I know that.  Funny thing is, it doesn't really bother me anymore.

Agent Carter: Thoughts on the Show So Far

Source

Caution: Minor spoilers ahead.

I have been anticipating Agent Carter ever since I heard about the show.  I've also been worried.  Let's face it - the women superheroes still don't get their due in live action media.  I'm not saying Marvel has completely let down it's female heroes - but they sure as hell took their sweet time about giving us a female lead in any of their films and shows.  Someday I hope to live in a world where a female superhero movie is considered bankable.

First of all, I want to make it clear I will not be nitpicking the historical inaccuracies here.  Yes it's the 1940s but it's the 1940s in the Marvel Universe.  This is comic book science fiction and shouldn't be held to the same standard as a traditional period piece or something "based on a true story." 

But moving on.  We have our star.  The woman on whose shoulders the weight of the show rests.  So to speak.  And Atwell does a fine job.  She brings Carter to us as a whole person.  A woman who is strong, smart, and capable.  But also human.  She cries.  She makes mistakes.  She never wishes she were a man.  She may have moments of doubt but she still believes in herself and is rightly pissed that her co-workers don't.  She is keenly aware of what is expected of her as a woman and resents it with every fiber of her being.  She seems to be a wonderful combo of two of my favorite childhood heroes: Nancy Drew and Emma Peel.

Swap the gun for a magnifying glass and it's Nancy Drew.

We have our co-star: Jarvis.  Who actually points out Carter doesn't have to carry the weight of the world alone and indeed Jarvis (James D'Arcy) helps her carry the show quite well without stealing it from her. It's clear she's the hero and he really only wants to be allowed to provide her with support. They seem to be hinting there's a lot more to Jarvis than we've seen so far and I'm interested to find out what it is.  

We also have Carter's female friends.  Civilians,  so she can't really talk about her SSR work with them.  And we lose one of them right off.  Still, I like Angie (Lyndsy Fonseca) and hope that Carter learns to how to balance personal and professional so she can have female friends.  That said, I'm also suspicious of the new tenant.  Is she really a ballet dancer?

As the story progresses I want to get a better picture of the men in Carter's office.  I want to see more of who they are and why they treat her as they do.   Are they really completely unaware of her capabilities?   Do they view her as taking the place of a better qualified man?  Do they see it as a waste to let her in on work that might advance her career when they figure she will probably just retire when she marries?  Perhaps all three?  Will she ever earn their respect or will she have to continue to manipulate and work outside the system to make any difference?

There are great moments through out the show.  When the lone male co-worker who seems to have some respect for Carter defends her she thanks him and tells him not to do it ever again.  Carter doesn't want to be defended.  She doesn't need a hero, she is her own hero.  She was there before Captain America ever existed.  (Am I the only one irritated by the promos that identify Cap as Carter's Hero?) 

source

Another moment is where Carter tells Jarvis she used to have a sense of purpose.  It's a thing which all soldiers face after any war.  To have to return to civilian life and do something ordinary.  She once helped win a war.  She had seniority and respect.  Now she's filing and answering phones.  It's hard on soldiers but can you even imagine how much harder it was on women like Carter?  Women who would have probably married or worked in a shop but because of the war were called into the service of their country?  Who found the opportunity to be someone they never imagined or perhaps imagined but never thought possible.  And then the war is over and where are they?  They are asked yet again to do their patriotic duty and to give their jobs back to the men.  Possibly not even being able to tell anyone about what they did during the war - not because they didn't want to but because their government required them to keep secrets that wouldn't become public knowledge until decades later.  Their silence leaving people to assume that they were no more than a secretary.  Or no more than Captain America's girlfriend.

I also love the radio show.  It's ties in quite well with the underlying themes of perception and assumption.  It's a good reminder when most people look at Peggy Carter they don't see an Agent.  Not only because of her (assumed) history with Cap but because of her gender and looks. Which can be frustrating for her but also an asset at times.

I think it's not at all surprising when Stark asks for her help Carter jumps at the chance.  She's bored and wants to do something important again. Stark is part of a good time in Carter's life.  Oh yes, it was the war but she had purpose then.  Carter is also under the impression that Stark respects her - something that her male coworkers don't.  Of course if Stark really did respect Carter, then wouldn't he have told her the whole truth?  Whatever that might be?

I'm impressed so far and have high hopes for the rest of Agent Carter.  I also hope other Marvel (and DC for that matter) women finally get their due in quality shows and movies.  

My great uncle's yearbooks -1939

Remember ages back (July) when I posted the first one?  No?  Here's a link.

The observant might note that the last yearbook was 1937.  What happened to 1938?  Your guess is as good as mine.  Either he just didn't buy one that year or it got misplaced.  I do have 1940 and will get around to posting it.  Probably six months from now.

This year the theme was "Then and Now." 

Each section begins with an illustration of "Then" on the left page . . .

. . . and a photo of "Now" in the right.

This year my great uncle played varsity - he's in the front, number 70.

Being a junior, this year he also got a solo photo.  He looks very cool.

Continuing with the theme of "Then and Now" are photos of teachers and staff "Then"  I made this extra large so you could see all the details.

This is the Junior Safety Council - who have awesome coats. 

Male cheerleaders, just because.

I'd love to meet the new Nash.

This particular yearbook was ephemera heavy.

The back of the Jinx dance ticket.  In case you can't read it, it says "Whopee, I finally danced"

I'm assuming this "arrest notice" was a way of "collecting" one's date to the dance.  The address on it is in a residential area.  Bonus, the dark haired young lady in the white sweater is the one whose name appears on the arrest notice.

But what of Peggy Landis mentioned in the last year book post? A Margaret Landis is standing behind the brunette looking left.  Mystery solved?  Anyway I love Peggy's hairdo. 

On Modesty and "Old Fashioned"

This recent post on Cos Couture got me thinking about modesty and how we often associate "old fashioned" with covered up and modest looks.  Which is a bit odd. It assumes that fashion runs in some sort of line straight from completely covered to showing it all off.  But fashion has always cycled.  

A fashion plate from 1919

Now, I will be the first to point out when skirts are too short in a film or show set in the 1920s but while the actual length of a 1920s dress may look long to modern eyes, in terms of what women were wearing just a decade earlier hemlines were shockingly higher.  But they didn't stay that way and by the 1930s they had fallen again to something closer to 1910s lengths. 

Rising hemlines in the twenties . . .

 . . .Falling ones in the thirties.

And then there's the sixties.  The mini skirt was mini.  So short many women opted for tights to avoid flashing people.  Last time I was in a store I didn't see any dresses or skirts that short.  And while the 20th century saw some of the biggest shifts, hemlines have always risen and fallen.

I admit this is evening wear, but clearly plunging necklines are nothing new.

It's the same for necklines and the tightness of how clothes are worn.  I guarantee there are plenty of older women and men who have uttered comments on how "dowdy" modern clothes are.   Yes, there are "Old fashioned" folks out there thinking the young people should wear tighter  and more revealing clothes.  And no, they are not all dirty old men.

This is the first image that popped up when I did a Google search for "appropriate work wear" Yawn.

While the casual and special occasion clothes of today can some times get pretty revealing the notion of accepted work wear  is pretty conservative.  Can you imagine an office allowing women to wear skirts as short as those shown in the SCDP offices in recent seasons of Mad Men?  When I was younger I was pulled aside for wearing clothes that showed  a little too much or were too brightly colored according to those who spoke to me.  I didn't think I was showing too much or being inappropriate but I did as told.   Then when I got into vintage dressing I had to think carefully about what I could get away with and what would lead to another "little chat".

In the Cos Couture article she writes about how the visibility of the human nipple through clothes was not considered to be obscene and in fact its appearance was sometimes enhanced with the sewing of buttons on the bra.  It brought to mind a time when I was bra shopping and asked the clerk if they had any bras that weren't lined with foam.  She responded to me in a despairing tone "But the nipples."  Apparently I had been unaware that such exposure was not only undesirable but downright tragic.  And yet the store was filled to the brim with push up and padded bras.  Clearly enhancing the actual size of one's assets was okay but let's not remind people that breasts have a functional as well as decorative purpose!  Where will fashion take us twenty, thirty, fifty years from now?  What are we enhancing and admiring right now that will become obscene?  What will we chose to show off and augment instead?
 

Just some old fashioned ladies.

So why is that most people equate "Old fashioned" with prim, proper, and (occasionally) prudish?   Is it because most people are ignorant of fashion history?  Is it the idea that fashion only runs in one direction?  Is it, perhaps, coming from the same place that the notion that old people are naive and unworldly?  That the mythical "Good Old Days" were a simpler and more innocent time? I hate to shatter anyone's illusions but the "Good Old Days" exist only in people's imaginations.  Life was never simple, it was just different.  Attitudes change over time, maybe sometimes for the better.  Of course what is "better" will depend on your perspective.

"Old fashioned" should simply mean that it's fashion from a time previous to now.  But that's not how it's used.  This certainly doesn't bother me on the level of a "wrong era" comment.  I think how it really bothers me is that it seems to be closely associated with a value judgement.  The person using the remark is often either praising or insulting what they deem to be "old fashioned."  Either being an "old fashioned" girl is good because you are prim, sweet, and proper or it's bad because you are prudish, repressed, and dowdy.  Take your pick.  I prefer neither.

What do you think of when you hear the term "old fashioned"? 

It's no Halloween but it's still one of my favorite Holidays

It's Veteran's Day.  I urge you to DO something nice for the vets in your life.  Because actions speak louder than words and it doesn't have to be huge.  Take 'em out for a drink - it can be a soft drink if they don't drink alcohol.  Bake 'em a cake.  Let 'em take possession of the remote.  Whatever thing you can do to let them know that while you can never possibly fully thank them for what they've done you will never forget it.

Don't have a vet in your life?  You can always donate:

Disabled Veterans of America
Veterans of Foreign Wars
United Service Organizations

Manh(a)ttan

Source

I've been watching the show Manh(a)ttan since it started.  I know anyone who knows me wouldn't be too surprised as clearly it's the sort of thing I will watch. It also has some of my favorite actors in it (Olivia Williams, Harry Lloyd, and Daniel Stern!) and it's set in New Mexico.  Which, duh!  But still.

And I do enjoy the show.  I'm not ranking it top ten of all time but it's a nice cap to Sunday night, but . . . 

Okay, I'm not saying you have to be 100% accurate when you make this sort of thing.  It's a drama and if you play things out as they actually were no one would believe it or it might just be kind of boring.  But I do think you need to fall in the realm of what actually happened.  There were real people that worked on this project.  Some who still live.  And some of the liberties being taken aren't very respectful.

Now it just so happens I'm reading a book about women in the U. S. military and I'm smack dab in the section on World War II.  There's even a part about WAAC/WACs who were stationed at Los Alamos.  I've read a lot on this subject and I have infinite respect and admiration for all these women went through just so they could serve their country.

The book I am reading right now, A Few Good Women,  takes a few pages to describe the experiences of WAAC/WACs who worked in the Manhattan Project in New Mexico.  These women were told they would be going overseas so when they arrived in the middle of the New Mexico desert it was a shock.  It was considered a security risk to inform the women before their arrival.  The women themselves could not tell family where they were or what they were working on.  They couldn't even talk to their roommates about it if they didn't happen to work in the same area.  Many had degrees - even doctorates.  They were a vital part of helping win the war.  These women were and are heroes who worked hard and made sacrifices for their country.

Source

So, you know this is show is a huge opportunity to educate and pay tribute to these women.  Except the only real plot line to involve a WAAC/WAC at this point involves her charging for sex.  In fact, it's implied that all WAAC/WACs on site are prostitutes. Wait, what?

The irony here is there was a campaign by men in the army and their families to smear the WAAC/WAC organization so badly that women wouldn't join.  The U. S. Government thought it was probably Nazi's spreading rumors so imagine their surprise when they found out it was their own men.  You see the campaign for the WAAC was "Free a man to fight" - women could take over military jobs that didn't involve direct combat so the men who used to do those jobs could be on the front.  Not every man or man's family was happy with that idea.

So what was the smear campaign?  Well the usual stuff: women who joined were lesbians, loose morally, would end up pregnant ( according to the statistics in the book women in the military were actually much less likely to become pregnant than civilian women at that time) and, of course, the real job of the WAAC was to keep the men happy by having sex with them.  It was actually pretty clever - it played on the fears that women, away from their families and left to their own devices, would suddenly behave in ways that went completely counter to how they had been raised.  Yes the smear campaign is a pretty nasty bit of history, but to me it's almost more upsetting that so many people believed it.  That so many people just accepted the idea that the only thing a woman could offer to the military would be her body and not her brain.

Of course none of it was true.  Sure, there were a few lesbians, some women did get pregnant, and maybe there was the odd WAAC/WAC who did trade sex for money.  But it certainly wasn't common.  The fact is most women were too busy with important war work and fending off rude remarks from those who bought into the smear campaign to have time for much else besides a little sleep  and maybe a beer every now and then.  For most WAAC/WACs what they were doing for their country was far more important than risking getting in trouble of any kind.  And you can bet that trading sex for money would definitely have got them in a world of trouble.

So, it's 2014 and we still believe the WAAC/WACs were prostitutes?  Who is researching this thing?  Why would you make that choice?  Couldn't you think of a better way of including a WAAC/WAC in your storyline?

There isn't anything inherently wrong with sex work in my eyes.  It's the circumstances surrounding it that are the problem (abuse, not having a choice in the matter, unsafe - among others) and not the work itself.  But WAAC/WACs weren't prostitutes.  Portraying them as such is not only a lie but it totally ignores the important contributions these women really made to help end the war. 

These women are heroes.  They served their country bravely and well.  They gave up a lot so they could do their patriotic duty.  They also had to put up with a lot of crap male soldiers never had to deal with as part of their service.  And, apparently, they are still having to put up with it.

My Great Uncle's Yearbooks -1937

Remember how I said I would share my great uncle's  high school yearbooks?  Well I have three and I'm going to give each one a separate post.  Because the books are not in the best shape and may scanner is weird, I decided not to scan them.

 The first book is from 1937.  My great uncle attended Waukegan High School - which is the same school my mother attended many years later.  It is still open today.   Jack Benny went there but that was before my great uncle so sorry - no pics of a teen aged Jack Benny.

The Cover, the theme for 1937 was Western Ranch

Signatures!  Anyone know when people started writing notes instead of just signing their names?

My great uncle was a freshman - freshmen only got group photos.  He is second from the left, third row up.  It's hard to tell but he wrote "me" and a little arrow pointing to his head.

My great uncle also played football - complete surprise as athletics are so not a family trait these days.  He is the rightmost one, kneeling.

A sampling of the junior class photos.  Everyone looks so spiffy.

One of the things I love to look at is the teaching staff.  It's always interesting to see what classes were offered - along with Math, Home Ec, Latin, Bookkeeping, Office Skills, English, etc . . . was a class called "Clothing" - they even had two teachers who taught it.  I would take that class today.  I bet it taught lots of useful skills - no, I'm not being sarcastic.  I really mean it.

Photos of students goofing around.

Like modern yearbooks the back is full of ads.  Insert obligatory comment about how prices have changed here.

Ephemera! I found what I think is a clipping from the school newspaper.  "Jeep" was apparently my great uncle's nickname.  I have no idea why.  The note seems to indicate he worked for the school paper - but not in 1937 - according to the yearbook.  I tried to hunt down  a photo with Ms. Landis but no luck.  Perhaps we shall find out more in the next two yearbooks.  Or not.  Stay tuned to find out.

A really fast US History lesson

I've been on a bit of a nostalgia kick with watching old Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour. (No, I'm not old enough to remember when they first aired but I did see the revival version when they were first run and the old ones in rerun when I was a youngster) In a few of the episodes they showed these really neat films.  One about the history of the US and another just covering 1968.  I thought I'd share them with you here. 

To any new readers who came via my Her Universe fangirl of the day profile, welcome!  I hope you stick around.

Because I can't say it in person . . .

Today is the 70th anniversary of D-Day.  I'm not going to get into a history lesson here because if you don't know what I'm talking about then you can look it up and get much better background than I can probably give you.

Both my grandfathers and my great uncles on my mother's side fought in WWII.  My one great uncle lost his life in the Pacific: PFC Thomas F. Vasta.  I actually have his high school yearbooks and will someday do a post on them.

But back to D-Day.  My paternal grandfather was there and badly wounded.  As my dad said the other day - "The most important thing to me about D-Day is my dad survived."   Because if he hadn't, my dad wouldn't have been born.  So I'm pretty grateful too.

I never got to know my grandfather.  He died before I was born.  Because the universe loves irony, the career army man who was declared KIA and MIA so many times my grandmother just ignored the telegrams after awhile, lost his life in a car accident.

I know.

So to one 21 year old man who would someday have son who would grow up to be my father: Thank You.  I wish I'd known you from more than stories.  I don't smoke but I will have a beer in your honor today.

As opposed to yesterday when I just had a beer because I wanted one.

I'm definitely your granddaughter.