Portal Fantasies

If you stepped through a portal into a magical realm and had to choose whether to stay there permanently or live permanently in this world with no chance of revisiting the other one, what would you do?

Doubtless the choice would depend on the nature of that other realm and your happiness or unhappiness in this one, plus the presence or absence of vital relationships in your current life. Seanan McGuire's "Wayward Children" series, so far comprising EVERY HEART A DOORWAY, DOWN AMONG THE STICKS AND BONES, BENEATH THE SUGAR SKY, and IN AN ABSENT DREAM, centers on a boarding school for children and teenagers (mostly the latter) who have returned to mundane reality after living in other worlds. EVERY HEART A DOORWAY takes place at the school, founded and run by a woman who visited such a realm in her own childhood, and the subsequent novels tell the stories of various individual students. Their parents think the facility is an institution for "troubled" youth, but in fact it's a refuge for those who no longer feel at home in this world and yearn to go back to their true "homes." Only in this place can they speak the truth of their experiences without being considered mentally ill. Whether wardrobe, looking glass, rabbit hole, cyclone, enchanted picture, or whatever, most portals open only once. Some travelers find their doors again, but that happens rarely. For those who make the transit multiple times, such as the protagonist of IN AN ABSENT DREAM, there's always a final trip. The heroine of that novel faces a deadline; by the time she turns eighteen, she must make an irrevocable choice.

Of course, this premise inevitably brings Narnia to mind. The characters in EVERY HEART A DOORWAY discuss that series at one point, remarking on how the children get to visit Narnia several times, through a different portal on each occasion. One of the characters says C. S. Lewis didn't know what he was talking about; he might have heard rumors about children traveling to other worlds and just decided to develop the concept for his own narrative purposes. "That's what authors do, they make [stuff] up." In THE LAST BATTLE, all the "Friends of Narnia" get to stay there at last—except for Susan, who has managed to convince herself that their adventures were only games they'd played in childhood. (In one of his letters, Lewis says Susan may have eventually gotten back to Narnia in her own way.) Visitors to Narnia, however, don't control when they go there and return to Earth; they cross between universes by the will of Aslan. Even in THE SILVER CHAIR, when Eustace and Jill ask to be taken to Narnia, Aslan says they wouldn't have called on him unless he'd first been calling them.

In THE LIGHT BETWEEN WORLDS, by Laura E. Weymouth, three children are transported from their backyard bomb shelter in World War II to an enchanted country ruled by a lordly stag. As in Lewis's stories (and unlike in most of the alternate worlds mentioned in McGuire's series), the characters return home at the moment they left, so their parents never know they were gone. Several years later, in the postwar period, one girl remains obsessed with getting back to the magical realm, while her sister simply wants to move on with her ordinary life.

Claire, the heroine of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series, faces a similar dilemma, in her case dealing with time travel rather than cross-dimensional travel. When she finds herself pregnant just before the battle of Culloden, she chooses to return to the twentieth century and her first husband for the unborn baby's sake. Twenty years later, when her circumstances have changed, she ultimately decides to return permanently to the eighteenth century and the love of her life in that era. Her first trip through the stone circle happens by accident, while the other two result from her own choices.

If I had the chance to visit Narnia during one of its peaceful periods and meet Aslan, I would, but only for a visit, not to stay. On the other hand, if I'd been offered such an opportunity between the ages of about eight and sixteen, I would have joyfully leaped at it and remained in the magical realm permanently. From my own experience and what I've read, it's not uncommon for a young fan of fantasy and/or SF to have a strong feeling that "there must be a place where I belong, but it's not here." Indeed, that's probably an important factor in making us fans in the first place.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

How To Use Tarot And Astrology In Science Fiction Part 4 - Explore Solutions New To Reader

How To Use Tarot And Astrology In Science Fiction

Part 4

Explore Solutions New To Reader 

The previous entries in this series are:

Tarot:
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2017/10/index-to-posts-about-or-involving-tarot.html

Astrology:
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_30.html

Part 1
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2018/12/how-to-use-tarot-and-astrology-in.html

Part 2
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2018/12/how-to-use-tarot-astrology-in-science.html

Part 3
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/01/how-to-use-tarot-and-astrology-in.html

Last week we looked at copyright, DRM and phone repair as it intersects the Law.

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/01/copyright-drm-and-phone-repair.html

And that raised the esoteric aspects of "ownership."

Oddly enough, "ownership" is deeply related to the "Happily Ever After" and perhaps a core issue in the problem of people not believing in the "Happily Ever After."

We've discussed the HEA ending in terms of the Pluto transits in life, testing, transformation, destruction, rebuilding, major relocation or profession changes.  Mars is "war" -- Pluto is "transformation."

We experience Pluto transits as "destruction" -- which it usually coincides with because structures we have built in our lives (tangible and intangible), stand strong and prevent us from moving in a new direction.

Pluto represents "thinking outside the box" in the simple fact that we build boxes around ourselves, houses to be comfortable inside of, protected from the shapeless, fluid, wild, smashing waves of change outside our "house."

The mind is a "house" -- and through early years, we build ourselves boxes, nice strong shipping containers, and even brick walled storehouses, to rely on for protection.

To get outside those boxes, we have to smash through a wall we neglected to put a door into when building it strong.

We have to think the unthinkable. 

We have to face "the unknown" which we hid from as children, building walls around our minds.

Humans value conformity and busily spend childhood building the same walls as their teachers, parents, playmates have so they can all get the same answers to questions -- and "pass the test" in the school of hard knocks.

Science is organized human knowledge.  Science Fiction is "What if ..." and "If only ..." and "If this goes on ..."  --- science fiction is about what does not (yet) exist, what is not (yet) known, but mostly about what is not yet "organized."

Science Fiction novels don't work well as entertainment when the author doesn't know how and why human knowledge got organized in the first place.

A science fiction writer must know some science, and be keeping up with the most recent breakthroughs and farfetched theories on the outskirts of scientific thought.  But the most indispensable knowledge a writer can have is of the organizing principle around which our marvelously successful science is built.

The premise that carries a science fiction novel to the top of the charts, to "classic" status, usually involves challenging one of those core organizing principles.

For example, "no physical object can travel faster than light" is a principle, and most science fiction set in a galaxy spanning civilization postulate one or another way around that limitation.  In the 1940's, Edward E. Smith, Ph.D., wrote the Lensman Series which postulated FTL drive based on the ability to cancel out "mass" and thus "inertia" -- many UFO reports cite objects moving in speedy zig-zags that indicate they've got some inertia cancelling ability.

That's how you get out of the box.  Find a firmly believed limitation that is an unconscious assumption among your target readership, and smash a doorway through that wall in their mind with a "What if Science is Wrong ... again?"

What do the Characters in your built world know that your readers don't know?

Our entire world-spanning Civilization in the 21st Century is an outgrowth of Ancient Hellenistic Greek thought - Aristotle, Plato, etc. - and centuries and centuries later, Roger Bacon and the method of proving "knowledge" creating "science."

The Hellenistic civilization grew out of Egyptian Civilization, and there is cultural continuity behind some of that.  Assyrians and other Middle Eastern peoples flourished and collapsed, wave after wave.  None of the people who lived in those times knew they "lived in those times."  Chances are you don't view your life as "those times" either -- the millennia long waves of civilizations aren't apparent to those living inside them.

The science fiction writer's job is to make the current wave apparent to those living inside it by SHOWING (not telling) that wave from outside.

That's what Gene Roddenberry did by staunchly insisting on including Spock in the bridge crew.

One way to gain the perspective on our current state of civilization is to read this book, or to read about it (or its sources), and think hard.

https://www.amazon.com/1177-B-C-Civilization-Collapsed-Turning-ebook/dp/B013VPYYGQ/


That sketches the very-long-view of human doings.  Thinking hard about this view, you can see that we will look just as "primitive" to the future civilization that will (no doubt about it, climate change won't kill us ALL) that will grow out of the shards of our current life.

What survives the destruction of our mental (and physical) boxes?

What does it mean to "think outside the box?"

It means to absorb and internalize "the unknown" (and perhaps unknowable under current conditions).  What has to change in us to shift the unknowable to the merely unknown?

What grand wisdom has survived from Hellenistic Civilization?  We have some art and some literature, but what principles do we live by (what walls do we build in our minds) based on ideas codified by Aristotle but originating far earlier?

One such idea is the "either/or" principle, or the zero-sum-game.  The idea that material reality consists of mutually exclusive states - a thing is, or it is-not.

All computer architecture is based on this -- the 0's and 1's -- on/off switches in combination.  And now, such massive amounts of on/off switches can generate what we term "Artificial Intelligence."  Just how artificial is it?

We look at our reality, and we see a pie to be sliced -- a whole that is a certain size.  If I get some, that part is a part that you can't have.  Mine!  Ownership.  If I own a piece of the finite pie, you don't own it.  And you can't make that pie bigger.  Your piece plus my piece add up to a Constant, the whole pie.  That is the zero sum.  I win; you lose.  No two ways about it.

That is the box we live in, and the box science fiction romance writers have to think outside of, in order to argue readers into suspending disbelief of the Happily Ever After Ending.

Earth is a single planet, not getting any bigger.  In fact, available land is shrinking as the sea level rises, so we'll have to live under water again.

But astronomers are looking at an "expanding universe."

Particle physics and the newest mathematics are describing packets of energy of which matter is composed -- and those energy packets are neither here not there.

"Here" and "there" no longer are so sharply defined you can think of them as either/or --- either you are here in class on time, or you are not here.  Right?
You can't be both here and not-here at a given time.

Or can you?

The Hellenistic Civilization built that either/or box for us, and we're still trying to live inside it.  That could be the reason so many people just can't accept the "Happily Ever After" ending to the story of the life of a couple.

Civilizations rise and fall, but they don't "live happily ever after."

There is not stability long-range.  We are certain of that because of archeology, paleontology, and historic record.

So either there exists stability, or there does not exist stability –– can't have it both ways.  Or can you?

As we have noted, the laws of physics as they apply to subatomic particles are a little different than the laws of physics engineers use to build a bridge or a cracking plant.

Does "happiness" require "stability" and impenetrable walls surrounding what you "own" in order to protect you from the turbulence outside?

Is unchanging stability the necessary condition for human happiness?  Is life either "happiness" or "misery?"  Is the chaos outside our either/or world the source of all threat, all misery, all terror?

If your readers see "happily ever after" as a static situation boxed into protected space they "own" and thus "control," then the solution new to them that you can present and explore might be, "How Can A Couple Enjoy Chaos, Surprise, and meet Uncertainty with Zest, Verve, and Joy?"

The general reader resorts to Tarot and Astrology as tools that can "foretell the future" -- but they can't.  These tools reveal just how dependent your future is on your emotional attitude toward the unknown.  They are built around a notion of reality older than Egypt, one which puts the either/or notion of reality into a special case category -- like physics puts Kepler's Laws.

Fear of the Unknown makes the Unknown fearsome.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Controlled Digital Lawlessness

"CDL" is an acronym for "Controlled Digital Lending", and the trouble with CDL is, it is controlled and run by persons who have absolutely no right to copy, publish, or distribute copyrighted works to the public.

The Authors Guild is taking it very seriously, saying, "We must stop this Controlled Digital Lending nonsense in its tracks," and "...for those books not yet available in ebook format, CDL usurps that market before the author has even had a chance..."

https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/controlled-digital-lending-is-neither-controlled-nor-legal/

One of the problem organizations is Internet Archive's "Open Library", which is starting to refuse to remove copyright infringing books from its collection, when authors request a takedown. Allegedly, Internet Archive is citing CDL as a justification for their alleged piracy.

If you object to CDL, sign here. https://form.jotform.com/90035152846151

As good example of usurpation of a book by a living author is described by Matt Enis who gives the Librarian perspective on "CDL". Apparently, this topical book was loaned out 27,000 times, which is 27,000 sales the author could not make. The CDL folks see this demand as making their case for digital lending without the permission of a copyright owner!

https://www.libraryjournal.com/?detailStory=181115ControlledDigitalLending

Sixty-four people have signed a document --a white paper-- putting forward their plan to normalize and legalize digital lending. Much to his credit, Matt Enis points out, that there is no first sale lending right for digital copies under copyright law, and that because of the effect of digital lending on sales, recent best sellers are not good candidates (for permissionless scanning, copying, and unauthorized lending.)

What is a "white paper", and can anyone write one?
https://coschedule.com/blog/how-to-write-white-papers-templates-examples/

Apparently, a "white paper" is someone's opinion on the way things ought to be, and the more people who sign it, the greater its perceived authority. It's not law, but activists would like to cite their white paper as proof of legitimacy.

One has to be careful of weasel words like "white paper". Parse advertisements some time. You cannot escape them, so you might as well amuse yourself by looking for the loopholes.

For instance, "scientifically tested" does not mean "scientifically proven".
" #1 dentist approved..." is a case where lack of punctuation creates ambiguity. Does "Number 1" describe the prestige of one particular dentist, or does "Number 1" refer to the product and "dentist-approved" is an additional adjective describing the product?

It's not just American authors who take issue with CDL.

Porter Anderson, writing for Publishing Perspectives reports that the UK's Society Of Authors is also up in arms about unauthorized lending out of California.

https://publishingperspectives.com/2019/01/copyright-battle-internet-archives-open-library-authors-guild-society-of-authors/

The British authors' society has given the Internet Archive until February 1st, 2019 to take down UK authors' works, and to prevent its inventory of ebooks from being loaned to readers in the UK.

By contrast, and speaking of lawlessness in high places, Justin Trudeau just appointed an alleged piracy enthusiast as Canada's Attorney General.

https://thetrichordist.com/2019/01/14/pro-piracy-law-professor-appointed-justice-minister-of-canada-attorney-general/

Canada's top lawman says that "current normative structures" (or, our laws and morality) "ought to be adapted" (ie, changed) "to reflect..." (his own liberal)  "understanding of the impulse to share..."  He is talking about music in this context, but what he means is that piracy ought to be considered lawful and normal, because piracy is popular.

If CDL cannot be stopped, at least there ought to be PLR. That's Public Lending Right, and it means that every time a book or ebook is loaned out by a library, its author receives a small royalty.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry

Writer Emergency Pack

One of my Christmas presents was a clever little item called the Writer Emergency Pack. It's a deck of cards with prompts to help a stuck fiction writer get unstuck. The pack includes brief instructions for a group storytelling game using the cards, but it seems mainly intended for individuals. It comprises two numbered sets of cards. The first presents a one-sentence suggestion with an illustrative sketch, while the corresponding number in the second half of the deck elaborates with further details. Although I haven't actively used this product yet, I find reading the prompts fun in itself.

The story sparks aren't random ideas such as "Throw your heroine off a cliff," which was sort of what I expected. (That would have been fun, too, though.) They're more serious and of more general application. Some examples: What if your story were changed to a different genre? Talk it out. (What would the protagonist and antagonist say if they had an honest discussion?) Stop talking. (How would the characters handle not being able to communicate verbally? This hint reminds me of the BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER episode when the whole town was magically silenced.) Kill the hero. (If the hero died at this point, what would happen next? Who would carry on?) Imposter. (Some character is not what he or she seems.) An apparent blessing turns out to be a curse. Take away your hero's allies and other support. Bring on the zombies (which could mean any type of mindless horde). The explanatory note cards briefly explore the ramifications of the proposed twists.

If I did apply the cards to a writing project, as a devoted outliner I would probably find it more helpful in the planning phase than the first draft.

The deck is sold on this Amazon page:

Writer Emergency Pack

By the way, my first new e-book in quite a while (as opposed to re-releases) has just been published by the Wild Rose Press. "Yokai Magic" is a light paranormal romance novella featuring an enchanted Japanese scroll and a cat spirit:

Yokai Magic

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Copyright, DRM, and Phone Repair

Copyright, DRM, 

and Phone Repair 

Back in October, 2018, things changed that most people didn't know needed changing.

Changes like this one are the substance of science fiction futurology, as the business of fiction writing is to take you on an adventure into a world that does not exist and propose solutions to problems you think you don't have.  The solutions that are most interesting are the ones you (as a reader) are certain would not work.

The writer's duty is to make you think about why you are so certain the solution would not work.  In the process, you may generate a solution to a real and current problem that will work.

In other words, fiction writers prompt you to make the world a better place.

The problem that needed solving was about the right to repair devices you own -- which contain or run on software you only license.

Software, and intellectual property such as fictional stories, come under copyright law -- and that law has had to be changed to keep pace with electronic media.  When the xerox copier was introduced to libraries, the uproar over copyright was intense, furious, adamant and heated.  Look where we are today with copy/paste.

So, today, companies tried to keep you leashed tightly to their own repair shops and prevent tinkering with your devices by yourself or an independent repair shop of your choice.

Repairing stuff has been a profession for thousands of years -- they tried to un-invent it.

The law may be challenged in court, reversed, modified, struck down, or just repealed and replaced.  The fight over "you didn't build that" and therefore you don't own or control that, is raging globally.

So read and ponder this as it pertains to self-publishing novels:

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/right-to-repair-iphone-hack/

-------quote---------

Advocates for the right to repair movement have cause to celebrate this weekend. New rules, which go into effect on Sunday, will allow consumers to legally hack the software on their own devices to repair them.

The new rules will allow consumers and repair shops not affiliated with brands to break DRM, or Digital Rights Management, which previously sought to prevent the copying and distribution of media and technology. Large corporations backed DRM, saying it was necessary to protect consumers and fight copyright infringement, according to Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The DCMA, or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, sought to criminalize any attempts to bypass locks placed on devices, even if the attempt was made in an effort to repair or maintain it. The issue was primarily in the inability to repair a device that had already been bought and paid for. Instead, DRM forced consumers to take broken devices to specific repairers, stifling competition and monopolizing the market. DRM is “implemented by embedding code that prevents copying, specifies a time period in which the content can be accessed, or limits the number of devices the media can be installed on,” according to TechTarget.

The new rules proposed by the Library of Congress and U.S. Copyright Office will change that, allowing owners of smartphones, cars, tractors, smart home appliances, and a number of other devices to maintain their own property.

---------end quote------

"...maintain their own property."  -- "own?"

What does it mean to OWN something?  The esoteric and mystical ramifications of ownership are enormous.  Most people think ownership is a simple thing.  Children understand MINE at two years old.

Who is entitled to what for their creative work?  For any work, just the labor of moving one thing from one place to another place, we consider we have a right to be paid a living wage.

Do we?

And in what fundamental way will AI and all this automation change our "rights?"

Note this legal thrust includes cars and tractors.  Everything runs on chips now.

What will that imply about ownership in the future?

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

SCOTUS To Rule On F-Bomb Use

Let's dive straight into the gutter. Can you call your clothing and lifestyle "FUCT" (for trademark purposes)?  For that matter, is it decent to name your restaurant "PHO KEENE"?

Could you get around dirty-word bans on vanity vehicle license plates by using the Roman numerals IV (which sounds like For...) to announce your favorite extramarital activity?

Legal bloggers John Crittenden,   Bobby Ghajar and Rose Kautz writing for Cooley LLP look forward to the US Supreme Court hearing oral arguments as to whether or not the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) may refuse to grant a trademark for "FUCT", simply because it sounds vulgar.

Original article
https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2019/2019-08-scotus-to-decide-if-ban-on-scandalous-trademarks-is-unconstitutional

Lexology link
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=344eb724-448c-494d-8fc9-a0990ed791b1&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2019-01-10&utm_term=

The Court will hear the case in April, and rule in June.

Adding to the flying smut, Jeff Greenbaum  blogging for Frankfurt Kurnit Klein and Selz PC asks broadmindedly, Is It a "Pho Keene" Great Name Or Is It Offensive?

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=aee1e987-d850-428a-8212-d56ec7ba3a16&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2019-01-09&utm_term=

Original article  (with illustrations!)
https://advertisinglaw.fkks.com/post/102fctc/is-it-a-pho-keene-great-name-or-is-it-offensive

(Where does one draw the line, when there is a perfectly wonderful tourist destination in Thailand called phuket ?)

For the World Trademark Review, Adam Bobker  pens a comprehensive summary of some of the most interesting goings on, including fake Dyson hair dryers (which can ruin your hair and your day and maybe burn down the house), hologram marks, mary jane in plain packaging, and a "poop shaped" carrying case which Louis Vuitton finds offensive... probably because they call it Pooey Puitton.

Lexology link

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0cf9f2f4-ade4-41f8-9b95-a69e67674aae&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2019-01-10&utm_term=

Original link
https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/anti-counterfeiting/sweden-allows-hologram-marks-plain-packaging-design-gets-thumbs-and-dyson

Finally, loosely concerned with fakery, rip offs, copyright infringement, and the point of view that "Copyright is Censorship", Chris Castle has a go at the E.F.F.ing people who take lobbying too far.

https://musictechpolicy.com/2019/01/12/europarl_en-explains-article-13-and-googles-fake-lobbying/

All the best, and in the best possible taste.....

Rowena Cherry

PS... if you did not "get" the IV-word, try "IVnick8"   Total red herring. SCOTUS isn't concerned with that.

Robots in the Home

More new developments in household robotics:

Are Domestic Robots the Way of the Future?

One problem foregrounded by this article is people's expectation for robots to look humanoid, versus the optimal shape for efficiently performing their functions. A real-world autonomous floor cleaner, after all, doesn't take the form of "a humanoid robot with arms" able to "push a vacuum cleaner." A related problem is that our household environments, unlike factories, are designed to be interacted with by human beings rather than non-humanoid machines. Research by scientists at Cornell University has been trying "to balance our need to be able to relate ­emotionally to robots with making them genuinely useful."

Dave Coplin, CEO of The Envisioners, promotes the concept of "social robotics":

Domestic Robots Are Coming in 2019

He advocates "trying to imbue emotion into communication between humans and robots," as, for example, training robots to understand human facial expressions. He even takes the rather surprising position that the household robot of the future, rather than a "slave" or "master," should be "a companion and peer to the family.” According to Coplin, the better the communication between us and our intelligent machines, the more efficiently they will work for us. Potential problems need to be solved, however, such as the difficulty of a robot's learning to navigate a house designed for human inhabitants, as mentioned above. Security of data may also pose problems, because the robot of the future will need access to lots of personal information in order to do its job.

In Robert Heinlein's THE DOOR INTO SUMMER, the engineer narrator begins by creating single-task robots that sound a bit like the equivalent of Roombas. Later, he invents multi-purpose robotic domestic servants with more humanoid-like shapes, because they have to be almost as versatile as human workers. We're still a long way from the android grandmother in one of Ray Bradbury's classic stories, but robots are being designed to help with elder care in Japan. According to the article cited above, some potential customers want robots that may offer "companionship" by listening to their troubles or keeping pets company while owners are out. Now, if the robot could walk the dog, too, that would really be useful. The January NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC mentions medical robots that can draw blood, take vital signs, and even shift bedridden patients. One snag with such machines: To have the power to lift objects of significant weight, not to mention human adults, a robot has to be inconveniently heavy (as well as expensive).

On the subject of balancing usefulness with the need for relating emotionally: In Suzette Haden Elgin's poem "Too Human by Half," an elderly woman grows so attached to her lifelike household robot that she can't bear to replace it when it starts to malfunction. "Replace JANE? . . . Just because she's getting OLD?" Therefore, when the company launches its next model, "they made every one of the units look exactly like a broom."

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt