Mary Poppins is a Beeyatch

I have seen Disney's 1964 film Mary Poppins probably a couple dozen times now, and every single time I've thought to myself, "Why is Julie Andrews playing her so MEAN?" I've also thought that LSD probably had a big role in the chimney sweep dance number, but that's a topic for another day.

Last week Alice's sister dropped off four of P.L. Travers's Mary Poppins books for Grace and whomever else to read. Between books, I picked up the first one and plowed through it in a couple of days. Very imaginative stuff, and very different from the movie. Such as:

• Jane and Michael aren't the only kids. There are twin babies, Barbara and John.
• Mrs. Banks is not a dancing, singing Suffragette.
• Bert only shows up once and it is obvious that Mary Poppins is more than smitten.
• No written job description and line of nanny candidates. Mary just appears one day.
• While the laughing/floating scene with Uncle Albert and the Bird Lady are in the book, the movie leaves out the compass trip around the world, talking John and Barbara, and the night visit to the zoo (which are great).
• The Banks don't seem to have much interest in their kids, but there is no Mary Poppins mission to get them to connect, culminating with "Let's Go Fly a Kite" in the park.

But believe it or not, another big difference is that Mary Poppins in the book is even MEANER than the Julie Andrews portrayal. Not a single nice word or smile the entire book. Other than the cool adventures, the kids should have been thrilled the West wind finally blew her away.

Chalk Up Another One for the Church

Somehow, I don't think this is what Jesus had in mind.

"Socially Horrifying"

I've never read any of Malcolm Gladwell's books, just the occasional article in The New Yorker, so I've never formed much an opinion one way or another. His recent article on underdogs, however, knocked my socks off. He looks around the corner and throughout history to see how Davids beat Goliaths--which they do almost 30% of the time--and whether there are any consistent patterns.

Turns out, there are. One is that underdogs simply work harder.

"We tell ourselves that skill is the precious resource and effort is the commodity. It's the other way around. Effort can trump ability--legs, in Saxe's formulation, can overpower arms--because relentless effort is in fact something rarer than the ability to engage in some finely tuned act of motor coordination."

The other consistent trait is that Davids often come from the "outside" and thus confront their superior adversaries using unconventional or unexpected methods. At one end of the spectrum, the adversaries mock these methods. At the other end, they find them "socially horrifying."

Gladwell weaves in stories of George Washington, Rick Pitino, Lawrence of Arabia, and a team of 7th-grade blonde-haired girls (among others) to make his point. Totally fascinating and somewhat inspiring.

I don't know if was intentional or not, but towards the end of the article, Gladwell begins using the terms "underdog" and "insurgent" interchangeably. It made me think the piece should be required reading for every member of the US military force in Iraq and Afghanistan.

How to Ruin Your House

Our town, like many around it, has undergone a pretty amazing transformation in the past 15 years. Little homes have either been renovated and greatly expanded or demolished to build massive new structures whose garage is bigger than the original house. Most of them have been beautifully designed with interesting roof lines, cool porches, etc.

And a surprisingly large percentage share a common color scheme. Pale yellow siding with maroon shutters. Other than displaying your rusty washing machine collection in your front yard, there is no better way to quickly and drastically reduce your home's value.