text:
I apologize for getting all LiveJournal on you, but Landed are one of my personal favorite groups to come out of the '90s – not only did they put out fantastic records, they really meant something to me as well. They opened my mind to so many fresh and new concepts as a teenager entering adulthood (unhinged live performance, improvisation, costumes, unusual musical instruments, the concept of a "rock band" completely deconstructed), they sounded freaking great – it was like they took the scariest parts of rock songs, made them noisier, and stretched that moment into infinity. They were the Fort Thunder band that offered the fewest answers, came with this air of mystery that seemed completely unmanufactured, and produced a small handful of records that still sound fresh. When I first released an album of my own band, I ripped off Landed's cover art design (shamelessly might I add), but what can I say, their influence was that strong. I won't gush any further over Landed, because much like their music, this interview is long, intense, hilarious and worth paying close attention to. Founding members Dan St. Jacques, Joel Kyack and Shawn Greenlee all graciously participated.
How did Landed start? I'm not as interested in how you guys met, unless there is some great story there, so much as how did you all agree to create and perform the music you made? I can't imagine there was much of a musical precedent you were following.
Joel: Landed started out of necessity, like all freakish things do. Things had reached a terminal head of convention. Granted, tons of sub-genres of music had evolved, but in each sub-genre there seemed to be rules and conventions that were silently adhered to. Shawn and I were just coming out of the Rhode Island School of Design, where we were trained in a particular line of thinking. We were after a larger idea than just some assembly of notes that were dutifully rehearsed and performed. We were lucky enough to be at this moment when a bunch of us (RISD grads) stayed around Providence after school, and began to become friendly with the local freaks. The bands like Six Finger Satellite and Thee Hydrogen Terrors, Arab on Radar – these were bands we'd seen but not people we knew. Then we got to know them as musicians ourselves living in the town, dedicated to Providence, not just kids passing through to go to school. For me, that's when the real magic happened – between 1995 and 1997, when this openness invaded the scene and there was a sweet intermingling. In school we knew Dan as the dude that worked at the sandwich shop and was the sickest bass player in town, but then we started going over to his house and jamming. He was such a stone-cold freak that Shawn and I knew it was on… true love.
Shawn: Before Landed, we played under the name Land for a few months. So, Landed came out of Land. We had developed quite a bit as a band during our first months playing shows and the name-change acknowledged a new path we were on. What brought us together for Landed and what allowed it to thrive was the warehouse we all moved into in 1997, known as 556. We started as a three-piece that year, Dan and I both on bass and Joel on drums. We had played music together before. Joel and I had a couple early bands together, and were already friends with Dan. 556 was across the street from Fort Thunder (another warehouse, where Lightning Bolt was based). Joel and I both lived at the Fort earlier. Many of Landed's other members lived in these warehouses. That community was really important for Providence music in the late '90s.
The Fort plays a role in the Landed origin story. Fort Thunder would stage these big, tag-team, mock wrestling matches where wrestlers would dress up in absurd costumes and battle in the ring. At one event, Dan and I were a team, and Joel was the referee. In a match, Dan sprained his wrist, and couldn't play bass at our next show, which was at a local bar. Rather than cancel, we decided to improvise a new set, maybe with one rehearsal beforehand. Joel and I stayed on drums and bass respectively, while Mat Brinkman (of Forcefield/Mindflayer) joined on electronics. Dan had a shortwave radio he was going to play. Up until that show, Joel and I were doing some vocal stuff, but we were mostly instrumental. We had already gotten a reputation for having an "active" live show, but this is when Landed really reared its head. As we started, Dan's instrument broke. Without any warning, he took on a frontman role with vocals. We had not discussed this beforehand – it was a spontaneous decision. I remember Dan's bass cab on the floor, him eating the speaker cone, and the audience in frenzy. The bartender freaked out on us after our set; he hated it. There was a tense, public argument with him and the rest of the show got shut down. On our track "Why I Live," you can hear Dan chanting, "fuck One Up." The bar's name was "One Up."
I guess we knew we were onto something different at that point. Dan was a singer, and the music we wanted to play was definitely about reacting to circumstances prior to and during performance, not about perfectly matching something precomposed. Both Joel and I kept accidentally hurting ourselves, which caused us to change instruments or the ways we played. This set us on a path to frequently change things as a working method. At one point in '97, I had broken ribs and Joel had severe back and knee problems. The philosophy was that if we booked a show, we wouldn't cancel on account of injury and we'd keep booking shows despite whatever issues arose. We'd figure out what to do with the ongoing circumstances and our performance deadline. I think this had a big impact on the music we made. Sometimes this involved adding or removing players. This is when Rick Pelletier enters as a core member. John Dwyer and Mat Brinkman were also regulars. We had arrived at the idea that we should write basic song structures around which we could improvise, and change these from show to show. We didn't over-rehearse as we wanted the audience to be there for when we really nailed it. Members changed instruments. New members were added to the mix. Altogether, I think there have been thirteen Landed members. Shows were full of "obstacles", either self-imposed or granted by the audience.
We knew that Landed shouldn't be a band that was organized around a collection of songs, because as soon as creative differences or other circumstances happened, the band could easily die. We wanted a structure that actually reveled in the creative differences and the unforeseen circumstances. Something that was capable of adapting, allowed members to drop out and come back, and as a founding principle couldn't "break up." Sometimes we repeated sets for short tours, but a lot of Landed material was only performed once and went undocumented (or maybe documentation hasn't yet surfaced).
The show that put us on the path to making some records is the one we played with Men's Recovery Project, Dropdead, and Forcefield in Providence. That's when we met Sam McPheeters who put out the first Landed stuff on Vermiform. That's the show where Dan set himself on fire.
That's an excellent early recap. I guess I am curious to go a little further back, not necessarily time-wise, but in the formation of your musical philosophies… like, how did you even come to the conclusion that a rock band could get up on stage and improvise the songs, get injured, and allow spontaneity and energy to reign supreme? I feel like for most people who start playing guitars and drums as teenagers or whatever, the general ideology is that "practice makes perfect", and that being tight and well-rehearsed is a sign of superiority, even for punk bands. How was it that you were all so willing and eager to throw out rock's rulebook from the get-go?
Shawn: I'd say our rehearsals have always been about preparedness for the performance. To me, improvisation is about being ready, having honed one's skills, so that you can create extemporaneously. That's where the dedication in rehearsal has been for Landed, much more than composing the details and hitting all the right notes at the right time. Even when we've agreed upon structures that have allowed us to get really tight, improvisation has been a factor. Sometimes it's been completely free, and sometimes improvisation is constrained… like maybe certain players get more freedom, while others have to hold down the core; or there is a tightly composed rhythm everyone is playing, but otherwise it's open; or there is some timing variable which isn't resolved until we play it live. There's a lot of care in crafting playing experiences that include potential discomfort and risk, and that's a good thing.
In a basic sense, the ideas that were formed in our early days were about setting the music in motion and not stopping on account of difficulties. Like, if someone breaks strings, a guitar neck, a drum head, or a mic… keep going. There's no stopping to re-tune an instrument or fix what's broken. If the audience comes crashing into the drum kit and knocks everything over, that's part of the music, not outside of it. In that way, Landed has been about the live event, much more than about delivering a live version of recorded/written songs. Reconciling that with the other rock contexts you're getting at is tough, as I'd hazard to say that most rock bands want to play their tunes for the audience, have the audience listen to recordings of those tunes at home, and have that process repeat. Eventually the audience becomes so familiar with the songs, that enjoyment comes from the familiarity with and recognition of them, including the ability to evaluate differences between live performances and recordings. Then, ideas of good and bad performance tend to become really simplistic; it becomes about meeting expectations as listening habits are formed. Landed should totally register as dissatisfaction with that formula of music production and reception. But, that stance is only possible because we all have experiences in and also care about those other rock contexts you're getting at. We've all had other bands before, during, and after involvement with Landed that aren't anything like Landed. Landed provides a context to experiment.
In the various changes the band has undergone, we've had shifting notions of what preparedness should be depending on the music we decided to make. So, sometimes it's involved doing something over and over for weeks in rehearsal in order to establish a framework from which to diverge from or return to in performance. Sometimes it's involved establishing a set of cues to watch or listen for so that we can arrive at the same place at the same time. That might take three or four rehearsals to get right. In the early days, we might have met once or twice before a performance to devise a strategy, but we had a lot of performances, so one live experience was feeding into the next cumulatively.
Most importantly, I think that preparedness involves playing a lot of music together over extended periods of time, like months and years… and hanging out, listening to and talking about music. We've gotten to know one another's vocabulary and be able to anticipate each other's moves. We've been able to play within that relationship, sometimes subverting, sometimes complying, sometimes instigating. The individual vocabularies and group dynamics change, so that's exciting too, to realize that your old expectations are wrong or that you have a new perspective.
Joel: Shawn was out in LA a few weeks ago and one thing that we talked about that I had almost forgotten was how much fucking music we listened to. As a group. Seriously listening, not having music on in the background and partying. This went on for years. We would go to Dan's or Rick's place (which was in the same warehouse where Shawn and I lived), and sit in the near-dark for hours listening to records of all kinds. We would sit without talking for entire record sides, over and over again. Then we would talk about it. Dissect it. Not only technically, but what made it tick in its dirty core. It was like a formal education, a seminar class in graduate school. We wanted nothing more than to thrill ourselves and impress one another. As for tightness and well-rehearsed-ness showing superiority, even in punk bands, I think we thought of that as total bullshit. Punk is a name for a kind of music that we can talk about, name, describe, and give examples, and punk is also a certain kind of attitude (outside of the music) that we were interested in exploring to our own selfish, extreme ends. Real freedom. Not according to some fashionable code of conduct. We played with a lot of these "punk" bands, and I think that by the end of those nights we had illustrated that those bands weren't as punk as they thought they were.
To an outsider, that seems like a pretty academic, thoughtful approach to what might seem like insanity on par with pro-wrestling, mosh pits and Jackass-style stuntery. You say that Landed provides a context to experiment – at the same time, how much was it about just going totally crazy?
Shawn: There's a lot of stories about Landed live shows which would back you up on claims of insanity and hedonism. I'm not going to dispute that at all, and totally acknowledge it. For sure, a good amount of irreverence and debauchery has been a consistent baseline for the group. Plenty of hijinks. It's hard to imagine Landed performances without some buffoonery and misbehavior (for the players and audience). It's a critical factor… otherwise, it wouldn't be Landed. But, that shouldn't undermine what I was saying early. It goes together. The music incites the revelry and vice versa.
Joel: If it sounds academic it's because to a certain degree it was. We discussed and planned very seriously a way to perform without planning. I've always thought that live, Landed is about creating a chaotic situation. Inside of that situation unplanned things emerge, either moments of brilliance or complete failure. Both of these are good. If your ear is tuned right and your body is ready to move, you react to this situation by contributing, by pushing the other players to evolve their strategy in the moment. We don't pick the notes or the rhythm or the "melody"… it picks us. We become conduits in a reactive state. The only note that matters is the first one. All the others are just following that one, dealing with it, responding and trying to put something together that (hopefully) to the audience is obvious that it is being done right there, for the first time, in the moment of performance. The band and the audience are all hearing this for the first time, together. That's where the energy is, the freedom. I think we even became snobs about this. Playing with really great bands that went out there and did their duty started to seem laughable.
So the story of Dan setting himself on fire needs to be re-told. As I remember hearing it, he was wearing a sweater soaked in oil, and then had to give some bogus excuse to the hospital, so as not to be sent to the mental institution?
Dan: I think Shawn did a fine job explaining things thus far and I would be happy to carry the torch (so to speak… ha!) a little further in regards to "the fire incident". A little explanation may be in order, as one does not come to the decision of lighting themselves on fire in a vacuum or should do so without good reason… unless they're completely nuts. You make the call! Ha!
Anyway, the night of July 27th, 1997 was definitely one to remember! We were asked to play a show with some local faves: extremist hardcore-punk heroes Dropdead, along with the avant sounds of Forcefield and the legendary act Men's Recovery Project headlining the night. Of course we jumped at the chance to play on such a sick bill, and I remember thinking we'd really have to make an impression playing with such heavy hitters, which leads me to some necessary background info.
The music we were working on at that time was quite unconventional. It was a very exciting atmosphere with all kinds of customized instrumentation and frequent line-up changes. With most of us the living in the same building, we were able to play all the time, but purposely didn't do a lot of arranging other than the most basic outlines as Shawn already mentioned. We wanted that open and spontaneous feeling to be conveyed foremost over rigid form. It was an odd blending of post-punk, noise and electronica without the contrived efforts of creating a certain sound or fitting into a specific genre. The vibe of the music felt very dark, yet had an energy that was not apathetic or depressing (as some music with that tone can easily fall into) but had more of a cathartic and psychedelic effect on me. I had only recently become the vocalist of the band (itself a result in spontaneous combustion as Shawn also already explained) and quickly found myself immersed in a new sense of freedom of expression and performance.
This is where my head was at the time. I had always been into the idea of the spectacle and embraced the dramatic performances of some of the more peculiar bands that I witnessed as a youth. As a member of the local music scene here in Providence (since my teenage years) I was fortunate to be a part of a very exciting time in the development of underground music of the mid/late 1980s. It was very reactionary – rock, metal, punk and then hardcore had pretty much run their course and underground musicians all over the country once again began tinkering with new sounds and influences that were not necessarily connected to music. I saw a ton of bands play during those years but what I was really impressed with were the ones whose performances were on the more wild/experimental side. These were the groups that rose above the limitations of their specific style and sometimes exhibited almost superhuman attributes to their performances. I witnessed acts where the vocalists would cut their faces up and bleed all over the place or jump into the crowd only to land on their head and crawl back to the stage. I saw all kinds of shit that blew my mind as a teen and it really made an impression on me. That a "live" band should kick your ass, not only sonically but physically as well, and that the band's energy should be projected outwards and not drain those bearing witness… yawn! Anyway, these are some of the things that helped create and inform my sensibilities about how I thought music should be made and performed (more specifically with Landed) and which ultimately lead to "the fire incident" which was (ironically) only hastily "practiced" the night before without much forethought or planning. I was not looking for a death-wish or trying to reenact some type of Buddhist monk self-immolation political statement (although I was very fascinated by those dudes), I just thought it would come of as visually stunning (in other words…crazy as shit!) and stir things up a bit for the "I've seen it all 'arms folded' Providence crowd", and I can say that because it takes one to know one – ha! It was something I would have wanted to see myself – fire is a powerful thing, and it always arouses the human mind both positively and negatively, for better or worse. Although I wasn't originally looking to get seriously injured, I soon found out it would end up costing me several weeks of some hard-ass healing time and more than a few painful nights being stuck to my sheets. All this being said (in hindsight of course) I do have to admit that it was definitely some sort of mixed/confused act of perverted/subverted/vanity/bravado/masochistic type of shit, which (for a time) seemed to only escalate with each Landed show thereafter.
So, back to the story: from the assumption that we would be the openers of the show (being the "newest" band on the bill) and reacting to the ominous droning sounds of J Ryan's Moog synth, Shawn's psychedelic "slide" bass/Optigan and Joel's relentless tribal-like drumming at practice that week, I was inspired to come up with an idea that would initiate the perfect mood for the entire evening. Something that would not only startle the crowd, but also let the headliner know how dead serious we were about music/performance and our commitment to both. We had rehearsed our set for the show at least a couple times in the proceeding week in typical Landed fashion, going over an amalgamation of a few pre-arranged riffs but still relying on a lot of improvisation, a craft we were just beginning to hone – using very little to create something much larger than just the sum of it's parts.
Having the fortunate position of being the first band on that night, we were able to set up our equipment/sound-check and then leave it there, ready to play. When we were finally told to hit the stage, I hung back in the dressing room while Shawn and J started warming up the stage with a creepy ambient intro vibe. I quickly removed the t-shirt I had been wearing and put on the polypropylene thermal underwear top I brought to douse in rubbing alcohol as I had practiced the night before, and with a last minute decision to use a little more accelerant than originally planned, I quickly found out it definitely would do the trick. I remember ditching the lighter as soon as my right arm went up as I ran out towards the stage. I tried to make it to the microphone but I went up in flames so fast that I completely knocked it over trying to get my shirt (now partially melted and still on fire) off of me. I was supposed to grab the mic and we would then all kick into the set together but it didn't go quite as planned, but as you can see in the clip on YouTube, Joel did actually wait for me to get the mic in hand and then we all hit that shit as hard as we could for just over twenty minutes, if I remember correctly.
It's funny that it has been almost seventeen years since that night, but it still feels so fresh in my mind. I clearly remember running out, knocking over the mic, seeing people backing up with terrified faces, ripping my shirt off, hitting the ground, grabbing the mic, screaming bloody murder (the lyrics I wrote for the main riff were "United States of pee / suck on my… techno pussy"), then jumping back onto my shirt (still on fire) and rolling around on it, then picking it up and throwing it all the while thinking to myself am I going to get into serious trouble here? I remember crawling around on the floor through the crowd, licking the floor, grabbing people's feet, doing some weird version of the "windmill" slipping and sliding around in my own pool of lymph. I also remember a "cold" feeling beginning to encircle my neck and armpit, only later to discover that was where my skin was most burnt.
After our set, I quickly made my way to the men's room to get some water. The vocalist for Men's Recovery Project, Sam McPheeters, came in and asked if Landed wanted to put out a record on his label. He wrote a little piece about our "meeting" in the men's room in his rag Shooting Space a couple of years later.
After much suggestion by a few buds, I finally drove myself to the hospital after having a look at myself in a mirror. I wanted to stay for the rest of the show but my lips were black (what was left of them) and my body was still smoking (steaming?). I wasn't really in any sort of pain, I just felt cold. I was in shock, but still quite lucid considering the situation. By the time I got to the hospital my adrenaline must have worn off, because I definitely began hurting all over quite a bit and I remember not being able to stop my legs from nervously shaking – and then the throbbing set in, a pulse that seemed to have no end. The nurse who interviewed me upon arrival asked me what happened and I told her that I was a performance artist and had an accident during a show. I explained that it was an unexpected result of a poorly practiced piece involving rubbing alcohol and fire. I have to admit, I was a little nervous that they might send me to the funny farm for further analysis, but luckily I was coherent enough to be believed and the nurse was open-minded enough to take my story at face value as the truth. Which it was… for the most part anyway. I left out a few minor details, but nothing that was going to inhibit my treatment in the emergency room, namely the shot of Demerol that was offered to me.
Meanwhile, back at the Met, Forcefield was on next and decided to pump the club full of carbon monoxide via a scooter and a very long hose hitched up to the exhaust pipe….slowly poisoning the crowd. Then the Dropdead boys leaked lighter fluid across the stage and onto the floor of the club before setting it ablaze. Finally Men's Recovery Project went on and did their thing as well, but unfortunately I can only recall what other people have told me of the rest of the show because I was at the hospital for most of it and was released only in time to get back to help with the equipment at the end of the night.
Note: this show and its display/use of extreme themes took place years before the somewhat recent tragic event concerning an infamous Rhode Island night-club and its irresponsible negligence for the death of a hundred music fans. A display of this sort would not likely ever happen again without serious fines and perhaps legal ramifications that no band would be interested in seeking out.
The aftermath: most of my face was somehow saved and only slightly burned, but my lips were burnt to a black crisp. They eventually fell off after a few days, revealing a fresh pair of pink ones underneath. My earlobes dripped a yellowish liquid/gel for about a week. My nose had a similar situation going on for about the same amount of time. My neck and chest were covered with very painful second-degree burns in some spots, healing time about three weeks. My hands were only slightly burned with a couple of spots having second degree lesions, healing time about two weeks. One of my armpits got the worst of it, maybe when I pulled the burning shirt off? There was a huge chunk of second-degree burns and a couple of third-degree burn holes as seen on the back cover of Landed's How Little Will it Take (photo taken after about a week of healing), healing time about a month. Fortunately all of my burns healed with minimal physical permanency, but I can't fully ascertain what the experience did to me psychologically. Those scars will last forever… just kidding! They've just been converted into tattoos.
Some people have asked me if I would ever consider doing it again. My answer: no, it's kind of something you only have to do once.
Joel: I remember when the backstage door opened. The audience could not see in the door, just the people on stage. Shawn had set up in the crowd and J and I were on the stage. It looked like a second sun had risen when that fucking door kicked open. J and I shot each other a look I will never forget, something like, "Our friend seems to be in serious trouble, but we both know he'd rather have us push on…" And so we did. The second Dan hit the mic, my arms came down on the drums and the whole place "lit" up. Some people made for the door right away, thinking something really awful and unexpected had happened. But for those who stayed…
Amazing. So, in moving forward with Vermiform, and putting out your debut album and 10″ EP… what was your thought process behind transitioning Landed from a live entity to a recorded one? Were you trying to capture the live show on tape, or do something completely different?
Dan: I handled some of our earliest studio recording efforts, and we basically set out to document what we would do live by recording the set a couple of times and picking out the one we liked best. We would then do minimal overdubbing if needed. We used a Yamaha 8-track so it was a very straightforward approach and it made the most sense economically. We would then take it to somewhere to be mixed and mastered.
We also recorded at Six Finger Satellite's studio, The Parlour for a few sessions. They had a much more traditional recording setup with a proper mixing board and separate tape machines. But even with access to that equipment, we usually went for the "live" vibe and tracked most of the material together in the same room, reacting off each other as if it was a live performance. It wasn't until much later (more recent Landed recordings) that we would sometimes create something completely in the studio and then "learn" to play it for a live show, mainly due to all of us living in different parts of the country, etc.
Joel: At first, the live energy seemed to be pretty important. Dan had a cassette 8-track that we recorded on, and Dan had this amazing King Tubby-style of live mixing that was pretty unique and gives the recordings he did a really singular, unique sound. But yes, at first I think that's what we were after. Then Shawn began to evolve as an engineer and all-around digital bad-ass, and the stuff started getting more refined in the recording. For me personally, the recording always followed the live shows in order of importance. Landed was one-night only, night after night. Andre Breton famously said "always for the first time". For me, that was Landed.
Shawn: Specifics on the releases would be a lot to get into, as almost every one was handled in a different way. Sometimes with the intention that it would become a record, and sometimes simply recorded to remember what we did that day in rehearsal. I remember that the Times I Despise 12″ was recorded entirely live to stereo DAT. Rick set up some mics to record the set after we got back from a tour. Our intention wasn't that the recording would become a record. We recorded that in 2001 and the 12″ was released in 2006. Then, we were simply documenting where we were at with the songs after touring. Recordings were often just for us. Of course, we wanted to put out records, but we never felt the need to make that a priority.
Those early recordings that Dan did on his 8-track underscored for me how difficult it is to capture the live set. The context of the live performance is simply gone. The volume, the physicality of the performance, the sight, smell, interactions with the audience, etc. What I've always liked about recordings was the possibility to get a new perspective on the live event, mostly from the positioning and selection of mics, but also in post, with mixing, processing, and editing. It was important that we always had mobile recording setups, so that wherever we rehearsed there was some device recording. Sometimes we had the foresight to use a multi-track and set up mics properly. Other times, it was simply a stereo mic, placed a little closer to the drums than the amps. The released recordings reflect that range.
Recording definitely became a form of "instant replay" during rehearsals. We used recordings to pick apart what we did, to understand the dynamics that emerged and figure out where we wanted to go. I remember listening to recordings of rehearsals between rehearsals again and again. Repeated listening was preparation. It helped to find new directions.
You mention touring – how much did Landed tour back in the '90s? As someone who never lived in Providence, I feel like Landed was so directly linked to that town and the Fort Thunder scene, that I'm wondering if audiences elsewhere were as receptive to your live performance. Was it a big difference, playing other cities?
Joel: Landed didn't properly "tour" all that much, considering the amount of time we were actively playing. We've played as far west as Texas, so half of the country had the chance at some point to see Landed. Most of them didn't. In keeping with the overall ethos of a band that can never die / have a permanent lineup / play a song consistently / do an encore, touring also wasn't something we managed to fully embrace. I can't totally say why even, other than that sort of planning, maybe, seemed too imposing. Our duty was to the music, and we really didn't give a shit about much else.
When we did tour, people in other cities either had no clue and no one showed up, or people showed up and were really psyched to see us. On our first tour (1997) we were "the new Vermiform band", so that helped get people out and provide a context for what we were doing. Pretty quickly we developed a reputation as a wild live show, so people came out for that as well, often with unrealistic expectations. Because our most active period was before everyone had a video and still camera in their pocket, the actual insanity wasn't preserved for everyone to witness on YouTube. What remains instead is legend, which has a certain power over the imagination that we definitely embraced and fed upon. People were expecting us to tear our heads off or spit blood sometimes, because they'd "heard" it had happened somewhere before. That energy and expectation on their part fed into the intensity and purpose with which we played and most often made for a memorable evening. I think that we were lucky that way, to be active pre-internet. Don't take me as some codger, but there really was something amazing to the way tales were twisted and exaggerated, and how those twists produced expectations that were sort of born on their own, the bastard children of what had really happened. And then that becomes the new reality that the band exists in. And that was sort of Landed's goal all along in some way. To produce situations that created their own temporary "rules", and then to operate inside that rule-set. And then to immediately break those rules.
Do you consider Landed to be a "Vermiform band"? Was there any camaraderie amongst the rest of the label's roster at that time?
Shawn: Neil Burke lived in Providence for years, and Sam McPheeters relocated Vermiform to Providence for a time. We did the Why I Live 10″ and Everything's Happening album with Vermiform. Load put out the Dairy 4 Dinner 7″ in between those Vermiform releases. Besides some comp tracks, those three releases were all of Landed's recorded output until 2006, when we started releasing things from the archives and recording some new material.
Though our recorded output wasn't a lot during our most active period as a live band (1997-2002), I think we did identify as a Vermiform band. Simultaneously, we were a Load Records band. Though in the big picture, we've always been a Providence band through and through.
With Vermiform, the camaraderie was mostly with Neil and Sam, and other Men's Recovery Project members and associates we met through them. Neil performed in Landed on a number of occasions (including "Dairy 4 Dinner"), and Joel and I did one recording session as the rhythm section for Men's Recovery Project, the outcome of which was the track "Sexual Pervert" released on the Grappling with the Homonids MRP/Sinking Body split LP.
Joel: I felt there totally was, at least with Sam and Neil. Neil Burke was a close friend of the band's, and often played with us. Shawn outlined that relationship already. Funny thing is it still now feels a bit family-style. Sam McPheeters lives in Claremont, CA, and I see him as often as anyone sees that crazy hermit. And the only employee Vermiform ever had – Anthony Berryman – is one of my closest friends here in LA, the singer from a past LA band of mine called Megafuckers.
I'd say Landed were pretty unique and somewhat influential – I can't think of any bands who sounded like Landed before Landed. Was there ever a point where you started noticing other bands who kind of adopted Landed's style, one way or another? How did that feel?
Shawn: In thinking about bands that were influential on Landed, I'm sure we could each list important artists, records, labels, or live experiences that were formative. But rather than that, I'd focus on the bands we were connected to in-person. I think these relationships were key to Landed's growth, what made us think about what we were doing. I think Men's Recovery Project was certainly an influence. There was this mixture of absurdist performance, rock music, and sometimes odd / sometimes standard instrumentation that made sense to us. Joel and I had gone to see MRP in Philadelphia well before Landed started and before we became friends with those guys. I remember Hose Got Cable played the same show (with John Skaritza from MRP and Rah Bras on drums). I managed to see MRP another time in San Francisco. Must have been 1996.
Another clear influence is Six Finger Satellite. Dan has known those guys forever. Joel and I had seen them play while we were students at RISD, but didn't become friends with them till 1997. Shortly after we did, Rick and J were doing stints in Landed, with Rick quickly becoming a core member. There was some crossover the other way too. Joel and I were in 6FS from 1999-2001, and Dan joined for the most recent lineup.
Another important influence is Dropdead. This town would be nowhere without those guys. Other Providence bands too, we played a lot of shows with Lightning Bolt and Arab on Radar. Just looking over the Load Records roster, there's a lot of clear connection points and intersections. A lot of short-lived bands that sparked other short-lived bands that have impacted what might be a Providence sound.
Personally, I don't have a good sense of Landed's influence on other bands. I think certain aspects of what we did were unique, but I'd locate that somewhere in our overall approach and attitude to making music. I think we rubbed off on other bands in Providence, like they rubbed off on us. I'll meet people from time to time, who know our records better than I do, which is cool. I'm glad there's people that really care, and I'd be absolutely honored if some newer bands were using Landed's approach as a model to build upon. If they do, I'd rather that they think more about our process and how that might lead them to new places rather than trying to emulate what's on our records or what happened in our performances.
Joel: Wow, I'd say unique, but I don't know about influential. We ran around in the pre-internet days, or at least we weren't participating in it when it came around, so we didn't hear much from other folks about our influence. I think that a band can become legendary in two ways. 1. You play forever and tour everywhere and everyone gets to see your thing. 2. You play a ton for a short time, in a small geographic region, to the same few people every time, and hardly anyone gets to see your thing… but then people hear the stories and the records after the fact. We were a #2 band. Sam still has a garage full of Everything's Happening records. I look at their dust-covered boxes every time I go over to his house.
You guys all seem pretty keen on wild performances, improvisation, general 'out-there' musical behavior… were there any particular moments with Landed that really shocked you? Any shows, or recording sessions, or random run-ins with a fan on the street that took you completely out of your comfort zone or freaked you out?
Joel: A million of them. One small example: we played a sports bar in New Bedford that was horrifying. Large screen TVs showing Friends when we were loading in. Patrons mumbling that it "looks like they have AIDS" (not kidding). We brought Dwyer's rooster in a box with us. As we played the locals moved in as though they were going to kill us, yelling threats at us. Dan is carrying the box around under his arm for the first ten minutes of the set while singing. Just when violence seemed imminent, we start really going crazy and Dan pulls the rooster out by its feet and raises it above his head at full arms-length, it's body puffed up and wings flapping and feathers everywhere and us still ripping. The crowd shut the fuck up after that. There are many many stories like this. It could be an entire other article. It's almost too much work to even begin thinking about these moments.
More details of personal shock and awe:
– Headlining the No Fun Fest in Brooklyn, watching Dan get sucked horizontally, about three feet above the floor, feet-first into a jam-packed basement crowd of the – what was that club's name? It was sincerely out of a horror movie, some zombie-apocalypse kind of shit. That's the only time I've ever seen real fear in Dan's eyes, truly. My kit was being torn apart by the surging crowd, I didn't know how long it could last, I had busted my finger at the beginning of the set, and then the look in Dan's eyes… The crowd closed around him like quicksand, around his shoulders and head and then outstretched arm and hand and fingers and then he was just gone. If they'd told me he was dead I wouldn't have been shocked.
– Taking the stage at Sudsy Malone's in Cincinnati to the bartender and his two friends, on tour with Arab On Radar. We decided to have two of those guys play with us that night. I got off the drums and grabbed a guitar. Eric (AOR singer) was playing my kit, Craig (AOR drummer) was playing something else, Shawn and Dwyer out front. We start playing. Dan's not around but that wasn't uncommon – we'd often start without him, either by design or circumstance. After a minute or two I hear his primate growl come over the PA, and I sense his presence behind me. He's close enough now that I also hear him just straight yelling, along with the PA. Without turning I begin to lean sideways and into Dan, not an uncommon move when I'm playing the guitar. He stinks. Also not uncommon. After about ten seconds I turn to face him, and it's this crazy homeless guy from out in front of the club who we had met earlier. He had told us he was BB King's cousin. Dan had brought him in and gave him the mic and set him loose. I looked through the club into the laundromat that was located at the back of the club, and Dan's standing there behind a washer with his arms crossed laughing his ass off. There were more people there doing their laundry then had come to see us. The Assistant District Attorney of Cincinnati was there doing her laundry. After the show she took both bands out drinking in this fancy part of town, and then back to her condo to stay the night. I think there were nine of us.
– First tour, Pittsburgh, some second-story joint… a cafe? During the set Dan takes an intentional tumble down the flight of stairs we had hauled our gear up. This was an obscenely long flight of stairs. Dan ends up on the street, mic in hand but with no cord – keeps singing. He eventually finds his way back inside and up to the club just as Shawn and I close out the set. Afterwards, two high-school girls, who had just finished talking to Dan, ask Shawn and I, in all seriousness, what country Dan is from. We tell them Rhode Island.
– Baltimore – Store front, all ages show – first note of the set, Dwyer knocks a kid out cold with the head of his guitar.
Shawn: It's almost hard to think of a Landed show where I wasn't surprised by what unfolded! Partly this is attributable to whatever we had "set up" collectively (the known) and what the repercussions would be (the unknown). For the other part, this was due to what individuals or factions within the band planned ahead in semi-secrecy; here I'm thinking mostly of antics. The "Dairy 4 Dinner" set sticks out in my mind. We played at the Living Room and set up in a side-room bar which had tile floors. Dan carted in and dumped what seemed like 1,000 gallons of ice cream which quickly turned the entire room into a giant, sticky slip-n-slide. People flailed around on the dairy-soaked floor. One of the things I remember most about that night is that Randy, the owner of the Living Room, hung out with us way past closing, pouring us shots after we mopped up our mess. Rewardable behavior.
Other highlights involved firecrackers-in-pants, hidden seaweed, poultry assists, various props like scythes, full duct-tape body coverage, quasi-hallucinations, questionable costume choices, ill-fitting lingerie, pants-free percussion, welts, bruises, blood, mustache trimming, phenomenal crowd maneuvering, and stampede-like situations. I could go on. The "I Can't Get Hurt" set also stands out. A week or so after the show where Dan had set himself on fire, we were back for another performance. Dan didn't miss a step, no shirt, covered in his burns, belting it out. I feel like the fire show was a question, and that show was the answer.
Why did you go with the standard rock-group structure of bass/drums/guitar/vocals for Landed? From the way you describe the group's general thought process and aesthetic choices, it sounds like Landed could have just as easily existed as synths and saxophones, or four guys on drums, or any sort of musical configuration. Was it important that the group was presented as a 'normal' rock group?
Joel: Landed often was synths and saxophones! We mixed that up quite a bit. But I think to a degree it was important to have the band have a consistent nod towards a traditional instrument set. Doing what we do with traditional instruments seems more radical and less obvious than slamming on a table of pedals (though we have had our share of pedal slamming!). The ability to make "new" sounds coming together with these traditional instruments felt amazing, like we were defiling these things that were meant to be treated in a particular way. I think that's a big part of the Landed ethos – defilement. As much as we were celebrating this new way of being, we were very conscious to be sure that we were violating something, sullying its reputation, leaving it beaten down and exposed. To revel in something made while simultaneously exposing its making.
Shawn: There's been lots of times when it hasn't been a bass/drums/guitar/vocals set-up. In the mix we've had double drums, multiple synths, multiple vocalists, tapes, saxophone, harmonica, slide guitars, mixers + effects, and more. I think the largest line-up was the "Dirty Bomb" set where we expanded to seven members on stage; the smallest is probably the three piece (Dan, Joel, and I) doing vocals, drums, bass. For a good hunk of the 4-piece stuff, it was double guitars with one on the low end. The rotating membership has contributed to reconfigured instrumentation. There was an era when it was Rick, Joel, and I (drums and double guitars). Joel and I sang in that line-up without microphones. We could yell loud back then. A tour when it was Dan, Brian Gibson, and I (vocals, drums, bass). That tour was done with no rehearsals beforehand, just got in the Bronco with the gear. Totally improvised, one night building on the next. A classic line-up was a 5-piece. Joel and John Dwyer on guitars. Rick on drums, me on bass, Dan singing. Dwyer and Dan were always unplugging each other, not always by accident. Some of the more recent recordings feature the non-standard rock-arrangements. "Blow Your Burger," for instance, is all synth, drums, and vocals (zero guitars). I think it's important that we've oscillated between what's considered a standard rock arrangement and what's not.
Will there be any more Landed records?
Joel: Absolutely. Sands of Darkness. 2014. Get ready.


text:
- Liability disclaimer - - Privacy policy - - Cookies policy - © Copyright Powerwatch 2024
[Blog Index]
Peer Review and quality of science
The other evening I was talking to a Council about mobile phone masts and health and there was a senior scientific representative of the HPA also talking. He kept banging on about only accepting the results of proper peer-reviewed science published in good quality scientific journals. His organisation has recently had a version of their microcell and picocell base station investigation published in a reasonable quality scientific journal. (Journal of Radiological Protection, 26 (2006) 199-211). Even though this does admit that low-height, low power, base station do often expose the public to higher levels of microwave radiation than larger macrocell masts, they did not actually assess the more powerful low-height base stations that are located around Britain. This was with the connivance of the UK MTHR committee who funded the study:... "In compiling the cohort, it was noted that there were some 2000 of the 32,837 base stations, or around 6%, radiating more than 5 W at heights up to 10 m. In consultation with the MTHR project monitors, it was considered whether these transmitters should have been included in the cohort. It was decided that they should not and that this project should concentrate on the low power sites in order to stay true to its original aim of considering microcells as low height / low power transmitters."Earlier, the NRPB had published a report R321 on public microwave exposure from base stations where they state (page 10) that: "microcellular antennas are expected to radiate no more than a few watts."Apparently the high-power low-height base stations that they identified did not comply with this as they radiated far too much power, and so they chose to ignore them.Is this meant to be good scientific method, as used by the HPA and suggested by the UK MTHR? To ignore what is inconvenient (as it would raise real questions about public safety) and which does not match their original ideas about microcells?They did not even suggest and/or carry out a Part 2 survey that just looked at these previously identified but ignored most highly radiating transmitters. That would have been scientifically and ethically appropriate. Instead, they just ignored them. I think this is near to being criminal negligence. The HPA is there to help guide the levels of protection given by Government to members of the general public, and their staff (Tim Cooper, Simon Mann and colleagues) identified a problem, tried to cover it up using the MTHR opinion as an excuse, and did not even investigate how bad the problem was. This is even after they had admitted that the low-power microcells expose the public to higher levels of microwave phone-mast signals than the larger macrocell masts. They only considered base station radiating up to 5 watts, but admitted in Figure 2 in their fuller report, published in September 2004 as NRPB W-62 (freely downloadable from the HPA website), that some have radiated powers of over 100 watts - i.e. over 20 times more powerful. Yet two years on, a shorter version of the W-62 report is published in a peer reviewed journal. Two years when they could have much more usefully (from the general public's radiation protection point of view) have carried out and published a report showing what the highest of the low-height base station are exposing the public to.The MTHR are even more guilty than the HPA staff of covering up this problem. It is a great shame that the MTHR committee, under Professor Lawrie Challis, does not include good quality lay members as the original IEGMP under Sir William Stewart did. Instead, it is made up of senior members of the scientific community - the very people who often peer review papers for the better scientific journals. Yet these scientists choose not to fund further work into the higher-power low-height base stations. And we are expected to trust them and their half-truths.I first reported on their W62 report in February 2005:http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050207_tonight.aspThe cellular phone industry should not install these high powers on such low height base-stations. The HPA-RPD should be saying that loudly and clearly. Instead, not only is it silent but it is choosing to allow its staff to publish science that is highly misleading.Another example that was mentioned was the large "Interphone" mobile phone study. This is a multi-country and multi-agency study and various papers have so far been published "finding no evidence of an increase in cancer from up to 10 years of mobile phone use". However, they include very low use in their "user" group and completely ignore (in the official Interphone protocol) any cordless phone use - and DECT cordless phones and their base units often expose users to higher fields that they receive from a mobile phone in towns and cities near a base station (because DECT handsets do not have adaptive power control). The form of radiation (frequency and characteristics) is very similar to that from a mobile phone. Yet they ignore this large group of people who must seriously confound their analyses. Not part of the Interphone Group, Hardell and colleages have published a number of papers showing that over 5 years of cordless phone use does increase the chance of developing brain cancer. Yet the HPA spokesman told us that the Interphone study is offering the best proof that mobile phones cannot harm us. I see it as significantly flawed. Some of the Interphone papers have been published in the BMJ and these and other problems can be read about in the correspondence. The BMJ should be be praised for its letters and 'fast responses' web publishing which provides good public scientific debate on these contentious points. Yet, doubtless, the rest of the Interphone studies will be held up by industry and people like the HPA and WHO as "gospel".Other MTHR projects use the flawed MTHR handset design as regards testing people for electrical sensitivity. In "sham" (= "no exposure") mode it actually works at full microwave transmission power and dumps this power into an internal dummy load rather than sending it to the antenna. So although it does give off about 1000 times less than when transmitting at full power, the remaining levels are still well above the levels at which ES people react. The MTHR committee can't seem to get it out of their minds that non-thermal effects are just that - non-thermal. 1000 times less is no good if it is still above the claimed sensitivity threshold - which it certainly is - and this is also documented on the BMJ fast responses site.(http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/bmj.38765.519850.55v1)All in all, the MTHR does not seem to be intent on getting a better understanding of these matters.In the New Scientist magazine, 04 January 1992, p39, we can read an interesting early example of bad peer review. I extract some of it below.Among the papers of the UK Medical Research Council is a grant application submitted by the then Regius Professor of Anatomy at the London College of Physicians, one Guilielmus Harveius. The evaluation the MRC's external referee is given below; according to MRC rules, his name is withheld.Title of proposed researchAnatomical exercises concerning the motion of the heart and blood.ApplicantGuilielmus Harveius, BA (Cantab 1597), MD (Padua 1602).Summary of proposed researchThe applicant intends to perform a series of experiments on animals to provide evidence for, and to confirm, some of the postulates concerning the flow of blood and the function of the heart which he has publicised in his position as Lumleian Lecturer at the Royal College of Physicians since 1615, namely that, (1), the volume of blood which passes from the veins to the arteries per unit time is too great to be produced from the food consumed, (2), the volume of blood going into the extremities is far in excess of their actual metabolic needs, and (3), arterial blood returns to the heart from the extremities through the veins.Dr Harvey will measure the volume of blood he claims is ejected by the heart, per beat and per time. He also plans to study the emptying and subsequent refilling of superficial blood vessels in the forearm and he hopes that he will find a pattern such as to support his notion of the circulation as a hydraulic system.Experience and qualifications of applicantDr H. is a distinguished anatomist, has been appointed the King's Physician in Ordinary and practises general medicine at St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. However, he has not received any formal training in physiology and he is not known as an astute experimentalist.Critical evaluation of proposed researchThe applicant's theory re the existence of a contiguous circulatory system challenges the view, held by all physicians since Galen, that venous blood is alimentary, produced in the liver from food absorbed in the intestines, and endowed with the spirit of vitality through a connection with the arterial system provided by pores in the walls which separate the heart's three ventricles. He claims never to have observed pores or holes in the heart, a statement that is contradicted directly by my own vast professional experience: I find a direct connection between one of the arteries and the principal vein right above the heart in the majority of autopsy cases available for study.By contrast, I have never seen any evidence for the existence of blood vessels providing a link between arteries and veins in the periphery of the body, as is stipulated by the scheme of Dr H.Final assessmentThe opinions expressed in the application are highly speculative. Critical to the applicant's theory is a presumed connection between the arterial and venous sides in the periphery of the putative circulation. Given the facts that the applicant has not had any postdoctoral training, has practically no research experience and has no publications by which to judge his research competency.I therefore give the application as submitted a rating of 3 on a scale of 1 (low) to 10 (high score) and I recommend that funding be denied.Date: 16 March 1618; Signature: ......(not published)William Harvey (April 1, 1578-June 3, 1657) is credited with first correctly describing, in exact detail, the properties of blood being pumped around the body by the heart. Harvey announced his discovery of the circulatory system in 1616 and in 1628 published his work Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus (An Anatomical Exercise on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals), where, based on scientific methodology, he argued for the idea that blood was pumped around the body by the heart before returning to the heart and being recirculated in a closed system.Sadly, I see little evidence that the state of Peer Review has improved much since 1618. In some ways it is worse, because there are now such vast numbers of scientific papers published each year that no one can keep up with reading or remembering them and powerful vested interests help spread scientific urban myths of safety. It is often almost impossible to tell which papers are soundly based on reality / real world conditions and which are just research exercises to add papers to researchers' publication lists to help with their career advancement. I am not saying that the researchers are deliberately being misleading - often the advice they are given in how to do / what to measure / etc., by the so-called experts in any particular field is just plain wrong. I have seen many examples of this.Instead of being a critical examination of the authors' submitted research, Peer Review is all too often a hurried quick-look-through of work by over-busy scientists of work done by friends and/or colleagues of friends that then proceeds to publication with minimal, or no, challenges and changes.I leave you with something Sir Richard Doll once wrote, tongue in cheek, in the NRPB's Journal of Radiological Protection. It went along the lines: "When you are young, you read everybody's (scientific) papers; when you get established, you read your own and your peer's papers; when you get old, you don't even bother to read your own."Enough said.Alasdair
Posted at: 07/08/2006 16:02:17 :: 0 Comments
There are currently no comments for this blog entry.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Loris Karius 7
Well protected by his defence, especially at set-pieces. Handled crosses calmly, made a couple of routine saves and distribution was solid.
Trent Alexander-Arnold 7
Given a few early tests by the pace of Brahimi but soon won that arm-wrestle. With Porto offering so little forward threat, was able to crack on upfield for much of the second half.
Virgil van Dijk 8
A few nervy moments in the first 15 minutes, especially when bailed out by Lovren's block, but soon grew into the game highlighted but some good long-range passing. One vital touch prevented a Porto goal before the break.
Dejan Lovren 8
Barely a foot wrong from the Croatian, justifying his selection ahead of Matip. His interception of Jose Sa's throw sparked Liverpool's opener, and has staked his claim to be Van Dijk's regular partner.
Andy Robertson 8
More defence-minded than usual during the early stages, but like Alexander-Arnold was soon able to threaten at the other end with some wicked crosses. Incredible to think this was his Champions League debut.
Jordan Henderson 7
Kept things simple by setting the tempo in the opening 20 minutes, where his defensive work prevented an early Porto tide amounting to more than a mild ripple.
James Milner 8
An evening made for the Englishman, helping the visitors seize control and superb with the run that ended with the shot that prompted Liverpool's second. Later assisted the fourth. Great work.
Gini Wijnaldum 8
On the periphery early on but his persistence created the first goal and jolted him into life, the Dutchman then part of a Liverpool midfield that completely bossed proceedings.
Mohamed Salah 9
Made the wrong choice when presented with one early opportunity but didn't make the same mistake when offered another. So calm and composed, that's 30 for the season now. Worked incredibly hard, and Porto simply had absolutely no answer to his brilliance.
Roberto Firmino 8
Even during a quiet game compared to his strike partners, barely wasted a pass, hounding the Porto defence to distraction, produced another tasty backheel in the build-up to the third and scored the fourth.
Sadio Mane 9
A little wayward in the early stages but his opener underlined he's a player who makes things happen. His second ended a devastating breakaway and his hat-trick goal was all his own work. Welcome back, Sadio.
Joel Matip (for Henderson 75) 7
Brought on to shore up an under-pressure back line, said nobody ever.
Joe Gomez (for Alexander-Arnold 79)
A run-out to prove his fitness.
Danny Ings (for Firmino 80)


text:
As part of our response to the evolving COVID-19 situation, this website has been created to provide students, staff, agents, and homestay families with the most up-to-date information about COVID-19, including tips for staying healthy, information for travelers, and other useful resources.
Heartland is continuing to follow the advice of the Public Health Agency of Canada, the World Health Organization, Manitoba Health, and Ontario Health.
Heartland is also closely following updates from industry associations such as Languages Canada, and the International Association of Language Centres (IALC).
September 30, 2023
📢 Announcement from The Government of Canada 📢
As of October 1, all travellers, regardless of citizenship, will NO longer have to:
❌ Submit public health information through the – – ArriveCAN app or website;
❌ Provide proof of vaccination;
❌ Undergo pre- or on-arrival testing;
❌ Carry out COVID-19-related quarantine or isolation;
❌ Monitor and report if they develop signs or symptoms of COVID-19 upon arriving to Canada;
❌ Undergo health checks for travel on air and rail;
❌ Or wear masks on planes and trains.
📲 For more information, please visit the Government of Canada's website: https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid
📚 For information about Heartland English classes, please visit: www.heartlandenglish.com/
March 23, 2022 (Mississauga)
As of March 23, 2022, the City of Mississauga has done the following:
Businesses and organizations have the authority to continue to keep their own policies and requirements in place. Students are encouraged to be mindful and respectful of remaining public health measures and individual policies at restaurants, bars, retailers and other settings.
January 13, 2022 (updated)
In the effort to keep our current and future students updated with COVID 19 information such as cleaning protocols, contact tracing, masks, social
distancing, and vaccination requirements, a new guide called Heartland Winnipeg – COVID-19 and Vaccination Information for students is now available online and applies to Winnipeg students only.
Click on the link below to access the new guide:
Heartland Winnipeg – COVID-19 & Vaccination Information For Students – Jan 2022
September 7, 2021
– COVID-19 POLICY UPDATE – At Heartland, we strive to create a safe working and learning environment and we continue to adjust our policies to align with these goals and to meet with governmental requirements. COVID-19 vaccines are now readily available in Canada, and therefore, new safety protocols are being recommended federally and provincially which may affect our two Heartland locations differently. Our school in Winnipeg, Manitoba and our school in Mississauga, Ontario may, at times, have separate requirements for in-person class attendance. From Tuesday September 7th Heartland Mississauga will be implementing our COVID-19 Mandatory Vaccine Policy. The policy will require all students, staff, and contractors to be fully vaccinated in order to access our campus. Those who are not fully vaccinated will be provided with information on vaccines and required to participate in routine, rapid COVID-19 antigen or PCR testing. Details about implementation will be available in the coming weeks.
Please read more about our Heartland Mississauga COVID-19 Mandatory Vaccine Policy
July 19, 2021
July 15, 2021
(On this request form under the "Reason for Request", students must check the box indicating that they want a paper copy of the immunization record mailed to their home address.)
NOTE: Using this online form, students can also add information about vaccines they received outside of Manitoba
June 21, 2021
You may qualify for certain exemptions to quarantine and testing requirements if you:
Those who meet the requirements may be exempt from:
Travel restrictions on who can enter Canada remain in place.
Foreign nationals (including U.S. citizens) coming to Canada for non-essential reasons will be turned away at the border.
Find out if you can enter Canada
June 9, 2021
June 8, 2021
May 11, 2021
April 22, 2021
April 14, 2021
April 1, 2021
February 19, 2021
February 16, 2021
For travellers arriving to Canada by air
February 3, 2021
Government of Canada introduces further restrictions on international travel
January 29, 2021
Government of Canada introduces further restrictions on international travel
January 12, 2021
January 4, 2021
December 11, 2020
November 28, 2020
November 23, 2020
November 10, 2020
November 4, 2020
October 30, 2020
October 21, 2020
October 8, 2020
September 28, 2020
Previous provisions in place for all other sectors in this region remain in place. Further direction or additional restrictions may put in place by public health at any time.
September 25, 2020
Heartland International English School in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada is ready to welcome international students back for in-person classes. International students and their co-arriving family members traveling to Canada and Manitoba must follow government regulations for the COVID-19 pandemic to keep travellers and communities safe. We have developed a COVID-19 Guidelines document which outlines what international students and co-arriving family members must do while traveling and upon arrival in Manitoba to meet these requirements. Heartland International English School is committed to operating in a way that prioritizes the health and safety of students, staff, host families, and communities. We have based the guidelines on local, provincial and federal standards and recommendations. The Manitoba government provided Canada's Guidance for post-secondary institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic
August 28, 2020
These measures are available to eligible students who hold a valid study permit, have been approved for a study permit, and those who have submitted a study permit application prior to commencing a program of study in the spring, summer or fall 2020 semester, or the January 2021 semester. All student must eventually be approved for a study permit.
IRCC will issue further guidance on our website to assure students that they won't be disadvantaged for a situation beyond their control and they won't be penalized if they study online for the upcoming school year. IRCC will also continue to work with public health authorities to closely monitor COVID-19 and the impacts on international students and our operations.
For more information:
Please consult the public release which will provide further background on the facilitation measures:
The most recent updates on changes affecting international students can be found here:
August 20, 2020
August 4, 2020
July 23, 2020
July 14, 2020
June 30, 2020
June 29, 2020
June 22, 2020
June 1, 2020
May 25, 2020
Discuss your plans with your family, friends and neighbours, and set up a system to check in on each other by phone, email or text during times of need.
Please see the Government of Canada website for suggestions on how to prepare.
May 20, 2020
May 15, 2020
May 11, 2020
Coronavirus (COVID-19): financial assistance for newcomers, temporary residents and refugees
Canada is helping people who face financial hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic. If you live in Canada, even temporarily, there may be support for you. Some of the information on this page is available in multiple languages.
May 8, 2020
May 1, 2020
April 30, 2020
If results during or at the end of phase one or any future phases are not favourable, the province will not proceed with further easing of secondary public health measures and may reintroduce others. If disease activity remains low, we will give serious consideration in mid-May to reducing the restrictions on group size.
April 29, 2020
April 23, 2020
April 20, 2020
April 14, 2020
April 13, 2020
April 8, 2020
April 6, 2020
April 5, 2020
March 31, 2020
March 30, 2020
March 27, 2020
March 24, 2020
March 20, 2020
March 19, 2020
March 18, 2020
March 17, 2020
March 16, 2020 – Heartland Winnipeg:
March 12, 2020
March 9, 2020
March 6, 2020


text:
McGeevers Menswear
Welcome to McGeever Menswear
McGeever Menswear is located in Ashbourne, Co.Meath, and has been the leading gentleman's outfitters in the town since they opened their doors in 2006.
From casual wear to suit fitting we have it all to get you looking dapper in quality mens clothing that's fashionable and worth every cent. We stock all the major brands for quality mens clothing and footwear including Mayer, Bugatti, Tricot Marine, Carl Gross, Jacque Britt and Baumler to name but a few.
McGeever Menswear also carry a splendid selection of accessories from cuff links to bow ties and everything in between. Gift cards are available for those looking for the perfect present for a man who enjoys the finer things in life.
Business categories:
Clothing and Fashion, Menswear
Contact name:
Brendan McGeever
085 7333910
Murtagh's Yard,, Ashbourne, Co. Meath, Ireland, Ireland


text:
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333] : superdoc . print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
tachyon wrote: CGI::Simple uses SelfLoader to avoid compiling methods that are rarely used. You do this by placing these methods below a __DATA__ token. At compile time compilation stops at the __DATA__ token. I didn't notice this part at first. mod_perl scripts cannot contain __DATA__ tokens. Do you have a solution for this? I suppose you can make a separate mod_perl implmentation without the __DATA__ token. Since the performance issue you're resolving is load time, this really doesn't apply in this instance. However, then you have CGI::Simple, CGI::Simple::Standard, and CGI::Simple::mod_perl. I don't see a problem with that if you really need those namespaces to address these issues, but I wonder if others would object. Cheers, Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats. In reply to (Ovid) Re(3): CGI::Simple vs CGI.pm - Is twice as fast good enough?
by Ovid
Log In?
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (4)
As of 2024-02-29 01:57 GMT
Find Nodes?
Voting Booth?
My favourite way to spend a leap day ...
Results (26 votes). Check out past polls. |


text:
Our 3-room superior apartment is 53 square meters and offers space for up to 7 people to sleep, live and cook.
The superior apartments have 2 separate bedrooms with single beds, double bunk beds and a workstation per room.
The large seating area in the living room is furnished with one or two comfortable couches, which can also be used as a sofa bed.
• 1. Separate bedroom with 2x single beds 90 x 200 cm (single or double bed)
• 2nd separate bedroom with 1x bunk bed 90 x 200 cm and a single bed 90 x 200 cm or 2x bunk beds 90 x 200 cm
• Separate living area with 2x sofa bed 80 x 200 cm or 1x sofa bed with bed box 80 x 200 cm
• 2 bathrooms with shower, toilet, towel radiator or 1 bathroom with shower, toilet, towel radiator and additional toilet
• Cosmetic tissues, soap dispensers, toothbrush cups, hair dryer, toilet paper
• Bed linen & 2x towels per person
• 2x wardrobe, cloakroom and mirror
• 2x work table with seating
• Dining table with seating
• Fully equipped kitchen
• Dishwasher, coffee maker, toaster, microwave, kettle
• 3x flat screen TV
• Free WiFi
• Keyless access to the apartment by card
• Weekly cleaning
21 qm up to 2 people
66 qm up to 8 people
Each apartment can be reached through the outside area, no maze through dark corridors.
Special highlights are the fully equipped kitchen, especially popular with families and long-term renters. Furthermore, our guests will find Smart TV in every living and sleeping area.
You will find our parking lot directly in front of the entrance area. You can book this together with your apartment and receive the parking ticket at check-in.
We look forward to your visit at the TRIO Apartment Hotel!


text:
222 Harbour DR Unit 109, Naples
Commodore Club Homes for Sale
Commodore Club is one of the largest bay front communities in Moorings Naples with 82 condos amongst the 2 mid-rise buildings. Built in 1969 by Buckel Corporation. Building 1 is great for the boat owners and offers its residents boat slips while Building II has boat slips for rent to its homeowners. Commodore Club offers many amenities to its residents such as two pools, barbeque and picnic area, library and much more.
Commodore Club condos range from 1495 to 1979 in square feet of living space all with spectacular views of the bay. All units come with one covered parking space.
For more information about Commodore Club, or to find out what your Commodore Club home may be worth, contact Mindy today at (239) 784-4868.
Our website features the best Commodore Club real estate search for homes, condos, land and foreclosure properties available. It is the only site you will ever need! It is easy-to-use and updated by the official REALTOR®'s database every 15 minutes.
You can save searches, and get daily email alerts of new listings, price changes, sold data, and market reports. Our Interactive Map Search allows you to view properties on a map or refine your search by drawing the boundaries around the area you desire.
Curious about what's happening in the Commodore Club real estate market? Sign up for a Commodore Club Real Estate Market Report to see what's active, under contract, and sold!
today to find out how we can be of assistance to you!


text:
We expect daycare owners to hire the correct and qualified caregivers that will be working with the children. This will be essential toward the success of their business. A daycare owner can't hire a person who does not have the patience for young children. This, unfortunately, was the case at StarBright Learning Center.
What Happened At This Houston Daycare?
StarBright Learning Center, located in Houston, Texas, did not follow through with proper procedures for hiring, leading them to hire an unqualified daycare worker who abused a child while under their care. This lead to this employee using violence on a young child. Children are extremely delicate and must be handled with care, as well as patience. At times it is hard to care for three children at a time, and most times, teachers are asked to look after twenty. Children can be extremely active and full of energy, and patience from the staff should be a requirement. Focus and awareness are also things that should be required because that is what it takes when dealing with these little ones. No one ever said that this was an easy task, but this is something that the staff signed up for. Everyone must be held accountable for their actions. Starting with those at the top.
A mother went to go pick up her child from daycare, and on their way out of the building, she noticed that the child was visibly shaken and wouldn't stop holding his left cheek. When she got him inside the car and asked him questions, the child then moved his hand from his cheek, and to her surprise, there was a handprint across his cheek. The mother described the injury as "a giant hand-print plain as daylight across his face."
The mother immediately went into the daycare facility and confronted the daycare's director and her child's teacher. The child's teacher openly admitted she had hit her son's face. The teacher was then arrested and charged with a felony. These things happen quite often, and some children are afraid to speak up and continue to be mistreated by the hands that are supposed to protect them. It is extremely painful even to have to visualize these things happening and also to know that the truth of the matter is that it is happening all across the world on a daily basis.
"I want to make sure she's never allowed to be around children again. Who's to say she hasn't done this before, and if it hadn't been reported, she would still be hurting kids," said the mother, and she is absolutely correct. This is why it's important to report any injury that your child has suffered at the hands of these daycare programs, no matter how big or small you may think it to be. If a caregiver is willing to put their hands on a child, there is no telling what other things he or she would do to other children. They know that is unacceptable and is completely against the law, but they make the choice to do it anyway. This type of behavior is reckless and shows signs that the daycare as a unit is not a safe place for children to be. The hiring process is clearly not up to standards, and you can bet that there is a number of violations being committed at the facility.
If you want to learn more about the first step to take after a daycare injury, follow this link on how to make an incident report in your state.
Daycares often get swamped with kids, so they get desperate and hire anyone who comes through the doors asking for a job. We have a guide on how to select a daycare and what qualifications we believe a caregiver should have. Knowing the things to look for when choosing the right daycare facility can greatly reduce the chances of your child experiencing neglect or preventable injuries.
What Can The Button Law Firm Do to Help?
If your child has been a victim of daycare abuse, please give us a call at (214) 699-4409. Our daycare negligence team is ready to handle all your needs and answer any questions you may have. When your child is hurt, the last thing you want to do is deal with is some of the complexities of a lawsuit. Let us guide you through that process so you can focus on your child's well-being and your family.


text:
You wanna schplain that one to us, Mitt?
Mitt Romney made an astonishing promise today: he told a crowd of coal miners that he will have the USA energy independent from sources outside North America by 2021.
It's particularly astonishing given that he is against subsidizing renewable energy sources.
So, how is he going to get us off foreign energy sources? That's a fine question and one that Romney hasn't really answered.
This, of course, surprises exactly nobody.
His website says this:
As president, Mitt Romney will make every effort to safeguard the environment, but he will be mindful at every step of also protecting the jobs of American workers. This will require putting conservative principles into action.Significant Regulatory Reform
The first step will be a rational and streamlined approach to regulation, which would facilitate rapid progress in the development of our domestic reserves of oil and natural gas and allow for further investment in nuclear power.Increasing Production
The United States is blessed with a cornucopia of carbon-based energy resources. Developing them has been a pathway to prosperity for the nation in the past and offers similar promise for the future.Research and Development
Government has a role to play in innovation in the energy industry. History shows that the United States has moved forward in astonishing ways thanks to national investment in basic research and advanced technology. However, we should not be in the business of steering investment toward particular politically favored approaches. That is a recipe for both time and money wasted on projects that do not bring us dividends. The failure of windmills and solar plants to become economically viable or make a significant contribution to our energy supply is a prime example.
So, Romney's going to magically get us off non-domestic energy sources by starving renewable energy of the needed early investments to let it get off the ground, continuing to subsidize environmentally harmful carbon-based fossil fuels (choosing winners despite the fact he says we shouldn't) and, strangely, by conceding that "government has a role to play." That last bit is pretty astonishing in and of itself, considering his "government IS the problem" platitudes throughout the campaign.
He also likes protecting the environment and stuff but, you know, not if it gets in the way of making money.
It's worth noting that his hatred of American-sourced renewable energy is a new Mitt Flop. There was a time when he loved him some renewable energy investments:
As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney created a fund to invest in green energy, said alternative energy could generate jobs and approved bills allowing cities to build fields of solar panels."Now is the time to refocus its assets in such a manner that it can become a major economic springboard for the commonwealth by focusing on job creation in the renewable energy sector," Romney said in 2003 of the state's energy trust fund that year.
Eight years later, it appears Romney, as he seeks the Republican nomination for president, has had a change of heart.
In his new economic plan released Tuesday, Romney called spending on green jobs a waste of money and an "unhealthy" obsession by President Obama to reshape the nation's energy markets.
Meanwhile, today the Department of Justice released a report (pdf) that shows just how far our country has come in the area of renewable energy production. From the DOE press release regarding the report:
The Energy Department released a new report today highlighting strong growth in the U.S. wind energy market in 2011, increasing the U.S. share of clean energy and supporting tens of thousands of jobs, and underscoring the importance of continued policy support and clean energy tax credits to ensure that the manufacturing and jobs associated with this booming global industry remain in America. According to the 2011 Wind Technologies Market Report, the United States remained one of the world's largest and fastest growing wind markets in 2011, with wind power representing a remarkable 32 percent of all new electric capacity additions in the United States last year and accounting for $14 billion in new investment. According the report, the percentage of wind equipment made in America also increased dramatically. Nearly seventy percent of the equipment installed at U.S. wind farms last year – including wind turbines and components like towers, blades, gears, and generators – is now from domestic manufacturers, doubling from 35 percent in 2005. President Obama has made clear that clean, renewable wind energy is a critical part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy that aims to develop more secure, domestic energy sources, while strengthening American manufacturing.
This refutes a claim by Republicans that most of our renewable energy investments are benefiting overseas companies. Have a look at this remarkable chart. It shows just how widespread wind energy equipment manufacturing has become in the USA:
Click for a larger version . [Source]
President Obama talked about renewable energy production during a stop in Iowa today:
We're at a moment right now when homegrown energy, like wind energy, is creating new jobs all across Iowa and all across the country. And guess what, Governor Romney said let's end the tax credits for wind energy production. Let's get rid of them.He said that new sources of energy like wind are "imaginary". His running mate calls them a "fad." During a speech a few months ago, Governor Romney even explained his energy policy this way — I'm quoting here — "You can't drive a car with a windmill on it." That's what he said about wind power. "You can't drive a car with a windmill on it." Now, I don't know if he has actually tried that. I know he has had other things on his car.
But if he wants to learn something about wind, all he has got to do is pay attention to what you've been doing here in Iowa. If he saw what you've been doing, he'd see that there are places like Newton, where a few years ago the Maytag plant closed down, jobs dried up. Folks are now back to work manufacturing these enormous new towers and blades for some of the most sophisticated, high-tech wind turbines on the planet. The wind industry now supports 7,000 jobs here in Iowa — 75,000 jobs across the country. These jobs aren't a "fad". These are good jobs, and they're a source of pride that we need to fight for.
And if Governor Romney understood what you've been doing, he'd know that we used to have to import most of the parts were used for wind turbines — they're now being made here in America, by American workers in American factories. That's not "imaginary" — that's real. That's part of what we're fighting for in this election.
If he knew what you've been doing, he'd know that 20 percent of Iowa's electricity now comes from wind, powering our homes and our factories and our businesses in a way that is clean and renewable. In fact, over the past 4 years, we've doubled the amount of electricity America generates for wind. Across America, we've built the equivalent of 12 new Hoover Dams' worth of wind energy. Think about that. Think about that.
So Governor Romney may have figured out that you can't drive a car with a windmill on it, but he doesn't seem to know that America now has enough wind turbines installed to generate enough electricity from wind to power nearly 13 million homes with clean energy. That's how we leave something better for the next generation. That's worth fighting for. That's what's at stake right now.
So I want to stop giving $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies that are going to oil companies that are making huge profits and have been subsidized for a hundred years, and let's keep on investing in the new homegrown energy that's creating jobs right here in Iowa. That's a difference in this election. That's why I'm running for President of the United States of America.
We've got a whole lot of differences between me and Governor Romney.
It's a real choice we have here. It's a choice between the pragmatic approach that invests in our homegrown industries and in our energy future from President Obama and the backwards-facing approach from Mitt Romney "Go Back Team" that invests nothing in our future, ensures even more environmentally harmful carbon emissions, and that continues to subsidize our Big Oil companies that have been making record breaking profits for decades.
Energy independence by 2021 sounds damn fine but it's just another lie being told by the most prolific liar we've had run for president in modern times. And, given his "plan", it's a fantasy, as well.


text:
Ladies Cap
One for the ladies. Come to think about it, some guys have pony tails… Him, they, she…whatever. You have a style, go for it.
This trucker cap will allow the cool breeze to blow over your pip and keep your ponytail or man bun in order while you go about your day.
It's designed for the active, the sporty, the person who has long hair, but isn't afraid to head out into the wind, up a mountain or onto the beach.
Maybe you are like some of us, and growing a pony is no longer an option, but you need to hide your balding nut under something stylish. Check out our other caps HERE


text:
Return to Fascism and Communism/Socialism
Through the agency of three new guilds (the Food Estate, the Estate of Trade and Industry, and the Labor Front), the government assumed control of every group of producers and consumers in the country. In accordance with the method of "German socialism," the facade of a market economy was retained. All prices, wages, and interest rates, however, were "fixed by the central authority. They [were] prices, wages, and interest rates in appearance only; in reality they [were] merely determinations of quantity relations in the government's orders . . . . This is socialism in the outward guise of capitalism."
The nation's businessmen retained the responsibility to produce and suffered the losses attendant on failure. The state determined the purpose and conditions of their production, and reaped the benefits; directly or indirectly, it expropriated all profits. "The time is past," explained the Nazi Minister of Economics, "when the notion of economic self-seeking and unrestricted use of profits made can be allowed to dominate . . . . The economic system must serve the nation."
"What a dummkopf I was!" cried steel baron Fritz Thyssen, an early Nazi supporter, who fled the country . . . .
As to Hitler's pledges to the poorer groups: the Republic's social insurance budgets were greatly increased, and a variety of welfare funds, programs, agencies, and policies were introduced or expanded, including special provisions for such items as unemployment relief, workmen's compensation, health insurance, pensions, Winter Help campaigns for the destitute, the Reich Mothers' Service for indigent mothers and children, and the National Socialist People's Welfare organization.


text:
TODAY: The Mets have officially announced Walker's deal. Noah Syndergaard has been placed on the 60-day injured list to open up a roster space for Walker.
FEB. 19, 8:14am: It's a two-year, $20MM deal with a player option for a third season, Joel Sherman of the New York Post reports (Twitter links). The deal, which is still pending a physical, will pay Walker $10MM in 2021 and $7MM in 2022. The player option is at a base of $6MM and can rise to $8.5MM via escalator clauses based on Walker's performance. There's a $3MM buyout on the option, should Walker decline, making for a total of $20MM in guarantees.
7:04am: The Mets and free-agent right-hander Taijuan Walker have agreed to terms on a contract, tweets SNY's Andy Martino. The Excel Sports client will step into the rotation alongside Jacob deGrom, Carlos Carrasco, Marcus Stroman and David Peterson.
Heading into his age-28 season, Walker was the youngest established starter available in free agency. The former top prospect made his big league debut with the Mariners just two weeks after his 20th birthday back in 2013 and solidified his place in the Seattle rotation in 2015 at 22 years of age. The M's traded Walker to the D-backs in a high-profile 2016 deal also including Ketel Marte, Jean Segura and Mitch Haniger, and he went on to have his best season in 2017: 157 1/3 innings of 3.49 ERA ball.
Walker went down with a torn ulnar collateral ligament in 2018, however, and the resulting Tommy John surgery wiped out nearly his entire season. He was on the comeback trail in 2019, but those efforts were derailed by a strained shoulder capsule that limited him to one inning. After pitching a combined 14 innings in 2018-19, Walker was non-tendered by the D-backs and returned to the Mariners on a low-cost, one-year deal in free agency.
The signing worked out well for the Mariners, who parlayed five solid starts from Walker into a deadline trade with the Blue Jays that netted outfield prospect Alberto Rodriguez (currently Seattle's No. 24 prospect at Baseball America). Walker made six starts with the Blue Jays and pitched to a pristine 1.37 ERA with a 25-to-11 K/BB ratio over the life of 26 1/3 innings.
Overall, Walker's 2.70 earned run average in 53 1/3 innings last year looked quite sound. However, despite that impressive mark, his age and his former top prospect pedigree, Walker appears to have had a difficult time finding a club willing to meet his asking price this winter. There's likely some good reason for that, as once looking past the ERA, the numbers aren't nearly as appealing.
On his way to that 2.70 ERA, Walker benefited from a .243 average on balls in play and a slightly elevated 78.5 percent strand rate. His 22.2 percent strikeout rate was below the league average, as was his 39.1 percent ground-ball rate. The righty's 93.5 mph average heater was down from its 95.1 mph peak, and his swinging-strike rate was among the lowest in the league (13th percentile, per Statcast). Fielding-independent marks like SIERA (4.60) and Statcast's xERA (4.87) aren't as bullish on Walker, who averaged just 4 2/3 innings per start in 2020.
Add in the elbow and shoulder injuries in 2018-19, and some trepidation from interested teams is understandable — but only to an extent. We've seen the free-agent market regularly pay upwards of $10-12MM per year on mutli-year deals to fourth starter types, and Walker ought to be at least that moving forward. His prospect pedigree, youth, velocity and raw stuff give him the upside to become quite a bit more than that as well.
With the Mets, Walker needn't perform like anything more than a fourth starter, thanks to the talent they already have atop their starting staff. Of course, if he does take a step forward and pitch closer to last year's ERA marks, an already impressive rotation will only look all the more formidable. With the newest agreement in place, the Mets have an enviable quintet of deGrom, Carrasco, Stroman, Walker and Peterson. Beyond that looms the return of Noah Syndergaard, who'll ideally be ready for a summer return following his own Tommy John surgery last May.
Unlike in 2020, that group is backed up by considerable depth. Joey Lucchesi, Jordan Yamamoto, Sean Reid-Foley and Sam McWilliams were added to the 40-man roster via trade and free agency this winter, and prospects Franklyn Kilome and Thomas Szapucki will be able to work toward minor league readiness in a game setting. The Mets also added lefty Mike Montgomery and righty Jerad Eickhoff on minor league deals, and it's conceivable that they could yet bring in some additional non-roster depth in Spring Training.
While it may not be quite the offseason Mets fans envisioned, it's hard to look at the current roster and consider the offseason anything other than a substantial step in the right direction. New York's marquee acquisition of Francisco Lindor and Carrasco will go down as its largest strike of the offseason, with free-agent acquisitions of Walker, James McCann, Trevor May, Jonathan Villar, Kevin Pillar, Aaron Loup and Albert Almora have deepened the roster.
The Mets didn't shatter the luxury tax threshold as many expected when Steve Cohen purchased the team — they'd have done so had their near-deal with Trevor Bauer been completed — but Walker's deal pushes their baseline payroll and their luxury-tax ledger both just shy of $200MM. It's a franchise record for Opening Day payroll by a magnitude of roughly $40MM, setting the tone for future offseasons under Cohen's ownership.


text:
Welcome to RecipeSource!RecipeSource is the new home of
SOAR: The Searchable Online Archive of Recipes and your source for recipes on the Internet. | |
MMMMM----- Recipe via UNREGISTERED Meal-Master (tm) v8.04 Title: Lemon Whipped Cream Torte Categories: Cakes Yield: 14 Servings 1/4 c Butter, sftnd 1/4 c Shortening 1 1/4 c Sugar, divided 2 t Lemon peel, gr 1/2 t Vanilla extract 2 c Cake flour 1 T Bkg pwd 1/4 t Salt 3/4 c Milk 6 Egg whites Filling: 1/2 c Sugar 1/3 c All-purpose flour 1 3/4 c Milk 3 Yolks, lightly beaten 1/4 c Lemon juice 1 t Vanilla ext 1 t Lemon peel, gr 1 c Heavy cream, whipped In a bowl cream butter, short and 1 c sugar. Add lemon peel and vanilla; mix well. Comb flour, bkg pwd and salt. Grad add to creamed mix alt with milk, mixg well after each addition; set aside. Beat egg whites til soft peaks form. Grad add rem sugar, beatg til stiff peaks form. Fold into the cream mix. Pour into 3 greased and waxed paper lined 9″ round cake pans. Bake at 350 for 15-20 min or til cake test done. Cool in pans 10 min before rem to a wire rack. For filling, comb sugar and flour in a saucepan. Grad add milk; cook and stir til thickened and bubbly. Cook and stir 2 min more. Rem from heat. Grad stir a little of hot fillg into the yolks; return all to the pan. Bring to a gentle boil. Cook and stir 2 min more. Remove from heat and stir in lemon juice, vanilla and peel. Cover and cool. Fold in the cream then spread between each layer and on top of cake. Cover and chill. Source: Taste of Home magazine MMMMM Plain Text Version of This Recipe for Printing or Saving | |
Copyright ©1995-2000 SOAR. ©2001-2021 RecipeSource. All Rights Reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. |