Further information about anti-chalk-writing rule story

Did some further checking on the story focusing on children living in Whitehorse, Australia, whose artistic endeavors with chalk were deemed a legal no-no.

According to the newspaper, The Whitehorse Leader, the children, residents of a suburb called Nunawading, located 18 km east of the city of Melbourne, were actually drawing with chalk on a footpath located in an open strip mall in front of a cafe called, White's Cafe. In fact, according to the owner of the cafe, the children have been doodling there for almost a year without any complaints. The town council decided to act based on the complaint of one - count it - one person. Perhaps the person didn't care for the artistic renderings - go know.

The owner of the cafe said that a council officer told her that the children's drawings were considered graffiti and had to cease and desist (my words). For the record, the chalkings fall into the category of stick figures, scribbles, fish and pirates - typical topics of the young-at-heart.

Sounds okay to me!

She said the cafe had started a petition supporting the drawings, which had so far been signed by 180 patrons and residents. Furthermore, they would even go so far as to volunteer to wash away the drawings every afternoon once the cafe closed, or apply for a permit from the council if that would help.

The Council’s general manager corporate services, Peter Smith, said the drawings were in contravention of council’s Local Law No. 1 2006 and the state government’s Graffiti Act 2007. He went on to explain that age has no relevance and that drawing on public property is considered graffiti. One wonders if said council is generally busy.


"Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up.” (Pablo Picasso)

Anti-chalk adults - what were they thinking?

Another rant, this time focusing on adults who are unaware of the concept of being a kid and having fun.

In Whitehorse, Australia, a town council with obviously nothing better to do, decided to pass legislation prohibiting children to use chalk on the sidewalk, declaring it a violation of municipal graffiti laws. I mean - really - children all over planet earth or at least where there are sidewalks, have been creating hop-scotch patterns and other artistic endeavors, like, forever.

As if this isn't bad enough, they also declared the children who use chalk as safety hazards. Say what? A safety hazard? How does chalk writing on sidewalks in any way impede the safety of people?

For its part, the council declared sidewalk chalk a violation of the state graffiti laws. An option, according to local officials, would be to issue a permit that would allow the students to play with sidewalk chalk, however, seems that this is not a viable solution. According to a cafe owner, the Mayor of the town said that they would like to issue us a permit but can't because it raises health and safety issues, in case somebody fell over a child on the footpath or into the street.

So this leads one - me - to wonder whether other types of writing tools would be acceptable, other than chalk. Like paint, perhaps? Would they prefer children to paint up the sidewalks? How about loose stones being used to etch images into pavement that will be there much longer than chalk? Will/can the young offenders who ignore the anti-chalk rule be prosecuted in court, or be fined?

Is the next step to outlaw the sale of chalk altogether and related writing tools? Taking it to the absurd, perhaps the usage of chalk by the local teaching profession could be considered a safety hazard.

I mean, really...

To say that the town residents aren't happy with the situation is an understatement with more than 200 people signing a petition to let the children play with sidewalk chalk.

Absolutely unbelievable that this is an issue at all! What next? No roller skating on sidewalks? Or playing jump rope...after all, somebody could fall over a child that is doing what children love to do. The mind boggles.

Will Barbie take Ken back? Time to vote, peeplz!

At one time Barbie, the famous vinyl fashionista was dating Ken Carson, a vinyl surfer dude with a (very) limited wardrobe. They were considered the perfect couple, she with the immaculately coiffed long blond hair, perfectly chiselled features, who forever walked and will always walk on tip-toes. Ken was the perfect escort in spite of his limited wardrobe dressed in - well - surfing trunks. Together they led the ideal life - at least it seemed perfect to outsiders.

On Valentine's Day in 2004 after 43 years of being together and much to the surprise of everyone, they split up. Rumors were rife (say those words fast after a few drinks) that there were other dolls in Barbie's life but nothing was substantiated. However, shortly after they both went their own way, the plastic blond bomb shell started dating Australian surfer dude, Blaine. Initially heart broken, Ken re-started his life and with the help of an agent, he received critical acclaim for his role in "Toy Story 3", in addition to an appearance in Fashion Week in New York. Slowly and meticulously, he acquired a new wardrobe and a new image.

Although he enjoyed his new-found fame and according to sources close to Ken, he missed Barbie, the love of his life.

"If she called me right now - I would be back by her side - no questions asked," Ken frequently told mutual friends.

"Like - the guy was really becoming a drag!" said a friend who wanted to remain anonymous. "It was always 'Barbie this' and 'Barbie that.'

Obviously, many Barbie and Ken aficionados want to see the popular couple together again and to this end, a poll has been established, "Should Barbie Take Ken Back?" for the couple's fans to cast their vote on Facebook or at http://www.barbieandken.com/

When asked her opinion regarding the possible reunion, Barbie responded, "whatever..."

Music goes to the dogs

It's understandable how pet owners want to do everything to please the non-human elements in their lives but this is a doggone one for the record books.

Singer Lou Reed and wife Laurie Anderson, for whatever reason, will be putting on a concert at the Sydney Opera House for dogs as part of their "Vivid Live" festival, in June. According to news sources it will be a high-frequency concert created specifically for canine tastes but unfathomable for their owners. Ms Anderson who is a performance artist, has had practice entertaining her rat terrier, Lollabelle, for eleven years. Just wondering - how can one discern whether a canine likes or dislikes a particular musical passage. Anywaaaaay...

In the words of Anderson, "she (Lollabelle) likes things with a lot of smoothness but with beats in them. Things with voices and lots of complicated high-end stuff. Chk-chk-chk-chk-chk … that kind of stuff."

The event to be held in the morning, will be brief given the short attention span of canines. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 minutes or so. Since this concert is noiseless to humans, presumably owners will have to stare at their pet's faces and gauge the impact of the music. Something to the effect - pure speculation - a lot of twitches means excitement, a blank look on the face means it doesn't do anything for them or maybe they have to pee, drooling means they're really 'into it' or hungry... Go know! Thinking further about this, there is no information as to whether there will be any bathroom facilities for attendees. If not - this could be a problem. Perhaps somebody will supply fire hydrants or patches of grass. These are serious issues, people!

Music For Dogs adds to the avant-garde nature of a festival that includes improvised soundscapes by Reed's Metal Machine Trio, the Tuvan throat-singers Chirgilchin and tai chi classes, as well as more conventional acts such as the Rickie Lee Jones.