It’s New Year’s Day, as I write this, but it probably won’t be published for a day or two. Happy New Year!
Did you see the 1997 film Bean with Rowan Atkinson? It had some very funny moments. Bean is a security guard in an art museum and when left alone with Whistler’s Mother, he accidentally sneezes on the painting, then stains it with an ink-soaked handkerchief while wiping away his sneeze droplets. He then attempts to clean it with lacquer thinner, causing the figure’s face to dissolve and prompting him to replace it with a cartoon face.
Was it based at all on the story of Cecilia Gimenez who died on Monday at the age of 94 in Borja, her hometown in Northern Spain? A prized fresco of Christ by Elias Garcia Martinez called Ecce Homo in a local church had started to flake. Cecilia attempted to restore it but it came closer to Bean’s work than that of the original artist. Take a look:
Ouch!
Vandalism was suspected at first: The delicate misery on the face of Christ en route to the crucifixion was replaced by a misshapen head. Cecilia said the priest knew about her efforts and none of her acts were hidden. Nevertheless images of the botched job spread online and she was mortified. She couldn’t stop weeping and couldn’t eat. She was portrayed as a crazy old lady who desecrated a masterpiece.
Then something happened. People started visiting Borja to see the “famous” artwork. Lots of people. And they brought tourist money with them. Lots of tourist money. Restaurant business boomed. Visits to a nearby museum of medieval art saw its annual attendance jump from 7,000 to 70,000. And get this — local vineyards fought over the rights to put Cecilia’s Christ on their wine labels. Competitions were held in which young artists tried their own hands at the work. She became a beloved local hero.
Rest in peace, Cecilia Gimenez. You meant well, you had a good heart, and it all worked out for the best.
In the puzzle yesterday at 43A, “Spray in the kitchen” was PAM. Glad the veteran constructors Adam Wagner and Rafael Musa didn’t go with “AG Bondi” as the clue. Blecch. Have I mentioned before that she turned sixty last November? No shit. What’s your secret, girl?
At 2D, for “Default outcomes, perhaps,” the answer was REPOS. Get it? If you are in default on your car payments the REPO man will come for it.
We heard of a poor girl who was possessed by satanic demons. In desperation, her parents sought the services of an exorcist. His fee was $25,000, but he agreed to accept payments over an extended period. Thankfully, the exorcism was successful and the girl resumed a normal life. But the parents suffered some financial difficulties and couldn’t continue paying the exorcist. What can I tell you? There’s no happy ending. The poor girl was re-possessed.
I tried to share that joke with Rex’s Commentariat but it was rejected! Is it anti-Catholic?
5D in the puzzle today: “Symbols of love on some bridges,” was PADLOCKS. You ever see this? A couple would write their initials and the date on the lock and fasten it to a bridge. The problem is, if it gets to be excessive, it’s adding weight to the bridge. In some jurisdictions, the authorities make periodic sweeps to cut them down. (Boo.)
And since we’re in France all of a sudden:
Oddly, the clue at 45D was “Where French fries are ‘frog sticks.’” It seems to be endorsing reference to the French as frogs, or am I missing something? That’s a derogatory term, so I was surprised to see it in the NYT.
17A was sweet. The clue was “Save me!” Answer: LAST DANCE.
At 13D, for the clue: “Words on an incriminating email, perhaps,” the answer was DELETE THIS. Here’s Rex on it: if you are ending your “incriminating emails” with DELETE THIS, allow me to suggest that you are not very good at crime and should maybe consider going straight. At this point in our surveillance society, I just assume that every single word I type into a computer leaves a trace that someone somewhere can find if they really want to. Deleting means I don’t see it, but … it’s probably stored somewhere; some autosave or archiving feature will get you in the end.
Do you know this one? At 19A, for “Really went for” the answer was LIKE LIKED. It’s an expression used to distinguish between enjoying someone’s company and being interested in someone romantically.
On Seinfeld, Elaine is in art class sitting next to a woman who has dated George, and wants to find out her level of interest: “Do you like him, or like-like him?” “Like-like.” And she adds: “Looks aren’t that important to me.” (The whole thing is acted out just as if they were in high school, even to the point where Elaine is ordered to spit out her gum by the art teacher.) Later, Elaine happily reports to George that she really likes him, but unfortunately included what she said about looks, and George gets upset, “I’d rather she hate me and think I was good-looking!”
Right off the bat at 1A, “Spoilers that ruin a whole lot.” That’s a good clue but it’s also a pretty good distance from it to the answer: BAD APPLES.
Very happy to note that our Sirens have quietly put together a sweet three-game winning streak. All wins by one goal. It’s early, but they’re tied for second place. We’ll see them face off against a tough Montreal squad in two weeks. And our Sarah is back. She notched an assist in the last win. Yay!
Casey O’Brien is one of girls who’s been killin’ it for us. Radiant.
See you tomorrow!
The Wellington Files 