<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Keepapitchinin</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.keepapitchinin.org/wp-commentsrss2.php" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org</link>
	<description>Where our past is never very long ago</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 09:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Family History Basics &#8212; Lesson 1 by m&#38;m</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=172#comment-2713</link>
		<dc:creator>m&#38;m</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 05:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=172#comment-2713</guid>
		<description>I missed this when it first came up, saw the second installment, and just want to say that this is awesome. I'm one of the ones whose lines are done way back, but that doesn't change the fact that I want to learn how to do it all. 

I'm going to go link this on my blog. I'll look forward to more. And I'd love that field trip idea you mention in part 2 -- again, I would love the excuse to carve it into my schedule to actually DO some of what it takes, to learn how to use the software, etc. My experience with it all is very limited. 

Can I send you a pic of my family history wall, though? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I missed this when it first came up, saw the second installment, and just want to say that this is awesome. I&#8217;m one of the ones whose lines are done way back, but that doesn&#8217;t change the fact that I want to learn how to do it all. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to go link this on my blog. I&#8217;ll look forward to more. And I&#8217;d love that field trip idea you mention in part 2 &#8212; again, I would love the excuse to carve it into my schedule to actually DO some of what it takes, to learn how to use the software, etc. My experience with it all is very limited. </p>
<p>Can I send you a pic of my family history wall, though? <img src='http://www.keepapitchinin.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by m&#38;m</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2712</link>
		<dc:creator>m&#38;m</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:52:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2712</guid>
		<description>Wow, Ardis. You do deliver, don't you? :) It's so interesting to see how much some things have changed.

&lt;i&gt;FYI - $2 in 1920 was about $22-23 today, $2 in 1940 would be about 30 dollars today. (Yes the the trend was deflating!) $12 for silk garments would be $120 to $180 today! Just goes to show the declining cost of real goods.&lt;/i&gt;

The prices amazed me. Makes me feel like we get a pretty good deal these days. (All the more so thanks to Pres. Hinckley!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, Ardis. You do deliver, don&#8217;t you? <img src='http://www.keepapitchinin.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> It&#8217;s so interesting to see how much some things have changed.</p>
<p><i>FYI - $2 in 1920 was about $22-23 today, $2 in 1940 would be about 30 dollars today. (Yes the the trend was deflating!) $12 for silk garments would be $120 to $180 today! Just goes to show the declining cost of real goods.</i></p>
<p>The prices amazed me. Makes me feel like we get a pretty good deal these days. (All the more so thanks to Pres. Hinckley!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by Left Field</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2711</link>
		<dc:creator>Left Field</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:20:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2711</guid>
		<description>I left on my mission in October 1978.  I recall first hearing of 2-piece garments (and reading an announcement in the Church News)after I arrived in my last area in January 1980.  J. Stapley (#18 and 26)gives a 1979 date and cites the SWK biography.  Perhaps approval was given in 1979, but it was not until 1980 that two-piece garments had actually been manufactured, announced, and offered for sale.  That could explain the discrepancy in the 1979-1980 dates.  But 1978 definitely seems too early to me.

I remember having a conversation with my companion (it would have been sometime early in 1980) in which I gave my opinion that, given the garment changes that had occurred in the past, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see two-piece garments.  I thought I was suggesting a pretty radical idea, but apparently, my companion had already heard that two-piece garments would be available.  Sure enough, the next batch of back issues of the &lt;em&gt;Church News&lt;/em&gt; (they saved them up and gave them to us at zone conferences) had the announcement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I left on my mission in October 1978.  I recall first hearing of 2-piece garments (and reading an announcement in the Church News)after I arrived in my last area in January 1980.  J. Stapley (#18 and 26)gives a 1979 date and cites the SWK biography.  Perhaps approval was given in 1979, but it was not until 1980 that two-piece garments had actually been manufactured, announced, and offered for sale.  That could explain the discrepancy in the 1979-1980 dates.  But 1978 definitely seems too early to me.</p>
<p>I remember having a conversation with my companion (it would have been sometime early in 1980) in which I gave my opinion that, given the garment changes that had occurred in the past, I wouldn&#8217;t be at all surprised to see two-piece garments.  I thought I was suggesting a pretty radical idea, but apparently, my companion had already heard that two-piece garments would be available.  Sure enough, the next batch of back issues of the <em>Church News</em> (they saved them up and gave them to us at zone conferences) had the announcement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by Researcher</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2710</link>
		<dc:creator>Researcher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 02:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2710</guid>
		<description>#40--Caryn--You're welcome. (I'm always happy to look something up.)

Here's a very short article which mentions &lt;a href="http://udel.edu/~orzada/egypt.htm" rel="nofollow"&gt;nile green and the influence of Egyptology on 1920s fashion&lt;/a&gt;. Clothing from that decade also pulled in influences from ancient Greece and WWI military uniforms. Top designers from this era included Charles Worth, Coco Chanel, Madeline Vionnet, and Paul Pioret and their influence filtered down to the masses.

&lt;blockquote&gt;It's not insanity
Says Vanity Fair
In fact, it's stylish to
Raise your skirts and bob your hair...

What we think is chic, unique and quite adorable
They think is odd and "Sodom and Gomorrah"-ble!
But the fact is
Everything today is thoroughly modern...

Men say it's criminal what women'll do
What they're forgetting is
This is 1922!
[Thoroughly Modern Millie]&lt;/blockquote&gt;

This period saw immensely dramatic changes in women's clothing that were echoed by the change in garment design in 1923 as J. Stapley noted in comment 8. 

We saw some of these styles in Ardis' posts of church members around the world with the women wearing simple, straight dresses. It was very much a contrast to anything from the previous decades and I imagine that the switch to shorter garment styles must have caused heartburn in many a devoted Saint.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#40&#8211;Caryn&#8211;You&#8217;re welcome. (I&#8217;m always happy to look something up.)</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a very short article which mentions <a href="http://udel.edu/~orzada/egypt.htm" rel="nofollow">nile green and the influence of Egyptology on 1920s fashion</a>. Clothing from that decade also pulled in influences from ancient Greece and WWI military uniforms. Top designers from this era included Charles Worth, Coco Chanel, Madeline Vionnet, and Paul Pioret and their influence filtered down to the masses.</p>
<blockquote><p>It&#8217;s not insanity<br />
Says Vanity Fair<br />
In fact, it&#8217;s stylish to<br />
Raise your skirts and bob your hair&#8230;</p>
<p>What we think is chic, unique and quite adorable<br />
They think is odd and &#8220;Sodom and Gomorrah&#8221;-ble!<br />
But the fact is<br />
Everything today is thoroughly modern&#8230;</p>
<p>Men say it&#8217;s criminal what women&#8217;ll do<br />
What they&#8217;re forgetting is<br />
This is 1922!<br />
[Thoroughly Modern Millie]</p></blockquote>
<p>This period saw immensely dramatic changes in women&#8217;s clothing that were echoed by the change in garment design in 1923 as J. Stapley noted in comment 8. </p>
<p>We saw some of these styles in Ardis&#8217; posts of church members around the world with the women wearing simple, straight dresses. It was very much a contrast to anything from the previous decades and I imagine that the switch to shorter garment styles must have caused heartburn in many a devoted Saint.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by bfwebster</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2709</link>
		<dc:creator>bfwebster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2709</guid>
		<description>I would swear that the two-piece garments were introduced no later than 1978 (when I graduated from BYU). I remember my good friend and fellow CS undergrad Mark Savon commenting that this established once and for all that it was OK to take off your garments during sex, since the two-piece women's garments no longer provided, ah, access.

Neither he nor I personally believed that there was any issue about it (we were both happily married), but there were a lot of folks in Utah -- including married students at BYU -- who were sure that you weren't allowed to remove your garments for sex. Of course, there were also persistent apocryphal stories of Mormons (usually older, string-tied garment types) who would bathe or shower while holding onto their garments with one hand. 

Mark and I did have occasional contact after I graduated in '78 and moved away, so it's always possible this was some follow-up conversation a year or two later. But it sure seems to me that this happened while we were both still at BYU.  ..bruce..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would swear that the two-piece garments were introduced no later than 1978 (when I graduated from BYU). I remember my good friend and fellow CS undergrad Mark Savon commenting that this established once and for all that it was OK to take off your garments during sex, since the two-piece women&#8217;s garments no longer provided, ah, access.</p>
<p>Neither he nor I personally believed that there was any issue about it (we were both happily married), but there were a lot of folks in Utah &#8212; including married students at BYU &#8212; who were sure that you weren&#8217;t allowed to remove your garments for sex. Of course, there were also persistent apocryphal stories of Mormons (usually older, string-tied garment types) who would bathe or shower while holding onto their garments with one hand. </p>
<p>Mark and I did have occasional contact after I graduated in &#8216;78 and moved away, so it&#8217;s always possible this was some follow-up conversation a year or two later. But it sure seems to me that this happened while we were both still at BYU.  ..bruce..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by Caryn Mouritsen Cherry</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2708</link>
		<dc:creator>Caryn Mouritsen Cherry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:22:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2708</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Researcher.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Researcher.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Family History Basics - Lesson 2 by Ardis E. Parshall</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2707</link>
		<dc:creator>Ardis E. Parshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2707</guid>
		<description>BruceC, starting with the next lesson, I'm going to go over some specific sources or types of records, and how to find them, that might help you with documentation. Starting now, anybody who is reading these lessons is going to be on their own research path different from everybody else. The sources I'll start with will be the ones easiest to find and to search, and then we'll move along to older, harder ones. 

After we've gone over some of the easier sources, I plan to ask for a few real-life examples from readers' pedigrees. I can't offer to solve all problems or do original research for anybody, but I'll look at the examples and explain where I would go to look for evidence.

I'm still debating the wisdom of this one, but if I can work it out, I'd be willing to set up a field trip with a small group of readers at the Salt Lake Family History Library (sorry, everybody at a distance) for an afternoon or evening of working on your own research. I could review your chart, suggest a research strategy, and you would do the searching yourself with me there to answer questions if you get stuck. But I'd like to go over some common documentary sources, especially ones you can do online, before we set up anything like that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BruceC, starting with the next lesson, I&#8217;m going to go over some specific sources or types of records, and how to find them, that might help you with documentation. Starting now, anybody who is reading these lessons is going to be on their own research path different from everybody else. The sources I&#8217;ll start with will be the ones easiest to find and to search, and then we&#8217;ll move along to older, harder ones. </p>
<p>After we&#8217;ve gone over some of the easier sources, I plan to ask for a few real-life examples from readers&#8217; pedigrees. I can&#8217;t offer to solve all problems or do original research for anybody, but I&#8217;ll look at the examples and explain where I would go to look for evidence.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m still debating the wisdom of this one, but if I can work it out, I&#8217;d be willing to set up a field trip with a small group of readers at the Salt Lake Family History Library (sorry, everybody at a distance) for an afternoon or evening of working on your own research. I could review your chart, suggest a research strategy, and you would do the searching yourself with me there to answer questions if you get stuck. But I&#8217;d like to go over some common documentary sources, especially ones you can do online, before we set up anything like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ads You&#8217;re Not Going to See Again Anytime Soon - Chapter 5 by BHodges</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2706</link>
		<dc:creator>BHodges</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=118#comment-2706</guid>
		<description>ha nice finds, Ardis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ha nice finds, Ardis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Family History Basics - Lesson 2 by BruceC</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2705</link>
		<dc:creator>BruceC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:46:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2705</guid>
		<description>I'm running into the same things. Navigating the non-member parts of my wife's family yeilds more temple work than the over researched parts of mine. Two months ago I thought I had found a branch of the family that had been missed. The whole branch had left the church. After weeks of work collecting names I found a distant cousin. She was three years ahead of me. I'm glad to have met her, and glad to fill in the blanks, but still no temple work needed. And this wasn't the first time.

So I've been trying to find new ways to document what I have. I want to flesh out the details and resolve contradictory facts. I'm just so new to this I haven't learned all the right sources yet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m running into the same things. Navigating the non-member parts of my wife&#8217;s family yeilds more temple work than the over researched parts of mine. Two months ago I thought I had found a branch of the family that had been missed. The whole branch had left the church. After weeks of work collecting names I found a distant cousin. She was three years ahead of me. I&#8217;m glad to have met her, and glad to fill in the blanks, but still no temple work needed. And this wasn&#8217;t the first time.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;ve been trying to find new ways to document what I have. I want to flesh out the details and resolve contradictory facts. I&#8217;m just so new to this I haven&#8217;t learned all the right sources yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Family History Basics - Lesson 2 by Ardis E. Parshall</title>
		<link>http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2703</link>
		<dc:creator>Ardis E. Parshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepapitchinin.org/?p=315#comment-2703</guid>
		<description>LOL! Yeah, I feel your pain. My mother's researched family history was easier to document, but I had to go way out on limbs in order to find parents of in-laws of cousins of spouses who needed temple work, while my dad's unknown family history was more difficult to dig out, but with the automatic reward of temple ordinances at the end.

I have a friend who descends from the Youngs, Bensons, Pratts, and other well-known families. He's worked on documenting his lines for years, and a while ago he finally found a great aunt who had married a nonmember and gone away from the family and church and had been still living the last time anybody had done massive amounts of temple work. Just one person, but he didn't give up before he found her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LOL! Yeah, I feel your pain. My mother&#8217;s researched family history was easier to document, but I had to go way out on limbs in order to find parents of in-laws of cousins of spouses who needed temple work, while my dad&#8217;s unknown family history was more difficult to dig out, but with the automatic reward of temple ordinances at the end.</p>
<p>I have a friend who descends from the Youngs, Bensons, Pratts, and other well-known families. He&#8217;s worked on documenting his lines for years, and a while ago he finally found a great aunt who had married a nonmember and gone away from the family and church and had been still living the last time anybody had done massive amounts of temple work. Just one person, but he didn&#8217;t give up before he found her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
