tbaangel-d Digest Volume 97 : Issue 56 Today's Topics: Re: My (belated) intro Tonight's Special Episode Re: Tonight's Special Episode Thanks for the Info, Yolanda! Re: Tonight's Special Episode Re: The Angel of Angels and Ages of Angels TBAA Re: Tonight's Special Episode The Sky is Falling -- redux 1 The Sky is Falling--redux 2 Re: TBAA Martha Williamson on 60 Minutes "The Sky is Falling" Re: tbaangel-d Digest V97 #48 Re: AOL TBAA chat RE: Martha Williamson on 60 Minutes ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:05:19 +0000 From: "Ray Simard" To: TBAAngel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: My (belated) intro > From: AmilynH @ .addy.com > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 21:05:52 -0400 (EDT) > To: TBAAngel @ .addy.com > Subject: Re: My (belated) intro > In a message dated 97-04-29 16:01:33 EDT, Ray wrote: > > >I spent a little time digging ... >> amused by the criticisms and predictions of an early demise for TBAA > >published in its infancy. > > In all fairness, most of the review that were out there early on were being > based on the original pilot, which the audiences never saw. By all accounts > (including Martha Williamson's) it was quite dreadful and more than likely > *would* have been an early casualty. Because of that, I've not been terribly > in agreement with the presentation of TBAA as being one of the "beat the > critics' odds" shows. More than likely. From what I understand, Martha W. became Exec. Prod. sometime well after its inception, and that things improved then. I'd like to get some idea of about when that happened and try to properly juxtapose that time and the comments I've read. > >But even now, some of the comments I see refer to it as "feel-good" > >programming, a vapid, "sanitized" version of things. How > >short-sighted! > > But how accurate in many ways! TBAA *is* a "feel-good" show. If it isn't, > I'm defining that word *terribly* wrongly. There is not, however, > necessarily anything inherently *bad* about feel-good shows, imo. No, certainly not! If there were, nobody would remember Frank Capra! :-) But the articles I was referring to (and which I didn't quote here, hence, most likely, the differing perceptions) used "feel-good" in a scornful tone, as if TBAA were nothing more than a collection of meaningless situations contrived to produce an untterly unrealistic happy ending everyone can take to sleep with them. Sort of like the electronic equivalent of an overly-rich dessert, sweet and tasty for a moment but leaving nothing of substance behind (except, perhaps, a bit more substance around the waistline, but never mind! :-) ) > As far as showing a "sanitized" version of things, well.... You do have a > good point that TBAA doesn't try to sugar-coat the world. They don't try to > say that bad things never happen, that life is never difficult, that people > never make poor choices, that things are always working out perfectly at all > times. However, I believe they do show a sanitized version of the > *solutions* to those real world, nasty, evil problems. > > Every week, they successfully change someone's (usually *several* someones') > life. And most weeks, that change is effected incredibly quickly. This is, > of course, partially due to the constraints of hour-long television. The temporal foreshortening is indeed necessary to effect dramatic changes in forty-two-point-something minutes. In "Volunteers," Jason is seen lying on his cot in the darkness, deep in reflection, a cinematic device to suggest that he has been so moved by his recent experiences that he is seriously rethinking his values and priorities, and spending a good deal of time at it, not only at that particular place in the show. I have taken to automatically injecting some assumed periods like that into other episodes, making the changes less sudden, and allowing for some dramatic license in the way it's actually portrayed. > However, there are a number of episodes where *drastic* changes > happen at warp speed, and I am left thinkig, "No way." This usually occurs > when they have tried to make *everyone* all fine. I did see one episode (but the only one so far) that gave me just that impression. It was "Last Call." It seemed to move uncharacteristially slowly and with only a rather vague premise which would rather predictably evolve into another: there's one miracle to give away, but naturally, it's going to really be a miracle for everyone. I had a hard time getting into the ex-felon's emotional changes and the bar-owner's suddent acceptance of them, followed by the avalanche of subsequent transformations. But, for the time I've been watching, at least, that was the only one I saw that way. (I also got a rather similar impression of last Tuesday's "Promised Land.") > I think I consider things to be most "sanitized" when absolutely > *everyone* undergoes a change of attitude and lifestyle and > condition. Often, in instances like this, I find the characters' > "coming around" to be less than believable. > ...will have to continue to *work* at it to keep whatever > gains they have made. In most of these cases, I find myself allowing that the presentation of a character who is greatly transformed at the end is actually a depiction of that character at a much later time, after the experiences depicted in the show and their influence on him or her have had time to take effect. Although the action of the show at the end may not seem to allow for such an interval to have occurred, that can be allowed for as dramatic device. And, as you point out later, they are often not so much completely overhauled as they are struck by the events of the show and the insights the angels point out to them and experience a change of outlook and priorities that could be expected to mean real changes later on. Their deeply-engrained ways will probably never stop asserting themselves, but how there's at least they are aware that there's an alternative available to them they never had before. > You know, as I write about how the shows end without *ultimate* resolution of > the problems presented, I am becoming more pleased with their protrayal of > things. > And in most episodes, at the end there is more hope, there is a better chance > than there would have been for things to work out or for people to be happy, > but there are no guarantees. It might be an interesting thought to occasionally bring back a character who had experienced big changes in the original episode but who is now faltering, perhaps as the result of new challenges in his/her life that are threatening the lessons learned before. If that has, in fact, been done on TBAA, please disregard this notice... :-) -- Ray Simard rsimard @ .addy.com "What you need to know about the past is that, no matter what has happened, it has all worked together to bring you to this very moment. And this is the moment you can choose to make everything new. Right now." Monica ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 13:09:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Darla Bradley To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Tonight's Special Episode I've never seen "The Sky is Falling." Is Andrew in this one? Is it on at 8 central time, or seven, central time? Guess I'll check out the TBAA episode guide to find out what it's about, unless one of you "earthbound angels" 0:) wants to clue me in! Love to all, and miles of smiles! :) Darla ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:29:38 PST From: "Yolanda P." To: Darla Bradley , tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: Tonight's Special Episode Darla, Andrew is definately in this one. I think you'll love his encounter with *Death*. (Hint: It's a Halloween episode) Although he doesn't try to be, Andrew is pretty funny in this episode. Most of the episode is a flash back in time, and it shows when Tess met Monica. Don't want to give out to much info so I'll stop there. The prime time line up out here on the west cost is: 8:00 pm Diagnosis Murder 9:00 pm Touched By an Angel 10:00 pm 48 hours. (Pacific Standard time) **It's probably on at 8:00 pm Central time Hope this helps, Yo... ************************************** I've never seen "The Sky is Falling." Is Andrew in this one? Is it on at 8 central time, or seven, central time? Guess I'll check out the TBAA episode guide to find out what it's about, unless one of you "earthbound angels" 0:) wants to clue me in! Love to all, and miles of smiles! :) Darla ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 14:34:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Darla Bradley To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Thanks for the Info, Yolanda! Yolanda wrote: >Andrew is definately in this one. I think you'll love his encounter >with *Death*. (Hint: It's a Halloween episode) >Although he doesn't try to be, Andrew is pretty funny >in this episode. Thanks, Yo! You *are* an angel! 0:) I'm looking forward to seeing Andrew being funny! If you've seen any of John Dye's movie work, he's *very* funny at times. He's got a real talent for creating humor right in the middle of a very serious situation. For example in BEST OF THE BEST, he plays a young man named Virgil, an aspiring "Buddhist", who is one of five young men chosen for the U.S. Karate Team. One of his teammates accidentally knocks the breath out of him in practice. He's on the floor, unconscious. Another teammate revives him, and asks, "Virgil, do you know where you are?" He opens his eyes, looks around, and *very* dead-pan, matter-of-factly says, "On the floor." *I* was ROTFL at that! Didn't think I'd like a "martial arts" action movie, but John was *precious*, and the whole movie was good! Rent it, anyone who hasn't seen it. . .you'll like! Love to all, and miles of smiles! :) Darla ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 16:16:17 -0400 (EDT) From: IDyeForYou @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: Tonight's Special Episode In a message dated 97-05-01 16:11:31 EDT, you write: << I've never seen "The Sky is Falling." Is Andrew in this one? Is it on at 8 central time, or seven, central time? >> It's 9 est, 8 cst.... It's an adorable ep..everyone is great in it...Andrew is rather priceless...between his little boy whining and his interaction with "little death"...it's too cute. Also, not to be missed (for Androolers) is the last scene...with John perched on the porch railing in his own clothes and his infamous Timberland's...looking, according to his mom...completly like John and not Andrew.... Susan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 19:45:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Finabair @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: The Angel of Angels and Ages of Angels In a message dated 97-05-01 19:13:49 EDT, tbaangel @ .addy.com writes: > refering to a child or baby angel only the appearance of the angel. So, > could an "adult" angel appear as a child was my question. Would the show > do that? This would be a fascinating thing for them to do - and a good way to give Roma a vacation sometime if they needed to. I mean, they would likely have to find a child actress to play Monica for the episode, as I don't think makeup would work in this case. ;-) take care, Jennie finabair @ .addy.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 19:48:13 -0700 From: Richard Treadwell To: TBAAngel @ .addy.com Subject: TBAA Hi Jennie, At 07:45 PM 5/1/97 -0400, you wrote: >and a good way to give Roma a vacation sometime if they needed to. I >mean, they would likely have >to find a child actress to play Monica for the episode, as I don't think >makeup would work in this case. ;-) Or, better yet...a boy child and give John Dye an episode off... ;) ;) ;) In His Love, Dick P.S. I'm in for it now... ******************************************************************** Richard Treadwell treadwel @ .addy.com Living God, for whom no door is closed, no heart is locked, draw us beyond our doubts, till we see your Christ and touch his wounds where they bleed in others. New Zealand Prayer Book, p. 599 ******************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 00:04:25 -0400 (EDT) From: CPOEGO @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: Tonight's Special Episode Again, Seattle area viewing has been pre-empted for the Seattle Sonics game!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 00:45:48 -0400 (EDT) From: AmilynH @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: The Sky is Falling -- redux 1 I posted this, mostly in this form, to the original TBAA list. The group on this list is different enough and we have enough new members, that I thought I'd re-post a revised version. Jennie said that was okay. So, for those of you who've seen this before, I apologize. :-) Di S. commented, lo these many moons ago: > I totally, totally LOVED the scenes when Andrew had to > hand out the Halloween candy and was sulking. I *totally*, TOTALLY agree with this. I feel a need to correct Tess every time I watch the scene when she says, "It doesn't become the Angel of Death to whine" with "he's not whining, he's sulking; there's a difference!" *grin* And it *was* such a delightful sulk--the kind that is thoroughly like a little kid digging in his heels and refusing to do something. His "Oh, I'm in trouble" reaction when Tess comes in is cute too. I think the little glare he gave Tess on his way to the door was *almost* as good as the sulk. And I love the almost-wicked (for Monica) look that she gives Andrew when she hands him the bowl of candy. That time he's almost whining with the "Monica, please, *please* don't make me." *giggle* I must agree again with Di; I also thought that the, "So, pal, who do you think you are?" --"I'm Death." --"Oh, *really*??" exchange was perhaps the most priceless moment I've seen on the entire series to date. I almost wore out the tape the night that aired watching and re-watching that moment. It did occur to me to think that if I had been that kid's parents (who, if they were anything like mine, were probably watching him trick-or-treat from the street), I would have been a bit worried at this stranger putting an arm around the kid and sitting down with him. Still, that little mental aside didn't detract from my enjoyment of the scene because I thought it was just too adorable. Someone commented that they loved imagining that kid showing up next year for Halloween dressed in a nice off-white suit, still telling people he's Death. I love that image. One of my other favorite moments of that episode was Monica's line about, "I particularly like wee Frankenstein and his lovely bride." I adore Roma's accent and literally originally started watching the show because I figured it was worth putting up with whatever-the-show-was-about (I didn't know at the time) just to get to listen to her speak. I often wonder if the insertion of the "wee" as an adjective is something Roma does when she's in the mood or if it's actually scripted. I suspect it's actually both. I *love* "The Sky is Falling". I really do. *bounce* I really think it's one of the finest pieces of storytelling they've done, in terms of the structure of the episode with the interspersing of the flashbacks, but most especially the characterizations, especially of the incidental guest characters. Did anyone ever mention on this list that the little girl playing the granddaughter was the same little girl as the one from "Operation:Smile"? I was so charmed by Monica being all dressed up in the 1938 scenes. She went to a lot of trouble to look just right for her very first annunciation; she took it so seriously. It was just the perfect look for the level of meekness she had then, too. She looked for all the world like a little girl going to her First Communion--right down to the little ribbon in her hair. She looked just lovely in the 30's dress and ringlets, too. Alyce Beasley looked great in that period's clothing as well. (Can you tell I love period costuming? ;-) ) It was really interesting to see how much Monica has grown since the late 30's; she was so easily quashed then, and she has gained an impressive amount of confidence and determination and a bit thicker of a skin...all without losing the innocence (almost naivete), deep caring, and sincerity that make her so very effective at the work she does as an angel. And it was fascinating how they used the lighting when Monica wilted just as her angel-glow faded when Tess jumped on her at the church--very effective visual representation of her mood dropping right through the cellar--especially when combined with the discordant fade of the little chime effect. The scene in the church showed, I think, Tess's own strengths at case work (as well as her weaker, but usual, traits of impatience and a quick temper). She was such a delight trying to reason, quickly giving up, and falling back on her cure-all: Singing. And the carefully-timed order of "Sing!" in between words was just delightful. And it almost worked. Poor Monica; she meant so well. There were so many tiny bits that made this episode work for me. The little lines like "You're supposed to be a heavenly being, not a holy terror." The 2 little girls both dressing as angels, but with Halloween costumes that looked appropriate to their respective decades. The one dressine as an angel because it made her feel closer to her dead father. The "little peppermint halos". Dottie saying she has "a list" of Tess's shortcomings in etiquette. The little dance that Leonard's parents do which sets them up as a happy couple. The scene with Leonard and his dad with the Buck Rogers rings that shows that dad is involved, caring, and accepting of his son's interests and idiosyncrasies. The lady running along the sidewalk mumbling, "I'm not letting the Martians get my Singer sewing machine; it took me two years to pay it off!" The parrot repeating, "Fear not. Fear not." So many little touches...what *wonderful* writing and direction to create this kind of richness in such a limited amount of time. Quite often, as you've probably seen, my opinion about an episode will be based more on the number of good lines, or the amount of well-done character development, or the amount and quality of little details than it will be based on the actual plot. Usually when I am really upset by the plot, it's because the plot is either glaringly hole-y (too much so to be ignored even though it's peripheral to the good stuff I like), or there wasn't enough of the elements I prefer to distract me from a weaker plot. I liked "The Sky is Falling" well enough that the only plot glitch I caught was one I didn't mind at all about (see next post....I do have a *lot* to say about this ep!). Bright Blessings, Amilyn ---- It's a Russian thing. When we're about to do something stupid we like to catalogue the full extent of our stupidity for future reference. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 01:56:14 -0400 (EDT) From: AmilynH @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: The Sky is Falling--redux 2 This is a post I originally sent to the first TBAA list. We have a different enough group here, that I thought I'd recycle, because I still love this episode as much as I did the first night it aired. :-) I was fascinated by getting to actually hear bits of the actual Orson Welles War of the Worlds broadcast; I had known that the broadcast had occurred, been mistaken for a real invasion report, and caused localized panic, but I had never *heard* the broadcast, and so I had never understood how anyone could mistake a program for a newscast. And that performance was so well done that it could easily have been mistaken for the real thing; it was staged and announced just like a news show. Excellent work--frighteningly so. It was hard to remember that it was a time when entertainment was often patterned after the RKO-style films, where Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers ruled the screens, and realism was not exactly a buzz word in entertainment. The style of entertainment in the late 30's was not often modeled after real life, and so to hear something that sounded like a news broadcast would be far more likely to make people assume that they were hearing a news broadcast. This was hard for me to remember in a more cynical time when the recreation of events and scenes and dialogue that look and sound like they could be real (even when it's in a setting that makes us need to suspend disbelief) are the norm, and the exceptions to that style are, by and large, trashed by the critics and booed off the screen (unless they are deliberate farce). I had to remind myself that science fiction was also barely a familiar concept. H.G. Wells and Buck Rogers were, I believe, about the extent of the sci-fi out there, and there were a huge number of people who didn't know those *were* out there. Even _The Wizard of Oz_ with its color fantasy was a year in the future, and George Lucas and Steven Spielberg had not even been born. :-) I was originally complaining during the ep that they (the real people--not the characters re-creating history) should have just *remembered* that they had announced Orson Welles as doing H.G. Wells's _WotW_. It was not until someone pointed out to me that this particular broadcast and its panic were in large part what spawned the FCC's regulations about station identification breaks needing to occur every so often that I realised than anyone coming in late would *not* have heard that, and there would not have been as many channels to switch to to double-check, and that there would not have been a repeat of the information that it was a teleplay. It finally occurred to me that perhaps the people listening might have thought that there might not *be* other stations carrying the news (since this was still an age of news scoops...something virutally unheard of in our internet-computer-satellite society), and that they had no reason to switch when they were already getting the information. I loved how the whole family in the ep was gathered around to watch the radio tell the news; that was so accurate to how people I know say they behaved. I was impressed that in the ep, it was a child who saw the similarity to Chicken Little and registered that there was no real data to base the assumption on. And even Penny mostly believed that there were real Martians. But, oh, did I love her character. *Very* neat kid! This episode had incredibly well-fleshed-out characters, especially since they were introducing us to *so* many. The only odd thing for me about the episode is something that I easily explained away--and that was that the grandfather probably should not have been worried about the "madman" Hitler. In Oct., 1938 WWII hadn't quite started. The Anschluss to annex Austria *had* already occurred, and Hitler had gained the Sudetenland from west Czecholoslovakia under English Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's idea of appeasement to secure "peace in our time" (He seemd to have the approach of, "Give him this; it's all he wants. Then he'll go away."). However, there had been no shots fired, and most of the U.S. was in full denial that war was imminent. (Even *after* all of Europe was embroiled in war, the U.S. still stayed out of things for two years, until Pearl Harbor was bombed in December, 1941.) Hitler had, of course, been giving speeches and acting scary all around, but there had by this time been no open agression (oppression, certainly, however) toward the Jews (that really began in earnest with Kristallnacht in November, 1939). I kept expecting Leonard's family to turn out to be Jewish in this ep for a couple of reasons. One was Leonard's grandfather's attention to and fear of Hitler. Of course, this could be easily explained by saying he was just one of those people who followed the news closely and knew Hitler was scary, or by saying he was just a doomsayer who happened to be right this time. But by the time we met grandpa, we'd already met Leonard's son, who was played by an actor who almost always plays Jewish characters, and so I was kind of just expecting it. That, of course, is no proof, and I'm not trying to say that I think that Leonard and his family were definitely unequivocably Jewish, it's just that I thought it was interesting that there was an "almost set-up" that didn't happen. I do know, however, that it wasn't really being set up anywhere but in my expectations, based on stuff I know that doesn't necessarily apply here. Just food for thought. Of course, I'm the one who spent all of "Groundrush" waiting for them to comment on the fact that Jacqueline was pregnant. I just assumed that at any moment it would be brought into the story. And then it wasn't. And I realized that Jacqueline *wasn't* pregnant even though Ashley Crow (the actress) apparently was. (Yeah, this is one of my little entertainments--I've spent a number of years watching with amusement how they've dealt with filming around pregnancies on television (Julia Duffy on _Newhart_, Gates McFadden on _ST:TNG_, Phyllicia Rashad on _The Cosby Show_, Gillan Anderson on _XF_, Roma last season....), and so I tend to notice. That, and I'm obsessive. :-) ) For me, "The Sky is Falling" remains one of the show's finest moments. Okay. I'm going to stop now. Bright Blessings, Amilyn ---- Take the time to learn the Babylon 5 mantra: Ivanova is always right. I will listen to Ivanova. I will not ignore Ivanova's recommendations. Ivanova is god. And, if this ever happens again, Ivanova will personally rip your lungs out! C&C out. Civilians. Oh, and, about that god thing....no offense? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 07:13:29 -0400 (EDT) From: IDyeForYou @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: TBAA In a message dated 97-05-02 01:43:32 EDT, you write: << Or, better yet...a boy child and give John Dye an episode off... ;) ;) ;) In His Love, Dick P.S. I'm in for it now... >> If I thought this was for concern about John having rest...I'd applaud...since I don't...see below.... Susan ____________________ / \ ! Acme(tm) Thwapper ! ! ! \____________________/ / _)! / /__L_ ___/ (____) (____) ___ (____) \__(____) ! ! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 08:18:43 -0400 (EDT) From: SunbirdSE @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Martha Williamson on 60 Minutes Has anyone heard anything new concerning Martha Williamson being interviewed on 60 Minutes? I believe someone posted to the listserver about this subject several days ago. But I have heard nothing new on it, so I thought that I would ask. Jan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 09:26:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Darla Bradley To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: "The Sky is Falling" Hi all! I loved this ep---Susan, you were *so* right--Andrew's pouting and sulking was so cute--(bet John's mom had her hands full while he was "perfecting" *that* around age 2 or 3!!!) Andrew's encounter with the little "Grim Reaper" was the *best* part of the whole ep! Our Andrew didn't have much screen time in this one, but when he *was* there--it was *so* effective! :) As for *you*, Richard T: I'm gonna get out my phaser and. . .oops, wrong series! (I'm a trekkie, too!) Oh well,. . .you get my drift, don't you? Love to all. . .and miles of smiles! :) Darla ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 12:16:22 -0400 (EDT) From: AKpatricia @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: tbaangel-d Digest V97 #48 In a message dated 97-04-25 08:05:48 EDT, you write: << The TBAA chat on aol is still ongoing Sundays from 10 pm till 11:30 pm est...there is discussion about starting an IRC one...but nothing settled yet. There is also a TBAA maillist you can join...details on John's web >> Hi. Could you tell me how to find the TBAA chat that is on AOL? Thanks. AKpatricia. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:24:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Finabair @ .addy.com To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Re: AOL TBAA chat >Hi. Could you tell me how to find the TBAA chat that is on AOL? Easiest way in is to go to Keyword: TVGossip and select The Remote Control. 10 pm to 11:30 pm EST on Sundays. If you're having trouble finding us you can try IMing me, if I'm online. Take care, Jennie finabair @ .addy.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 14:57:04 -0400 From: Diana Seals-Hopkins To: "'tbaangel @ .addy.com'" Subject: RE: Martha Williamson on 60 Minutes =09 ---------- From: SunbirdSE @ .addy.com[SMTP:SunbirdSE @ .addy.com] Sent: Friday, May 02, 1997 4:18 AM To: tbaangel @ .addy.com Subject: Martha Williamson on 60 Minutes Has anyone heard anything new concerning Martha Williamson being = interviewed on 60 Minutes? I believe someone posted to the listserver about this = subject several days ago. But I have heard nothing new on it, so I thought that = I would ask.=20 Jan Hey Jan, and everyone.... The 60 Min show should air sometime this = fall, was the latest news I heard on this..... if I find out more I'll = let ya'll know as soon as I know. =20 Diana -------------------------------- End of tbaangel-d Digest V97 Issue #56 **************************************