The Roxanne (Police)

Language: Greek

Apparently they've been around for a few years, but I've just become acquainted with LED Christmas lights, as of a week or two ago, and I think they're pretty neat. They don't use much energy (about 14 watts for three strings of 50 lights), they're bright to the point of being kind of alarming, and they stay cool, so they're a lot less likely to set things on fire than the other kinds of Christmas lights.

There are a couple drawbacks: LEDs don't burn out or break like normal bulbs do, but they do get dimmer over time. They're more expensive¹. And (the one that bugs me the most) they flicker. The reason is that apparently they can only emit light when electricity is moving in one direction, not both. When on alternating current, they turn on and off at the frequency of the current, which in the United States is sixty times a second: this is enough to be noticeable, especially when you and the lights are moving relative to one another. Inside, where the husband and I have our lights, this is obnoxious: outdoors, where the lights could swing back and forth or sway with a tree, it might actually heighten the glittery effect that Christmas lights seem to be going for in the first place.

Particularly if one were using white LEDs (actually more of a blue-white: when I look at them, I think of things like class-B and -A stars, or moonlight, or the color of a room which is being illuminated only by a single small black-and-white television), there'd be some glitter. Which is what the husband and I bought, white ones, as it is "not essential to put in the red light."

-Jessi

¹$10.00 for a set of 50 lights at K-Mart. This is partially or totally offset by the much-reduced cost of operation, since they use so much less energy than the equivalent number of C9 or C7 bulbs. Some C9 and C7 bulbs use as much as 7 W per bulb, as opposed to about 4-5 W for a string of 50 LED bulbs. If you're inclined to go nuts with Christmas light displays,^a the savings in energy could add up very quickly.
^aWhy? I mean, they're pretty, but come on. Lots of things are pretty.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Roxanne, it isn't essential to put you in the red light.
Those days are beyond you;
selling your body in the night isn't essential.
Roxanne, it's not essential that you wear the dress, or
walk the roads tonight for the money.
Whether it's erroneous or right, don't attend.

Roxanne, it's not essential to put you in the red light.

I loved you since I knew you;
I wouldn't speak while under you.
I should say it to you, precisely how I feel:
I won't be shared with other boys.
I know it's arranged; thus, it's been decided
above you. This rendered you mine as soon as I said it.
I won't say this again: I'm in a bad way.

Roxanne, it's not essential that they put you in the red light.
Roxanne, it's not essential that you put the red light in.

So Don't Cost Me So Close (Police)

Language: Russian

I can't say that I ever had a crush on any of my teachers, at least as far as I can remember. In fact, I don't even remember thinking that any of them would be remotely interesting or pleasant to have sex with. The only possible exception was Mr. R------, my Government and Psychology teacher, and it wasn't so much that he was cute as that he was young enough (I'm guessing mid-20s) not to be entirely gross. Though maybe he was a little bit cute. I'd have to see a picture or something.

What's wrong with this girl, anyway? I mean, okay, maybe if your teacher looks like Sting circa 1985 (pictured), then having a crush is reasonable. Or even possibly obligatory, for straight girls and gay guys. But otherwise (and let's keep in mind that very, very few people ever sat in Sting's English classes), wouldn't it make more sense to be looking at the other students? I mean, how often is a teacher going to be the most crush-able human being in the whole high school?

So, in conclusion, I question the very premise of this whole song. And what was Sting doing thinking about this sort of thing in the first place? Were there not enough groupies or something?

-Jessi

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

A young teacher
questions the fantasy of a schoolgirl.
He wants her, which is
bad; he knows it's so.
He wants to be in order,
longing inside, marking
the page of the book this girl opened –
Therefore, now, this girl
will only be his half of the time.

Therefore don't cost, don't cost,
don't cost me so close.

Therefore, jealous friends.
(You know how poor girls are obtained.)
Sometimes it's not so light, as they're
the teacher's temptation, in order to be the pet,
therefore frustration and failure.
A moist cry tires them. She makes a stop with
his automobile, and she awaits a "dry heat."

Therefore don't cost, don't cost,
don't cost me so close, will you?

In the class for free conversation, that
hurt. In its attempts and attempts to order them,
the staff room formulated decisive expressions, in
which accusations will benefit. Any fly sees it.
He is himself, they are her: he begins to shake,
and to cough, as old as the valid person
in that Nabakov book.

Therefore don't cost, don't cost,
don't cost me so close.
Therefore don't cost, don't cost,
don't cost me so close.