Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Answer me these

-Why did jury duty email me last night to say I "MUST" show up today, only to lead me back to the jury duty website I'd already visited, which continues to inform me that "no jurors" should show up today? Much anxiety and quadruple-checking and Facebook-posting later, it seems like I'm merely on call for jury duty for the rest of the week, that the email was some automated thing reminding me that today's the start of my possible jury duty. The "MUST," I think, referred to the need for me to show up unless otherwise stated. Otherwise was stated. I think.

-I understand the general 'be fully clothed' principle of the thing, but why are "t-shirts" among the items not allowed to be worn at NJ jury duty? If they want office-wear from the general public, maybe they should be prepared to shell out more than $5 a day, which I think even at H&M doesn't go much further than a t-shirt.

-Why didn't I think to do this interview? Or try, at least.

-What, dare I ask, is this?:


Spotted in the sponge (?) section of Sunrise Mart. Is it angry or happy? What makes it German? Why did I not think to take Japanese in high school?

-Will it be possible to recreate this yakitori recipe under non-barbecue circumstances? Charcoal-grilled over the weekend, it was pretty much the best thing I've ever eaten. Would the oven - I'm thinking the broiler - suffice?

8 comments:

Miss Self-Important said...

Is it unjust to be asked to wear clothing nicer than a t-shirt without having its cost covered by the entity making the request? If so, weddings have instantly escaped the reach of most people. Imagine having to subsidize all the guests' dresses and suits!

Phoebe said...

You don't get fined or jailed for failing to attend a wedding.

In utmost seriousness, though, what struck me about this was more that many things fall under the "t-shirt" umbrella, including plenty of reasonably formal women's shirts. Corporate-lawyer formal? No, but that would be far too much to ask of jurors.

Miss Self-Important said...

What about mandatory uniforms at public schools? Must these also be paid for by the state?

Is there a lot of controversy over what constitutes a t-shirt for the purposes of jury duty? Are women routinely being penalized for the misperceived informality of their short-sleeved shirts? I don't really see the problem with expecting people to dress for jury duty in a way that reflects respect for the institution of the jury trial and for the law. Why should they expect monetary compensation from the state for that? Do you think jury duty is like a small-scale form of military conscription, where the state does have to take responsibility for outfitting, lodging, and feeding you because it's forced you into service you would not have voluntarily rendered?

Phoebe said...

No idea whether this rule is enforced. If I had to guess, I'd imagine a neat, fitted, short-sleeve shirt would not get a woman arrested for jury-duty disobedience, but that a baggy, casual t-shirt on a man - or an undershirt - might cause problems.

As for the state paying... I really didn't mean this so seriously, and really was just baffled by the inclusion of "t-shirts" on the list of forbidden garments. I think something generic about not showing up in your underwear might suffice, but also that the bar for what constitutes "respect" in terms of clothing should be different for a juror than for a lawyer. The idea is to look neat and tidy, not to look professional.

Re: schools, if the uniform's more expensive than other kids' clothes, it ought to be subsidized, but either way, this is something worn all the time. ("Cost-per-wear" resurfaces!) It seems a bit much - not that this is happening! - to ask jurors to shop at Ann Taylor for outfits they'd only wear at most every few years.

Andrew Stevens said...

It seems to me that they ban t-shirts because it's an easy way of banning the things that appear on them. That way nobody has to police whether whatever slogan somebody is wearing on his t-shirt is appropriate or not.

Phoebe said...

Could be! They do also, separately, ban offensive-slogan t-shirts, I think, but this would do it.

kei said...

I thought that I had left a comment on your FB post re: the German maybe-angry sponge, but it appears the comment did not take for whatever reason! Anyway, his materials are of German origin, and he's not angry but rather, hard working. All you need is water, it claims! And his face, in particular, claims that you'll understand if/when you try it out.

Quick thoughts that I didn't post on FB:
A) The Japanese are really into lots of text on packaging, and B) I've been taken aback by this sponge as well. It kind of reminds me of an ad I once saw for some like, heating device or something used in buildings(my husband works in architecture). The device was best if it worked well and was quiet, and the silence of this product was referred to as "the sound of German engineering." I found this to be really frightening, way more than the potentially angry and efficient sponge, so much that I forgot the product and company. I thought in the East, maybe they don't know about angry Germans (at least now, or to the extent we do or remember in the West), but was surprised by the use of the phrase in an English language magazine.

Phoebe said...

Thanks Kei! (I keep missing things on FB, so could be!) Hard-working, that makes sense - for a sponge, and also why the sponge looked angry plus happy. He's just really focused!

Re: "German engineering," I feel as if I've seen this in car commercials, and done a double-take. In any case, I think stereotypes of German "efficiency," or even people saying that the German language sounds "angry," have taken on a life of their own, in a way, and no longer hint at anything sinister. Not - see your reaction to that ad, mine to the sponge - that it's never received that way.