Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Archive for December 3rd, 2020

Elton John interviews Diana Krall

leave a comment »

I have loved Diana Krall’s work since her first album, which blew me away. I actually saw her perform in Santa Cruz. It was packed and at the intermission people were in line to to use the rest rooms. She walked up, asked where the rest rooms were, and as she walked away a woman standing near me turned and said, “It must be reincarnation. She’s too young to be that good.”

And she’s from just up the road in Nanaimo (home of the famous Nanaimo Bar), though she now lives in Vancouver and London with her husband Elvis Costello and their twin sons (age 11). Interview is from December 27, 2019.

I really enjoyed this interview and you can search on YouTube and Spotify for more songs by her. (And I also love Julie London’s work and I think I had CDs of everything. And I had lots of Nat King Cole CDs. I remember hearing Nat King Cole from my childhood.)

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 6:57 pm

Posted in Daily life, Jazz, Music, Video

Iowa shows what happens when government abandons its role in protecting public health

leave a comment »

I lived in Iowa City for many years, and all three of my children were born there. It once was a pretty good state. Elaine Godfrey reports in the Atlantic:

IOWA CITY, IOWA—Nick Klein knew the man wasn’t going to make it through the night. So the 31-year-old nurse at the University of Iowa ICU put on his gown, his gloves, his mask, and his face shield. He went into the patient’s room, held a phone to his ear, and tried hard not to cry while he listened to the man’s loved ones take turns saying goodbye. When they were finished, Klein put on some music, a muted melody like you might hear in an elevator. He pulled up a chair and took the man’s hand. For two hours that summer night, there were no sounds but soft piano and the gentle beep beep beep of the monitors. Klein thought about how he would feel if the person in the bed were his own father, and he squeezed his hand tighter. Around midnight, Klein watched as the man took one last, ragged breath and died.

“I still don’t know if I’ve fully processed everything that’s going on,” Klein told me the day before Thanksgiving, as we talked about what the past few weeks and months at the hospital have been like. And with COVID-19 infections skyrocketing in his state, he added, “I don’t know when I will.”

To visit Iowa right now is to travel back in time to the early days of the coronavirus pandemic in places such as New York City and Lombardy and Seattle, when the horror was fresh and the sirens never stopped. Sick people are filling up ICUs across the state. Health-care workers like Klein are being pushed to their physical and emotional limits. On the TV in my parents’ house in Burlington, hospital CEOs are begging Iowans to hunker down and please, for the love of God, wear a mask. This sense of new urgency is strange, though, because the pandemic isn’t in its early days. The virus has been raging for eight months in this country; Iowa just hasn’t been acting like it.

The story of the coronavirus in this state is one of government inaction in the name of freedom and personal responsibility. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds has followed President Donald Trump’s lead in downplaying the virus’s seriousness. She never imposed a full stay-at-home order for the state and allowed bars and restaurants to open much earlier than in other places. She imposed a mask mandate for the first time this month—one that health-care professionals consider comically ineffectual—and has questioned the science behind wearing masks at all. Through the month of November, Iowa vacillated between 1,700 and 5,500 cases every day. This week, the state’s test-positivity rate reached 50 percent. Iowa is what happens when a government does basically nothing to stop the spread of a deadly virus.

“In a lot of ways, Iowa is serving as the control group of what not to do,” Eli Perencevich, an infectious-disease doctor at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, told me. Although cases dropped in late November—a possible result of a warm spell in Iowa—Perencevich and other public-health experts predict that the state’s lax political leadership will result in a “super peak” over the holidays, and thousands of preventable deaths in the weeks to come. “We know the storm’s coming,” Perencevich said. “You can see it on the horizon.”

Warnings from doctors like perencevich are what prompted my visit to Iowa City, a college town in eastern Iowa that serves as a sort of liberal sanctuary in a mostly red state. The city is home to the University of Iowa, and also to its public teaching hospital, which employs 7,000 people and has more adult ICU beds than most other state hospitals. I spent two days there just before Thanksgiving, interviewing doctors and nurses outside the brick walls of the hospital in the frigid November weather, standing six feet apart in the front garden or, when it rained, near a vent shooting out warm air on the building’s south side. Through the glass windows of the lobby, I watched as nurses in face shields pushed sick people around in wheelchairs. Once, I stepped inside to thaw and was startled by how quiet it was, and how the silence belied the suffering going on just a few floors above.

The first cases of the coronavirus in Iowa were recorded here in early March, when a group of infected locals returned home from an Egyptian cruise. As cases rose, Reynolds closed schools for the rest of the school year and most businesses for about two months. But by May 15, she’d allowed gyms, bars, and restaurants in all of Iowa’s 99 counties to open up again. She did not require Iowans to wear a mask in public, ignoring requests from local public-health officials and the White House Coronavirus Task Force and arguing that the state shouldn’t make that choice for its people. “The more information that we give them, then personally they can make the decision to wear a mask or not,” Reynolds said in June. She also wouldn’t require face coverings in public schools, where she ordered that students spend at least 50 percent of their instructional time in classrooms. When Iowa City and other towns began to issue their own mask requirements, Reynolds countered that they were not enforceable, undermining their authority. (The governor’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story.)

The rest of the summer and early fall brought on a mix of business closings and reopenings in counties around the state. (Complicating the picture, a data glitch at the Iowa Department of Public Health deflated case numbers in late summer.) Infections exploded in meatpacking plants, where managers were allegedly taking bets on how many workers would get sick. After students returned to schools and universities in the early fall, Iowa had the highest rate of COVID-19 infections in the country. In October, when Iowa was in the thick of community spread, Reynolds showed up, maskless and smiling, at a campaign rally for Trump at the Des Moines airport. (Her let-them-get-sick attitude toward the pandemic hasn’t been unusual among Republican governors, though there have been exceptions, including Mike DeWine of Ohio and Larry Hogan of Maryland.)

By late November, the number of new COVID-19 cases in Iowa was higher than at any other point in the pandemic, and as many as 45 Iowans were dying of the disease every 24 hours in a state of just 3 million people. Outbreaks were reported in 156 nursing homes and assisted-living facilities in Iowa, and the virus ran rampant in the state’s prisons.

Doctors have been warning for weeks that the state’s health-care system is close to its breaking point. The University of Iowa hospital reached a peak of 37 COVID-19 inpatients in April, but by Thanksgiving, it had 90. That number may not seem overwhelming until you consider that COVID-19 patients require dozens of staff and that many spend weeks or months in hospital care. To meet the demand, administrators have had to reschedule hundreds of nonessential surgeries and converted multiple wards into COVID-19 units. Doctors told me that they’re already short on ICU beds, and are having to decide which critically ill patients receive one. There are not enough specialists to oversee common life-support techniques, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or ECMO, for people with severe cases of COVID-19.

And the University of Iowa hospital is actually in a better position than many others in the state. Smaller institutions, which have fewer specialized doctors and fewer staff overall, are being overwhelmed across Iowa, and many face bankruptcy, in part because they’ve been forced to cancel elective procedures.

Worst of all, health-care workers are sapped. They are used to death. But patients don’t usually die at this pace. They don’t usually die in this way, with tubes sticking out of their throats and sucking machines clearing the mucus from their lungs. They don’t usually die all alone.

Joe English, a 37-year-old respiratory therapist, spends every day traveling between hospital units, hooking up seriously ill COVID-19 patients to ventilators or ECMO machines. When there’s nothing left to be done, English is the one who turns off those machines; he’s done so at least 50 times in the past few months. “What I’m seeing [among health-care workers] is just frustration, desperation,” English told me. “People have been acting like we’ve been fighting a war for months.”

There is a name for this feeling, says Kevin Doerschug, the director of the hospital’s medical ICU: moral distress, or the sense of loss and helplessness associated with health-care workers navigating limitations in space, treatment, and personnel. Just a few weeks ago, a man in his 30s with no medical problems arrived in Doerschug’s unit with a severe case of COVID-19. After a week on a ventilator, the man’s health had greatly improved. Nurses removed his breathing tube, and his vitals were stable. But just a few hours later, the man was dead. “Our whole team just sat down on the ground and cried,” Doerschug told me outside the hospital, his voice muffled by his mask and the sound of the heating vent. Trauma like that compounds when a hospital fills up with critically ill patients. “The sheer enormity of it—it’s just endless,” Doerschug said.

What makes all of this suffering and death exponentially more painful is the simple fact that much of it was preventable. A recent New York Times analysis clearly showed that states with the tightest COVID-19 restrictions have managed to keep cases per capita lower than states with few restrictions. Reynolds is in an admittedly complicated situation. She, like other governors, is facing enormous pressure to protect people’s livelihoods as well as their health. But a mask mandate is free. And failing to control the virus is, unsurprisingly, very bad for business. “We want to take care of people … It shouldn’t be this hard, and that makes us mad,” Dana Jones, a nurse practitioner in Iowa City, told me. “There are people to blame, and it’s not the patients.”

When Reynolds finally announced a spate of new COVID-19 regulations on November 17, the rules limited indoor gatherings to 25 people, and required that Iowans wear masks inside public places only under a very specific set of conditions. Four of the doctors and nurses I interviewed laughed—actually laughed—when I asked what they thought of the new regulations. The policies will do basically nothing to prevent the spread of the virus, they told me.

State lawmakers’ response to Reynolds’s handling of the pandemic breaks down along partisan lines. “She’s done a good job balancing people’s constitutional rights with a few restrictions that have been commonsense,” Representative Dave Deyoe, a Republican from central Iowa, told me, arguing that tighter restrictions in more liberal states haven’t led to lower death rates. Although this is a common argument among Iowa Republicans, it’s an unfair one. Many Northeast and West Coast states have had more total deaths because they were badly hit by the virus early in the pandemic, before strong measures were put in place. In the past seven days, Iowa’s death rate has been at least twice as high as that of New York, New Jersey, and California.

Democrats in Iowa believe that Reynolds’s inaction has always been about politics. Early on, . . .

Continue reading.

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 6:11 pm

A more pleasant video: Doris Day and Kirk Douglas in a scene from “Young Man with a Horn”

leave a comment »

Young Man with a Horn is an excellent movie in which Hoagy Carmichael also plays (a role and the piano). It continues awhile after the actual ending of the movie, doing an after-the-fact pasted-on fakei-cheery epilogue narrated by Carmichael, but if you stop the movie just before that starts, it’s a great movie. Here’s the scene:

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 6:02 pm

Posted in Jazz, Movies & TV, Video

Trump’s video deposition in Trump University fraud case

leave a comment »

Mother Jones posted the video below, which contains snippets from the deposition. Their note on the video:

📝 Full analysis on the Trump University deposition: https://www.motherjones.com/deposition
🗣 Full Trump “hot-mic” tape with commentary:
https://youtu.be/SqNtc-t0Cr0
📼 Trump deposition “hot-mic” tape highlights:
https://youtu.be/fZw228yu0hI

During the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump was burdened with federal lawsuits that accused him and his Trump University of defrauding students who had paid thousands of dollars to learn the supposed secrets of Trump’s financial success. As part of the lawsuit, Trump sat for a contentious six-hour deposition in Trump Tower on December 10, 2015. He subsequently managed to get the court to seal the video recording of the session.

But Mother Jones has now obtained the full video of Trump’s deposition. The written transcript of the session was released in June 2016, but the video version includes several exchanges that likely would have not played well for Trump if they had become public when he was chasing votes. Had the video deposition been released during the campaign, it probably would have yielded ammo for anti-Trump ads.

The video shows Trump parrying with the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Jason Forge, over various issues, including false statements made by Trump University employees and Trump’s own memory. Trump at one point griped, “It’s the most ridiculous lawsuit I’ve ever seen.” He claimed not to remember having boasted that he possessed one of the best memories in the world and repeatedly said he could not recall matters related to the fraud case. He downplayed false and misleading statements presented by Trump University instructors as merely “hyperbole,” refusing to label them “false.” He even disavowed a passage from one of his own books in which he had assailed educational institutions for committing “fraud.”

Mother Jones was provided the video by a source who asked not to be identified. Art Cohen, who was a lead plaintiff in one of the lawsuits against Trump University and Trump, confirmed that this was the actual video of the deposition. (Last month, Mother Jones posted a video of a conversation that occurred during a break in these proceedings between Trump and Dan Petrocelli, Trump’s attorney, in which Trump boasted of threatening the Better Business Bureau to change the D grade it awarded Trump University to an A.)

Trump University shut down in 2010. Though Trump vowed during the 2016 campaign that he would never settle the Trump U lawsuits, days after the 2016 election, he did just that. He paid the students $25 million, without acknowledging any wrongdoing.

NOTE: We are providing subtitles for this video that draw on details, including names, found in the official court transcript: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sta…

00:00 Introduction
00:44 Trump’s memory: best in the world?
02:07 The name game
07:00 Trump can’t name one instructor
07:27 “I’ve heard good things.”
08:27 Trump praises Hillary Clinton
14:59 Trump’s fraud flip-flop
17:58 Trump won’t call a lie a lie
21:45 Another lie Trump won’t acknowledge
25:53 Doing “well” by losing

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 5:56 pm

Michael Cohen on How ‘Monster’ Trump Will Undermine Biden

leave a comment »

Jeff Wise interviews Michael Cohen for New York:

Back in February 2019, President Trump’s longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen declared at a House Oversight Committee hearing that if Trump were to lose the 2020 election, “there will never be a peaceful transition of power.” Years of service as Trump’s bagman and consigliere — including participation in crimes that landed Cohen in prison with a three-year sentence — had provided him unique insight into the thoughts of the man he once called the Boss. With that in mind, New York asked Cohen to interpret Trump’s ongoing election meltdown.

Is there a strategy behind the tantrum Trump has been throwing since November 3? 
It’s all a shameless con job. He sees his claims of fraud as driving up donations — there’s nothing behind it beyond greed. Trump is using the moment to raise money. The number is actually shockingly large, over $150 million [currently closing in on $200 million – LG], a majority of it from small-dollar donations. This money is not going to his Election Defense Fund; it’s to keep him relevant in the GOP and launch his media brand. It’s all about money and power, and you need one to get the other.

Does he really believe massive election fraud took place?
There is that part of him that cannot accept losing. In his mind, the only way Biden could have won is through fraud. He has convinced himself of a narrative and is being fed back what he wants to hear from sycophants. The only one of these scumbags who truly believes this crap is Sidney Powell, but she is legitimately insane.

Assuming he can be removed from the Oval Office, what next?
The money he’s raising is going toward the Save America PAC, which will be the base from which he establishes an entire parallel system of government. I call it the Republic of MAGAstan, and its capital will be in Florida at Mar-a-Lago. He’s also going to have his own 24/7 media platform with Trump TV, which will be an unholy alliance between Newsmax, OANN, and whoever he can drag from the swamp looking for relevance. He’ll continue to suck from the veins of his MAGA faithful while chipping away at the Biden presidency, casting doubt on the legitimacy of the election. All of this is in service of a Trump 2024 run for president and his return to power. If this happens, all bets are off. He will try to change the Constitution and give himself a third term.

Yesterday the New York Times reported that Trump has been discussing pardoning his three oldest children as well as Jared Kushner and Rudy Giuliani over concerns that the Biden administration may seek retribution against them. Do you think he’ll issue those pardons?
If Donald Trump believed the pardons would be a slam-dunk benefit to him, he would already have signed off. Unfortunately for him, he is painfully aware that there are negative repercussions to such an action that could place him, his children, and his company in significant legal trouble. It is why he is proceeding cautiously.

The idea that he’s concerned about “retribution” is what’s known as deflection. Donald Trump knows that he, his children, and Kushner have all violated the law. And it’s not about retribution; it’s about an investigation that would most certainly lead to a conviction. He’s doing an act in advance of what he knows is coming down the pipeline. He’s already laying the groundwork for the premise of why he believes he must pardon his family: not because of their own dirty deeds but because of retribution. It’s all about distraction and deflection.

In your book, Disloyal, you tell a fascinating story about the socialite Patricia Kluge and how Trump slyly leveraged his way into acquiring her $100 million estate by exploiting her weaknesses. You wrote that Trump “was constantly calculating and assessing how to take maximum advantage of every situation.” I wonder if, while most people see the lame-duck period as a time to pack up and go, he sees it as a valuable opportunity to create discomfort that he can then trade for something valuable. . .

Continue reading.

It’s worth noting that it’s not just Trump who’s dedicated to undermining Biden. The entire GOP is complicit and will actively engage in obstructing all Biden initiatives, just as they did for Obama.

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 3:42 pm

Chimpanzees correct cultural biases about how good mothers behave

leave a comment »

Maria Botero, assistant professor of philosophy at Sam Houston State University in Texas, writes in Psyche:

Several years ago, I had a unique opportunity to observe and live with a group of chimpanzees, studying the mysterious relationship between chimpanzee mothers and their infants. As a philosopher, I never thought that my work would lead me to watch a group of chimpanzees lazily stretching their arms out of their nests as the first rays of sunlight came through the forest, that I would walk miles with them in search of food, that I would have to wait with them, miserable and wet, under a tree for the rain to stop. But there I was.

For the purpose of my fieldwork, I observed six adolescent chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) and their families for four months in the Kasekela chimpanzee community at Gombe National Park in Tanzania. Being part of this group allowed me to share their everyday life by making it my own everyday life. The experience of entwining my life into theirs changed the way I observed them. It allowed me to examine the preconceptions I brought into the field, and provided me with new insights into the social behaviour of chimpanzees.

Presuppositions play an important role in the way we observe animal behaviour. The role of these presuppositions affects how researchers choose and design their observational methodologies. The interests of researchers vary and, as a result, the background assumptions brought to any research design will vary, too. For example, if a primatologist is interested in understanding behaviour in terms of individual strategies of investment in time and energy, they will focus on observing behaviours such as male hunting and aggression that fit this background model. Those who are interested in understanding behaviour in terms of cooperation will focus instead on cooperative behaviours in females, since it better fits that model. All these contrasting presuppositions influence the way that we describe the behaviour of a species.

These presuppositions and values can play an even bigger role by influencing how we observe, how we understand our observations, and our own role in how these observations are conducted. I came to understand the radical influence of these presuppositions and values when watching how mother chimpanzees interacted with their offspring. Anyone who has seen an ape care for her infant – the gentle way that mothers cradle their newborn – can recognise the shared experience with humans. However, it’s not all so humanlike: you will also see chimpanzee mothers not share food with their infants – in fact, they might even steal food from their infants. So the observer might then conclude that the comparison with humans ends. But does it? Once we start looking at the different ways in which human caregivers and infants around the world interact, this tension between being the same and being different comes to light again. Discovering differences among childrearing practices in different human cultures helps us recognise the difficulties of universalising claims about parenting, even among humans.

As preparation before my trip to Gombe, I read the renowned paper ‘Affectional Response in the Infant Monkey’ (1959) by the American psychologists Harry Harlow and Robert Zimmermann. Despite troubling ethical implications, their work deeply influenced our understanding of the mother-infant interaction. Harlow and Zimmermann separated infant rhesus monkeys from their mothers and replaced them with inanimate versions of themselves made of wire. Some of the monster-mothers were covered in cloth, and some, without cloth, were constructed in such a way that they would provide milk. Harlow observed that the infants spent most of their time clinging on to the cloth mother, and continued to do so even when various ‘fear-inducing stimuli’ were presented to them, for example, a moving toy bear. These experiments showed that, if the mother was missing or if monster-mothers were provided, the infant would exhibit neurophysiological and behavioural characteristics that would prevent it from engaging in social interaction and cognitive tasks.

Similar outcomes have been observed in human infants, particularly in the extreme case of Romanian orphanages. In 1990, after the fall of the Ceauşescu regime, it was discovered that children in orphanages had been housed with minimal food, minimal clothing, minimal heat and minimal caregiving. Several studies of these infants found difficulties in the children’s attachment patterns, and delays in cognitive and social functioning. In short, these early studies make it clear that the caregiver and infant interaction is fundamental to the primate infant’s development.

Armed with this background knowledge, I arrived at Gombe National Park ready to start my observations. And then everything changed. Allow me to explain this change through one of my earliest and most vivid memories from my field research at Gombe: the first time I saw a mother and infant chimpanzee pair. I was expecting to observe very sensitive chimpanzee mothers who would frequently gaze at their infants, ready to respond to the infant’s needs – but this is not what I saw. Mothers rarely so much as glanced at their infants. They always seemed to be occupied elsewhere, looking at other chimpanzees, exploring, grooming – in short, paying attention to anything but their infants. This contradicted what I had read about the attentiveness of mothers. The research was not borne out by my observations. But then I looked closer. As time passed, I noticed that mothers are attentive through less obvious modes of interaction: for example, they constantly keep an arm or hand in close contact with their infants, monitoring them without having to look at them.

Once a month I travelled to Kigoma (a bustling port in northwestern Tanzania) to gather provisions. There, I started noticing that human mothers in town carried their infants on their backs, wrapped in beautiful fabrics. This reminded me of my childhood in Colombia where, in rural areas of Cauca, mothers carried their infants in a similar way. I also started thinking of how different this was from the way mothers in urban areas of Colombia and Canada (where I was living) interacted with their infants. In these urban settings, many infants spent a large portion of their time in strollers, engaging through visual and vocal modes of interaction.

This experience provided me with two fundamental insights. First, . . .

Continue reading.

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 3:27 pm

Arecibo Observatory collapse video

leave a comment »

Alexander Witze writes in Nature:

The iconic radio telescope at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico has collapsed, leaving astronomers and the Puerto Rican scientific community to mourn its demise.

Engineers had warned that the 900-tonne platform suspended above the telescope’s 305-metre-wide dish could fall at any moment, given that one of the main cables supporting it had snapped in early November. Last month, the US National Science Foundation (NSF), which owns the observatory, had announced it would shut down the telescope permanently, citing safety concerns over its instability, and damage too extensive to repair.

The final collapse happened just before 8 a.m. local time on 1 December. No one was injured.

Drone footage of the collapse, released by the NSF two days later, shows cables snapping at the top of one of the three towers from which the instrument platform was suspended. The platform plummets downward and crashes into the side of the dish. The tops of all three towers also snap off. . .

Continue reading. There’s more at the link, including photos of the aftermath.

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 2:32 pm

Mass-timber construction: New to me

leave a comment »

The building pictured above (Brock Commons Tallwood House, University of British Columbia) is built using mass-timber construction. This is not the stud-frame construction used in constructing homes, but (as the name implies) massive engineered structural components of wood.

 

Mass-timber (and tallwood) construction is becoming popular for a variety of reasons, including ease of construction, low cost, and very low carbon footprint. (Concrete is very carbon-intensive cause of how cement is made, and the same goes for steel — and those are also more costly than engineered wood.)

This report (PDF) has quite a bit of information on the technology.

One immediate objection is that wood burns, whereas concrete and steel do not (though in fact steel beams in buildings must be fireproofed — coated with sturdy insulation — since an interior fire would greatly weaken uncoated steel beams). But in fact, the thick engineered wood beams are remarkably fireproof. The photo is from an interesting page (which also addresses the earthquake-resistance issue), which notes:

During a fire resistance test of a 5-ply cross-laminated timber (CLT) panel wall, the panel was subjected to temperatures exceeding 1,800 Fahrenheit and lasted 3 hours and 6 minutesfar more than the two-hour rating that building codes require.

During fires, exposed mass timber chars on the outside, which forms an insulating layer protecting interior wood from damage. Additionally, when the code requires mass timber to be protected with gypsum wall board, the mass timber can achieve nearly damage-free performance during a contents-fire burnout event.

There’s much more, and a search on “mass-timber construction” will find many references, including perhaps this Wikipedia article: Engineered wood (to which you are re-directed if you search “Mass timber”).

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 12:36 pm

The luxury of ultra-premium shaving soaps

with 3 comments

As the song says, “How ya gonna keep ’em down on the farm, after they’ve see Paree?” Once you’ve shaved with an ultra-premium soap, it’s tempting to stick with that level of performance and after-effect. Yesterday’s shave with Dr. Jon’s wonderful “Vol. 3” formula switched on my desire for more, so today I’m using one of Declaration Grooming’s Milksteak line, Cuir et Épices, the first of that line — and a fine fragrance it is, with more leather than spice, I would say, but very nice withal.

I pre-soaked my Plisson HMW 12, but again I cannot really tell the difference in a badger brush between pre-soaked and not. The lather was thick and fine-grained and abundant.

Three passes with the Above the Tie R1 and then a splash of Geo. F. Trumper’s Spanish Leather. My skin feels wonderful. I think I’ll stick with the ultra-premiums for a while.

Written by Leisureguy

3 December 2020 at 11:11 am

Posted in Shaving

%d bloggers like this: