Session 1984

“The Historical Channel Session”
“Model Envy and The Transcribers Curse”

Saturday, April 22, 2006 (Private/Phone)

Participants: Mary (Michael) and Howard (Bosht)

Elias arrives at ... PM. (Arrival time is 23 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning!

HOWARD: Good morning! I’m back again. I tried to control myself from asking how you are, but I just did it again doggonit.

This morning is … this day is … I asked especially for it (a session) because it was Margot’s and my wedding anniversary and I wanted to set up this session in honor of that; as well as to ask a few more questions and give some impressions and if there is time at the end (to give) some other thoughts that I’ve got written down.

I will start with a question that Marj(Grady) had asked since she had heard that I was going to have a session and she was having continuing difficulty breathing. She asks if she has created any serious illness with her smoking. I responded to her that I thought that perhaps the smoking was not the issue, but it was life itself and the restrictions that she has invited into her life that made her feel suffocated. And I wondered if that was that good advice?

ELIAS: I would express agreement. Yes.

HOWARD: OK. Because I really don’t think it’s the smoking that’s doing it.

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: It maybe aggravating it, but it’s not that.

With my impressions I’ve a whole string of them together and the first on my list, which has been on my list for some time, I was wondering if my pianist friend, Terry Trotter, was a focus of the directing essence of Mozart?

ELIAS: No. Observing.

HOWARD: Observing. So he and I observed Mozart.


HOWARD: The second one. I do believe that I am currently a musician. I have a focus of doing that and I have been searching for him and it occurred to me that the country and western
singer, is a focus of Bosht.

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: (Chuckle) What triggered that was the song he wrote called, “Mona Lisa has lost her smile,” which is a cute song and I like it a lot. Thank you for that.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

HOWARD: Joanne (Gildae) of Marj has said she suffers from “model envy” and its because her mother was the stand-in model of the Venus De Milo and I was the model for the Mona Lisa and I thought about this for a while and there are several unknown models out-there for the most famous icons in the world, including the Statue of Liberty. The more I thought about it, because of the statues origins in France and the sculptor himself is known [Frederic Auguste Bartholdi], but no one really knows who Lady Liberty is modeled from, and I did some research and it appears that his mother [], the sculptor’s mother, may have been the inspiration for, or the model for the statue and I decided that that was Joanne. She was the mother of the sculptor and was the model for the Statue of Liberty.

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: (Chuckles) So we have a name to go with the face, now, officially. There’s no more speculation, it’s over. (Elias laughs).

I also felt since I like the singer Seal a lot I see a lot of energy similar to Sheri in Fresno, I believe her essence name is Seale?

ELIAS: I am understanding.

HOWARD: Are they the same … are they a focus of the same essence.

ELIAS: No, observing.

HOWARD: Ok. I’m still working on Seal, he’s a mystery to me.

The other one, I’ve been cleaning up the records that Margot had of the sessions, she was a very good keeper of the records and I have been reading the sessions and I came across a session of … I believe her essence name is Bahlah, I have never heard it spoken, B-A-H-L-A-H.


HOWARD: She feels like someone I know and I got this impression that she was part of this Paiute-Donner party experience that was going on and I said, my gosh, she could be a focus of the

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: I don’t where that came from, it was out of the blue. She’s somewhat part of the Donner Party at least from the Native American point-of-view.

The next one is regarding my childhood. I was raised in Glendale, California and one of the boys I played with, his last name was Colton … this is a stretch, I’m trying to put it together.

There was a woman psychic in the Glendale area whose was Ann Ree Colton and I can recall a time, as children kind of gossip about rumors of things, that Mrs. Colton was like a gypsy or a séance person and I even think I had a reading from her.

I came across a book that she had written in Margot’s library and I said, “My gosh, I know this lady.” Not only then, the lady, but I also think I know a contemporary person who is a focus of hers or visa versa. And I made the connection to Sandel. And I wondered was that a correct connection: and Sandel?

ELIAS: Yes, overlapping focuses.

HOWARD: Well I told Fran about this and she said, “Oh I read her stuff and I don’t like her.” And I said, “That doesn’t matter.”

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: That was my impression so I’ll pass that on.

I’ve inserted this impression up higher (on my list) because it just occurred last week. But I came across in a [TV] documentary a booklet that was called The Protocols Of The Elders of Zion and it was written in the later time or stages of the Romanov dynasty in Russia, turn of century, 1900 plus or minus, and it stipulated several kinds of axioms, (I would call them axioms) much like Sun Tzu’s, The Art of War or Machiavelli’s, The Prince. And when I heard these axioms I immediately thought that I had written them.

And secondly this Protocols Of The Elders of Zion is used as proof by militant Mid-East terrorists and Aryan-type supremacist, the Nazis and not very savory people to prove that there is Zionist conspiracy of the Jews to take over control of the world.

And when I heard that it was attributed to Russia, prior to the revolution, but in Russia at that time, it occurred to me that my involvement in the assassination of the Romanov family there, down in the basement cellar that I can see so clearly, that group of people were not communists! That they were these zealot Zionists and I even got a name. The fellows name is something like Meechum Zubarah (spelling not confirmed). And he was the leader of a group and we kinda-like called ourselves The Angels of God! So I’ve got several parts of this:

Did I write the Protocols?
Were the Romanov’s assassinated by zealot Zionists?
Was my name Meechum Zubarah?
And did we call ourselves the Angels of God?

ELIAS: Yes to all.

HOWARD: (Chuckles) I ought to get one point for this, don’t you think?

ELIAS: (Laughing) I shall offer you four!

HOWARD: Well that’s amazing! It really is. It was stunning. And this book, The Protocols of the Elder’s of Zion, or booklet is really cannon fodder for all these folks that are anti-Jewish. All you have to do is read it, “See I told you so.” It’s not a nice a book or interpreted nicely.

Alright, the next of is: Was I the individual known as Joe Banana’s, Joseph Bananno?

ELIAS: Counterpart.


Final impression. In my quest to find out more about the post Civil War period and John Wesley Hardin’s attitudes and things ... where they came from and how they happened ... I have a book about Jesse James and as I looked at the picture on the cover, I thought of Jessica-Jennifer-Giselle and I wondered if Margot was a focus of Jesse James?

ELIAS: Observing.

HOWARD: Very good.

I asked Mary if the lady up the street [from her] if she was still with us? The one that was a focus of Giselle? Or whether she was still alive?


HOWARD: Ohhh (sadly) ... I’ll pass that on then.

This is one of the impressions I spoke about the last time. No, it’s not an impression. This is one of the visits that I had with Margot that I alluded to the last time we spoke.

One night in January, when I was going to sleep I asked Margot if anyone was observing me. And she said quite clearly, Sheila (spelling not confirmed). And then another name, Colette. I wrote this down and didn’t really make a connection until later and it occurred to me that my granddaughter’s name is Colette Ocean Reed. And I thought to myself, is Sheila the essence name of Colette? Or what did the names mean?


HOWARD: And she’s observing also?


HOWARD: (chuckles) All right. And by-the-way isn’t the middle name Ocean a great name?!

ELIAS: (laughing) Quite creative!

HOWARD: Wonderful.

ELIAS: And Expansive!

HOWARD: Expensive?

ELIAS: Expansive. (Laughs)

HOWARD: Expansive. Yeah, she covers the earth. There’s no part of her that isn’t everywhere. It’s wonderful. (pause)

Our friend Carol in Sedona visits a medium frequently in order to check in on her dead husband, Jim. After Margot passed, Carol asked the medium if Margot had anything to say to me and the medium said, “she’s busy investigating esoteric stuff and talking to Alice Bailey.” And I cracked up.

Carol asked me why I was laughing. I said that Alice Bailey was an old time metaphysician that channeled “High Masters” and other potentates, which Margot studied a long time ago.

I did not say that I doubted she would be talking to Mrs. Bailey, which prompted me to laugh in the first place. I mean if she was going to talk to all of the philosophers and dead guys who ever were, Alice Bailey would be last on her list. (Elias chuckles)

But then I thought, Hold on! Perhaps Alice Bailey was a focus of Margot and Margot was just visiting with past focuses, which I think would be something that Margot would want to do. Am I correct in that assumption?


HOWARD: ... That [also spelled, Baily] was a focus of Giselle?


HOWARD: (chuckles) I am so good!

ELIAS: (Laughs)

HOWARD: This is another one. Now, this is interesting because I wanted ask her which of the focuses that I don’t know about that she was so excited of discovering.

I had a verbal interchange with Margot in October ... some time ago; I was in bed, talking out loud as I often do when I got this impression of sitting in our front room. Instead of Margot sitting next to me, which she does on the couch that we have, she was sitting on my lap. I could actually feel the pressure of her weight on my legs. I asked her if she was enjoying her explorations and she said it was wonderful ... glorious ... she had met soooo many people. Her attitude was bubbly, her eyes were sparkling and her voice almost giggly in enthusiasm ... I’m sure you have witnessed this.

I asked her if she has found a focus that surprised her or she was very proud of, and if she had a favorite like your Elias focus and she said yes she liked her Giselle focus, and that one of Maria.

And I said, “Maria? When was that?”

And she said quite clearly, “When I was the companion of the French Pope.”

And I got searching for a name, I was really becoming more awake or conscious, whatever, I got a name of like Pope Alexander VI. It came out of the blue and I had no confidence that an Alexander was a pope, let alone one of several. So the next day I searched the internet and was surprised to learn there was an Alexander VI, but was he was a Borgia. In fact he was the father of Lucretia and he came from Spain, not France.

So have I misidentified the Pope’s name? Or ... was the focus … (pause) ... let me finish this.

Either I misidentified the Pope’s name or the French Pope that she is talking about is in and around that time of Borgia’s. And that Maria and the French Pope were companions and I did some more research and I finally came up with Pope Clement V. Around 1264 to thirteen hundred AD and he was also involved in the destruction of the Knights of the Templar. Is this the Pope she was talking about?


HOWARD: Pope Clement V. And that puts me with my question regarding the Knights Templar, was a focus of mine.


HOWARD: And that would be our connection at that time?


HOWARD: Amazing. Well, Mr. Clement was not very nice to Mr. De Moly. But that’s the way it goes.

ELIAS: It’s all a matter of perception. (laughing)

HOWARD: I know (chuckles).

Then we have ...She also said she was the wife of the King of Arabia and she admired him greatly. There is only one King that I know of prior to ... well there is only one King and that would be Ibn Saud. King Saud of Saudi Arabia. Because you would have to really go back in time to find another King. Is that one she is speaking of? Ibn Saud, 1881 to 1953?

ELIAS: No. Muuuuuch earlier.

HOWARD: Alright. Would this go back to times of biblical? Like the Queen of Sheba.


HOWARD: Would she be the Queen of Sheba?


HOWARD: OK. Well I don’t know of any Kings of Arabia back then. This is back in Solomon’s time.

ELIAS: Kings may also be named as Sultans.

HOWARD: Alright. I’ll have to work on that.

Where do we go? (Pause).

Wendy has engaged me in a discussion about Judas. I told her that it was my impression, my understanding that Judas did not exist, but was invented for the story. She responded by saying that Seth said that Judas was ... well ... In her words, “I remember this part when Seth was talking about how Jesus didn’t get crucified and he said that Judas was in the know and that he kissed the look-alike to point the soldiers to the wrong guy. So in that sense he was a more enlightened disciple.”

And I guess I’d like to know ... there’s also a book coming out regarding Judas’ writings, that was discovered recently and translated. I’d like to know whether Judas himself did actually exist?


HOWARD: Where did I get the idea that he was made up?

ELIAS: Many of the stories concerning this individual did not actually occur in the manner that they are expressed, but that holds also in regard to the individual of Jesus.


ELIAS: They existed and participated with each other and other individuals, but most of what you know of these individuals or the followers of Jesus or the occurrences associated with him or with any of his disciples, so to speak, are for the most part, stories. They have been expressed to create a basis for a philosophy and to create a new direction in the religious era.

HOWARD: Yes. Well there’s an image I have in my head of looking across a kind of a chasm at what I would take as the character Judas, either tied to a tree or hung from a tree, a dead tree actually. Is that an accurate image?


HOWARD: And it was soon after the so-called crucifixion also.

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: That wouldn’t ... Judas wouldn’t be me would he?

ELIAS: No ... but you do incorporate counterpart action.

HOWARD: Yeah. I see him and it’s not quiet like out of body experience or anything. Apparently I witnessed it.


HOWARD: OK. Did he hang himself? He wasn’t hung by others, but did he actually hang himself?


HOWARD: OK. (pause)

I had a couple of dreams recently where the voice of a customer of mine [come into my awareness], he is not a friend of mine, he is customer and I’m friendly with him and I respect him a great deal. He came to me and he was speaking something that really got my attention because I never think of him. It happened twice within a couple of days of each other. And I was wondering ... And I don’t recall what he said but whatever he said it sure paid attention. I don’t know what that meant. Obviously, it was important. I am just befuddled, I just don’t know what to say.

ELIAS: At times individuals, such as yourself, may incorporate the image of an individual that is symbolic to them. And in that, the factor of the respect is the reason that you chose this individual as the image. The information at times in this type of dream activity and imagery is not necessary to be translated into an explanation, for in a manner of speaking, it is a similar action that occurs when I am projecting energy to an individual and they receive it and they image myself in their dream imagery and they are aware that they were engaging conversation and they are aware that it appeared to them in the moment to be significant and important but subsequently upon awakening they cannot objectively remember what was being discussed. That matters not. For what is occurring is a subjective interaction and it is being assimilated immediately, and therefore it is not necessary to recall for it becomes translated through action that generally speaking you shall even notice.

You shall merely begin to generate some difference within yourself or within your perceptions or within your actions and it shall occur somewhat quickly. But, if you notice a difference, it would merely be a noticing that some expression of yourself has changed in some manner. But it may not be entirely clear.

These types of dream actions and interactions are generated to assimilate certain energies quickly that shall initiate some alteration in a subtle but overt manner in waking state. And it is not actually necessary to incorporate an explanation or even an understanding for the energy has already been assimilated and is already generating an effectingness.

It may be an alteration in attitude, it may be an alteration in the lightness or heaviness of energy. It may be an alteration of perception that allows you to move more easily and generate less of a heaviness within your experience and expression.

HOWARD: Very good. (pause) I had a follow up to that as you were talking but it is gone now. (Elias chuckles … like duh, another subjective message not objectively remembered). I am sorry, my mind is not as agile in keeping up as I should be I suppose.

ELIAS: It matters not.

HOWARD: I know. The subjective though, and the change, or the effectingness of the afterwards I think that it did occur, because I am not quite riding that emotional roller-coaster as much as I have [in the past.]

ELIAS: I know. I am aware.

HOWARD: I still get despondent, of course but that’s the way it is.

I think I should do this question because I had written it down when I was reading one of the past sessions, and you had asked in the Fresno session, and I believe that Margot and I were in attendance then … In that Fresno session you had asked, “What our automatic response was.” And I am not sure what I said when I was there, but I was thinking about it that in all honesty my automatic response seems to be to say no. Or to ... well ... to say no.

I seem to resist suggestions to do things, or to eat things or to wear things or ... you name it. I am like an obstinate, precocious little kid and I just say no.

The reason I wrote this down is because I had an incident at the tavern where I go and frequent a lot and they were having a Mardi Gras party more or less in honor of ... like a memorial to the New Orleans catastrophe and I was offered some gumbo and I said, no I didn’t want it. And they kept insisting that I should have some and I said no and finally I just left. I said, “No I am not going to have any gumbo. I don’t any gumbo. I don’t like gumbo, I am outta here!” And that’s my observation. If I would have offered anything, that would have been what I would have said at the session.

And then I guess I am wondering how do I deal with this and what does this really [mean] and what kind of damage is this doing to me? Or why am I this way?

ELIAS: It is not necessarily generating damage. In this many times you are actually merely expressing your preference. What subsequently occurs is that you judge your own preference. And therefore you oppose your own preference and you generate an expectation of yourself in that you should or should not express in this manner.

Let me express to you this is not uncommon many individuals incorporate preferences and do not actually identify them as preferences; they express them but subsequently they judge them and they oppose their selves in expressing their own preferences. And generate thought processes in discounting of themselves that their own preferences are bad. For that they should not behave or express in this manner. This is the reason that it is significant to identify what your preferences are and acknowledge them.

HOWARD: OK. I am not wishy-washy about my preferences.

ELIAS: ... For in the acknowledgment of your preferences you are also acknowledging your guidelines. And once you begin to acknowledge your preferences and recognize your guidelines, and acknowledge them also, you can express different choices that allow you to continue in your direction with your preference and your guidelines but also does not generate a judgment or an irritation in in association with other individuals and their differences.

HOWARD: Yep. Well I have to say that I feel that in my preferences I am very allowing of others to have theirs, because I have mine and I guess I just feel that’s a good way to exist. Allow yourself to do whatever you want. Don’t do what you don’t want. That’s a double negative, I didn’t mean it that way. You don’t do what displeases you, so you stay away from that and you let other people do what they want.

ELIAS: Correct. And that would be an acceptance of differences.

HOWARD: Yes. Good. I am glad that I asked that question. It was there because I thought it was a negative.

I have been around people that try to please people all of the time. And they are miserable.

ELIAS: Yes. For this an action of acquiescing and compromise and in that the individual is continuously discounting or denying themself.

HOWARD: And it is so terribly important what people think of you … and this ... and that ... you’ve got to behave properly and you get ulcers. It’s got to be a terrible life.

ELIAS: I may express to you individuals automatically express an respect and admiration and attraction to those individuals that do express themselves and do pay attention to themselves and do accept their own guidelines and express a confidence in themselves and their ability and their choices.

HOWARD: I agree. I enjoy being around people like that because it fortifies me too.


HOWARD: I was thinking of a friend of mine who said he wanted to win the lottery so that he could share the proceeds with other people. And I said, “are you nuts?” (Elias laughs) I said, “Why?” And he said, “I would like to give you $10,000.” And I said, “For what?” (Elias laughs)

This actually happened in the same tavern as the gumbo incident and I said, “I’ve never bought you a beer. Do you know why I’ve never bought you a beer?” [He said] no. “Because I don’t want you to buy me a beer” (Elias laughs) “I want to finish the beer in front of me, order another one if I want it or leave and I don’t want to feel obligated to you.”

I couldn’t understand why he would win millions of dollars just to give it away.

ELIAS: These are differences in guidelines. Your guidelines tend to move you in one direction and another individuals guidelines move them in another direction.

HOWARD: That’s true. I just thought that it would be a gift to himself to win the lottery, do what you want with it; fine, no strings attached.

ELIAS: Yes. But that would be your guidelines and your perception and that may not be satisfying to the other individual for his guideline maybe different.

HOWARD: That’s true.

Can we speak about the passing or disengagement of M.J., Vicki and Margot in a manner that doesn’t sound morbid? I find it very interesting and curious, but not coincidental, that the three original transcribers of your material have disengaged.

I am not sure how to word this ... In the transcription of the material and in the actual shift that we are going through, these three individuals Mary Jane Gilcrest, Vicki Pendley and Margot Cheney were very interested in the movement and could see perhaps their own beliefs obviously, being tested. And were liberating themselves in a manner to which eventually led to their disengagement ... and ... I don’t’ want to say that transcribing for Elias and Mary is fatal (Elias laughs) or toxic, but there is a thread here.

ELIAS: Yes you are correct.

HOWARD: ... there’s a theme going here.

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking. Yes. But it is not the action of transcribing is lethal. (Laughing) But ... there are commonalities and each individual engaged the commonality in how they engaged the information and how they perceived the information with the shift. And the action of the shift. And what they perceived to be the most supportive action to engage in association with this movement and with this information.

Each individual, as you are aware, incorporated their own directions and curiosities and their own intent. But commonality with each individuals was a choice to be supportive of this movement with this information in a manner is which each of these perceived to be more effective than they would have allowed within physical focus. In a manner of speaking each one incorporated their own individual restrictions within physical focus and also incorporated a knowing that outside of the physical focus there would be more flexibility. And more of an allowance to be supportive and in a more affective manner.

The first individual, that which you knew as Mary Jane incorporated obstacles is relation to her own restrictions; very strong expressed beliefs and very strong judgments, which creates an obstacle. And there was a tremendous (and is continuing) desire to be supportive in a manner that would allow the promoting and the continued movement of this information.

The second individual that you knew as Vicki also incorporated restrictions, but in a different manner; restrictions of not wanting to be participating in public form; not wanting to be participating in public exposure of herself. Being very supportive of this movement and being very supportive of the phenomenon and information, but expressing tremendous reservation and hesitation to public exposure of herself and knowing that eventually that would occur and not wanting to participate in that. And also, knowing that would create an obstacle. For it incorporated tremendous potential to hinder the movement in this information and its direction; and recognized that the supportiveness could continue in a much more effective, efficient manner, not being physically focused.

The third individual, your partner, Margot also incorporated restrictions; physical restrictions which she perceived to be a hindrance. She generated tremendous supportiveness but also perceived herself to be restricted physically and that generated disappointment and frustration in wanting to participate fully and wanting to be fully supportive but perceiving herself to be restricted as she incorporated physical restrictions. Therefore the commonality with these individuals was their restrictions and their tremendous desire to be supportive in the most efficient and effective manner. Which each of them has accomplished.

Therefore contrary to your current transcriber’s present game in expressing, which I am aware of, “The Transcribers Curse”, (Howard laughs) no such curse exists! (Laughs)

These have been individual choices that have been engaged by individuals the shared commonalities in desire and also in restrictions.

HOWARD: So I am not the first one to bring this up, I guess?

ELIAS: (Laughs) No you are not. (Laughs) Jel, temporarily incorporated a slight fear that she should not engage enlisting any other individuals to be transcribing for it may be hazardous to their health. (Laugh)

HOWARD: Yes. I actually remember that! (Elias laughs).

We’re coming to the end here and I’ve got two quick light things to say to you. One is a question, long ago you said that I held an aspect for this Dreamwalker. And I never asked if there was a name for this Dreamwalker.

ELIAS: (Pause) Diekota. D-i-e-k-o-t-a. (DEE-KOTA)

HOWARD: Wow! What a great name.

And the last thing is that I want you to know that you’re famous in the sports’ world. (Elias laughs)

I was watching ESPN at the beginning of the month, which is a sports channel, and the announcer said something absurd about some fact. It was a ridiculous fact, some sports trivia fact, and the other guy said, “Really?” and the first guy said, “Yeah, I called Elias on this and he said I was right.” (Elias laughs) And I fell out of the chair and said, “Oh my gawd Elias you’re famous.” You have replaced Ashtar and Ramtha. How does that make you feel?

ELIAS: (Laughing) It is not a competition.

HOWARD: (Laughing together) Well that’s good. That’s right up there with Howard Roark and Ellsworth Toohey’s, interchange. You know that one don’t you? You know, where Roark was asked by Toohey, in the book, the novel, The Fountainhead, when he said, “What do you think of me?” And he said, “I don’t think of you.”

I like your, “They are not the competition.”

Well that’s pretty much it.

ELIAS: Very well my friend. I shall be anticipating our next meeting, and I shall be offering my energy to you, in supportivenss and encouragement.

HOWARD: And I feel it and I thank you.

ELIAS: You are quite welcome. And I am acknowledging of you for your allowance to be receiving. To you in great friendship and tremendous appreciation, au revoir.

HOWARD: Good bye.

Elias departs at ... PM.

(1) I learned later that her essence name is Milde. Since I personally know Sheri/Milde and Sherry/Seale, I thought I was expressing the least distortion by referring to Sheri in Fresno. This mistake caused me to research everyone’s essence names so that I would not confuse people I know with one another ever again. Unfortunately Elias did not correct my mistaken cross-reference, so I still don’t know which Sheri he was referring to. Was it Fresno Sheri/Milde or Sherry/Seale?

(2)I did not know at the time that Gina was Michael/Micah’s sister and Nicky/Candace’s daughter. I do not recall if I ever met Gina, but I had met Mike and Nicky. It was then that I realized that I did not have Margot to help clarify my impressions any longer and I had to do something about my ignorance.

(3) Jacques de Molay, the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, while about to burn to death as a relapsed heretic, allegedly issued a curse to both King Phillip IV of France and Clement V. The curse was that both men would meet him in heaven within a year to face God for their wrongful accusations. Whether this curse was actually spoken or not, will perhaps always remain a mystery. The fact is that both Phillip IV and Clement V did die within a year of De Molay. Clement V (Bernard de Got) died on April 20th, 1314.

(4) Jel ... a soft g, referring to Giselle. This is the first time I have heard Elias give Margot a nick-name. Like Rudy for Rudim. This is soo cool!

(5) The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand.

(6) It is strange that I heard “They are not the competition.” This must be another example of my preferences. Hearing what I want to hear. Where’s Margot when I need her?