Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Do you believe in Magic?

Well, I don't pay much attention to Horoscopes. I didn't even know my zodiac sign until a few minutes ago. I'm a Gemini by the way. I also have a positive polarity! Can anyone tell me what that means?

You see, I was flipping through the Round Town News when I landed on the Horoscopes page written by Kenny Corris.

Gemini: The power of positive thinking sets you in the right direction right now. This surely is a testing time and you know that you have to be sure before you take things further afield. The attitude of those who really have your interests at heart will be something rather wonderful, and you can begin to dump negative energies you have developed for the sake of both, vital and adequate protection.

No idea, really, what Kenny was trying to tell me, but I kept reading. My tail stood straight up. Turns out Kenny has been in contact with a Tibetan Terrier on the other side of the Rainbow Bridge. An angel?

"One client wanted to make contact with Charlie one day. After opening doors and channelling energy to facilitate this I was initially upset that clear communication was not getting the audible response that was called for. I suddenly realised that Charlie was a dog. A Tibetan Terrier to be precise, and my client knew that there was actual contact with her departed pet when I recognised the breed! Then a little bell could be heard. Charlie had a bell on his collar to warn away the squirrels that he loved to chase in the garden. Sound and picture, loud and clear from the Spirit Realms! One very happy lady left my office that day."

It turns out Kenny Corris is a working Medium, Clairvoyant, Psychic, and Astrologer, a Healer, Psychic surgeon, Teacher, Therapist and Life Coach with over forty years of experience.

He studied Astrology with the late and great Carole Golder, Astrologer to the U.K. Daily Express for many years, and he has been casting horoscopes himself for some thirty years.

Kenny currently writes articles for a growing number of publications, including the Round Town News on the Costa Blanca in Spain, and casts Horoscopes internationally for the World’s press, on a regular basis.

No stranger to broadcasting; Kenny’s first break was with Molly Parkin on her “Good Golly Miss Molly” show on BBC Wales. He has made appearances on Thames TV, with Robert Kilroy Silk. And has guested on TVam, Anglia, and STC, as well as W.I.O.D. Miami where he presented daily horoscope readings and forecasts. Currently Kenny is a weekly guest on Coast Radio FM’s Friday afternoon show, on the Costa Blanca.

Dividing his time between private sittings and castings and a host of personal appearances, Kenny always enjoys demonstrating his abilities publicly, speaking to groups and organizations, promoting spirituality wherever and whenever in a down to earth and practical manner.

Kenny runs a number of workshops and courses throughout the year on spiritualist matters.

This winter Kenny visits New York to demonstrate on tour. He has also been invited to Madrid, Barcelona, Bergen, London, St Ives, and Southern California to run workshops and courses.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Sh-Sh-Sh-Sherpa, Beautiful Sherpa

Sherpa, CH Deep Acres Autumn Splendor

Today is my boy's, Sherpa's, 18-month birthday. He lives in the state of Connecticut where, apparently, dogs are allowed on the dining room table.

I so want to live in Connecticut.

Instead of singing that tired old birthday song, won't you join me in a round of Sh-Sh-Sh-Sherpa, Beautiful Sherpa (sung to the tune of K-K-K-Katy, Beautiful Katy). I'm sure you know this old ditty.

"K-K-K-Katy" was a popular World War I-era song written by Geoffrey O'Hara in 1917 and published in 1918. The sheet music advertised it as "The Sensational Stammering Song Success Sung by the Soldiers and Sailors," reflecting a time when speech impediments could be poked fun at—albeit gentle fun in this case. The song tells the story of Jimmy, a young soldier "brave and bold," who stuttered when he tried to speak to girls. Finally he managed to talk to Katy, the "maid with hair of gold."

Sh-Sh-Sh-Sherpa, Beautiful Sherpa
You're the only b-b-b-boy that I adore
When the m-moon shines over the cowshed,
I will meet you at the k-k-k-kitchen door

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Madonna and Dog

Renaissance Art
An artist’s best friend—the dog in Renaissance painting
Dogs are a common visual motif in Western art and have been called the “artist’s best friend” for their role as companion and life model. The close and accurate observation of animals is a hallmark of Renaissance (and Baroque) art in general, and as the most domesticated and favored of species, it is inevitable that dogs in particular would be well represented. Sketching from life was part of the Renaissance artist’s normal routine, and when artists began to look at the world around them, there was the dog—a ready and willing source of inspiration.

Throughout the Renaissance, dogs abound in art, most often appearing as incidental background motifs, part of a hunting scene, religious, mythological, or allegorical composition, or beside their masters in portraits. However, even a brief accounting of their role in the visual arts of the period involves issues that go well beyond the history of art, including court life, aristocratic tastes and fashion, pet ownership, the status of hunting among the royal and noble classes, developments in the classification of dog breeds and types, and changing views of the intelligence and mental abilities of dogs. For example, although working dogs were ubiquitous in the Renaissance—they turned cooking spits, pulled carts, herded sheep, baited wild animals, and competed in sporting events—their menial status mostly precluded their appearing as such in paintings of the period.

The first great observer of animals in the Renaissance, Pisanello, produced several sensitively observed studies of dogs, evidently drawn from nature, in a sketchbook in Paris. He used these studies for the Greyhounds, hound, and two small Spaniel-like dogs in the foreground of The Vision of Saint Eustace (fig. 2). Half a century later, Albrecht Dürer rendered dogs with the attention of a portraitist, in silverpoint and ink and wash, leaving us several preparatory drawings of individual animals taken directly from life that exemplify the Renaissance artist’s intensifying quest for accuracy and realism. The tense, nervous hunting dogs in the foreground of his largest engraving, The Vision of Saint Eustace, were realized so persuasively that they served as an important source for subsequent artists who reused them for their own compositions.

Not all depictions of dogs in the Renaissance were lifelike or the result of firsthand observation, however, because many artists viewed animals as merely a vehicle for conveying a bewildering variety of complex and often contradictory symbols. Just as often as dogs were shown in Italian paintings as the companion of the young Tobias, protecting the youth as he wandered far and wide in search of the fish that would cure the blindness of his father, Tobit, they also carried the ancient burden of pariah, or scavenger, dogs, associated in the Old Testament with evil and unclean things, and in the New Testament with Christ’s persecutors. The dog was the faithful attribute of Saints Dominic, Margaret of Cortona, and Roch, as well as of the hunters Diana, Adonis and Cephalus, but it was also a symbol of sexuality and promiscuity. Yet church fathers, scholars, poets, and humanists were symbolized and accompanied by dogs. In Dürer’s engraving of Saint Jerome in His Study (1514; Bartsch 60), the saint works on his letters or translations, while his dog sleeps quietly nearby, a vivid symbol of the contemplative life.

As early as the second half of the 15th century, dogs began to take on an independent existence in art. Their status as objects of favor and prestige among the European ruling families and their owners’ desire for conspicuous display, particularly among the Italian ducal families in Mantua, Ferrara and Florence, resulted in a demand for portraits of individual dogs. In an undated account sent to Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan, by Zanetto Bugato, one of the items to be paid for was “a portrait of the dog called Bareta.” Francesco Bonsignori is said to have painted for Francesco Gonzaga, 4th Marquis of Mantua, a dog whose likeness was so convincing that one of his own dogs was said to have attacked the painting.

Although dog portraiture per se did not become a widespread practice until the early 18th century, it is clear that Renaissance patrons did not consider their dogs as frivolous or inconsequential elements of their own portraits. Dogs, even today, are natural adjuncts of portraits, appearing as fashion accessories or indications of a sitter’s tastes and interests. Even in the early Renaissance they appear to have been painted from life—surely the little Griffon terrier in Jan van Eyck’s Giovanni Arnolfini and His Wife (fig. 4) is a family pet and stares boldly at the beholder, irrespective of his role as a traditional attribute of marital fidelity.

A notable example of a vivid and lifelike dog appearing alongside its owner in Italian painting is the pair of elegant Greyhounds accompanying Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta Kneeling before Saint Sigismondo in Piero della Francesca’s fresco in the Tempio Malatestiano, Rimini. Although bred principally for hunting, Greyhounds were often kept as court pets in great luxury; this pair was a gift from Pier Francesco di Lorenzo de’ Medici. The white Greyhound, lying with outstretched paws, waiting patiently on its master, is especially well rendered. Although these noble dogs have been widely interpreted as symbolic of some virtue like fidelity, they are equally convincing examples of the high value placed upon hunting dogs in the Renaissance and were probably more greatly appreciated by contemporary observers for Piero’s detailed naturalism. Fifteenth-century letters survive in which Italian princes express interest in obtaining fine hunting dogs or giving them as presents. Such dogs often wore costly collars—the dog collars of the Ferrarese court were made by the court goldsmith—and the 1468 inventory of Sigismondo’s possessions shows that he owned a number of elaborate dog collars studded with silver.

The affection that Ludovico II Gonzaga, Marquis of Mantua, had for his dog, Rubino, is confirmed not only through his letters and, following the animal’s death, the erection of a tombstone complete with a sentimental Latin epitaph, but also by the inclusion of the creature itself—a russet-coated Bloodhound-like dog—beneath his chair in Andrea Mantegna’s celebrated fresco depicting Ludovico, his family, and court (1465–1474; Camera degli Sposi, Palazzo Ducale, Mantua). The adjacent fresco, which depicts two huge Mastiffs and other hunting dogs, further attests to the passion for dogs at the Gonzaga court. Another notable representation of a dog in monumental wall painting in the Renaissance is the feathered Saluki with a studded collar in the foreground of Pinturicchio’s Departure of Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini for Basel (c. 1503–1507; Cathedral Library, Siena). In this fresco, the animal appears almost as conspicuous as the figure of the future Pope Pius II.

In the 16th century, dogs adorned portraits in a variety of ways intended to reflect the character, strength, and nobility of their owners. Lucas Cranach’s imposing pair of full-length portraits of Henry the Pious, Duke of Saxony, and his wife, Catherine of Mecklenburg (1514; Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Gemäldegalerie, Dresden), illustrates the distinctions often made between dogs in royal portraiture: lapdogs represented as exclusively female companions, large hounds depicted as attributes of male virility. The size and prominence of the dog in Antonio Mor’s Cardinal Granvelle’s Dwarf and Dog (c. 1550; Musée du Louvre, Paris)—depicted with such vividness that he can only have been a living dog—suggests that the portrait of the animal interested the patron as much as that of the ornately dressed court dwarf. Increasingly during the 16th-century, dogs appear in portraits not as symbols, or objects of status or ownership, but merely because their masters considered them beloved companions. The Bolognese painter Bartolomeo Passarotti, who included dogs frequently in his late works, summarized explicitly the era’s tender feelings toward dogs in Portrait of a Man with a Dog (c. 1585; Pinacoteca Capitolina, Rome), remarkable for the obvious display of affection between the pair.


Italian painters of the 16th century produced a succession of memorable canines that suggests how familiar and admired dogs had become during this period. For Kenneth Clark, the wordless sorrow of Piero di Cosimo’s grieving dog in A Satyr Mourning over a Nymph (fig. 1), “the best-loved dog of the Renaissance,’’ marked the beginning of a long tradition in Western art of investing animals with human characteristics. Other notable depictions of dogs include the beautifully painted hounds in Parmigianino’s frescoes of Diana and Actaeon (c. 1523–1524; Camerino, Rocca Sanvitale, Fontanellato); Jacopo da Pontormo’s dog, drawn from life with its back arched, stretching itself in the lunette fresco depicting Vertumnus and Pomona (1520–1521; Gran Salone, Villa Medici, Poggio a Caiano); Dosso Dossi’s white dog in the foreground of Circe and Her Lovers in a Landscape (c. 1511–1512; National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.); and Federico Barocci’s brown-and-white puppy appealing to the spectator at the extreme lower right of the Madonna del Popolo (1575–1579; Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence).

It is in the work of the Venetian painters Carpaccio, Titian, Bassano, and Veronese, however, that canine imagery flourished in a sustained fashion. One of the first Renaissance painters to employ scenes of everyday life in his work, Vittore Carpaccio gave particular prominence to dogs in two vastly different contexts: as a symbol of carnality or animal appetite at the feet of a seated courtesan (c. 1495; Museo Correr, Venice), and as a symbol of the attributes of a scholar in the form of a fluffy white Bichon in Saint Augustine’s study (c. 1502; Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni, Venice).

With his preference for naturalistic form, Titian played an especially significant role in the promotion of the dog in the visual arts. In the portrait Federico II Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, the gesture of the white Maltese-type dog pawing his master is especially appropriate, as the duke’s love for his dogs was well known; in the spring of 1525 he owned no fewer than 111 dogs. The keenly observed dogs in Titian’s portraits appear as solid and real, as convincing and touching, as the human sitters—for example, Charles V Standing with His Dog (1533; Museo del Prado, Madrid); Eleonora Gonzaga della Rovere, Duchess of Urbino (c. 1537, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence); Captain with a Cupid and a Dog (c. 1550–1552, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Gemäldegalerie, Kassel); and Clarice Strozzi (1562; Staatliche Museen, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin), in which the lifelike depiction of the small red-and-white Spaniel was singled out by Pietro Aretino in a letter to the artist.

The toy dogs employed in Titian’s Venus of Urbino (1538; Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence) and in his paintings devoted to the theme of Venus with an organist or lute player (c. 1548–1549; Gemäldegalerie, Berlin), as well as in his second version of Danaë (1553–1554; Museo del Prado, Madrid), have been interpreted as symbols of female seductiveness. His hunting scenes with Venus and Adonis (1553–1554; Museo del Prado, Madrid) naturally feature realistic portrayals of dogs, and they appear conspicuously in the foreground of the late Flaying of Marsyas (c. 1575; Archiepiscopal Palace, Kremsier). If Titian ever produced a painting with a dog as its principal subject, it has not survived; the near-exception is the engimatic Boy with Dogs, which has been recently interpreted as an allegory of the complementary operations of nature and art: The contrast between the nursing mother’s relationship to her pups and the boy’s to his adult dog expresses the idea that nature brings forth, while art (or culture) trains and nurtures.

Jacopo Bassano seems to have been naturally drawn to animals as his subjects, and he depicted a variety of dogs of different breeds in his historical, religious, and genre subjects over a period of 40 years, beginning with the Adoration of the Magi (c. 1539; Burghley, Stamford, Lincolnshire), which includes a small Spaniel at the Virgin’s feet. He lent a naturalistic note to his compositions with motifs such as the dogs that sniff at the sores on Lazarus’s legs in the foreground of Lazarus and the Rich Man (c. 1554; Cleveland Museum of Art) and lick the blood of the wounded man in The Good Samaritan (fig. 3). Around the middle of the 16th century, Bassano produced a painting of two hunting dogs that survives to mark the beginning of a tradition of commissioned “portraits,” or at least likenesses, of actual dogs that reflects a new interest in and psychological understanding of animals. This unusual work was commissioned in 1548 by Antonio Zentani, a patrician Venetian art collector who apparently wanted a painting of only these two dogs, suggesting to some that these animals were prized hunters from his own kennel and that their depiction was not expected to convey any symbolic or hidden meaning.

Noting Bassano’s dedication to capturing the natural look of dogs, the art historian Roger Rearick emphasized his extraordinary excerption of “two perfectly straightforward canines from their familiar context” and the dedication of a painting to them and them alone. More recently, however, it has been suggested, on the basis of the patron’s spiritual inclinations, that the dogs tethered to a stump, in fact, convey “a severe, almost cheerless message” and represent a complex allegory of the combat between earthly and spiritual life. Irrespective of the symbolic connotations or moralizing intentions of Bassano’s composition, the animals are beautifully realized and remarkable for their truthful representation. The pose of the dog on the left appears to have caught the attention of Tintoretto, who inserted it nearly exactly into his painting Christ Washing the Disciples’ Feet for the church of San Marcuola, Venice (c. 1548–49; Museo del Prado, Madrid). By the beginning of the 17th century, Two Hunting Dogs was thought to be a work by Veronese and thereafter it passed as a painting by Titian through a number of celebrated collections, including those of Cardinal Silvio Valenti Gonzaga, William Beckford, and the Duke of Bedford; it was not until the middle of the 20th century that its proper authorship was restored. The naturalistic tenor of Bassano’s art was given further expression in a similar painting of two dogs by themselves that he made shortly thereafter, Two Hunting Dogs (c. 1555; Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence), and, two decades later, in A Greyhound (c. 1571; private collection, Turin).

Paolo Veronese, who has been called the “greatest dog-lover in Italian art,” included dozens of dogs, from Greyhounds to Spaniels, in his religious scenes, mythological and allegorical works, and portraits. Dogs abound in particular in his large paintings of biblical feasts executed for the refectories of monasteries in Venice and Verona. The Feast in the House of Simon the Pharisee (c. 1560; Galleria Sabauda, Turin), painted for the refectory of Saints Nazaro and Celso in Verona, Veronese’s earliest extant supper scene, contains two dogs under the table that have elicited the admiration of observers from Giorgio Vasari (“so beautiful that they appear real and alive”) to John Ruskin (“The essence of dog is there, the entire, magnificent, generic animal type, muscular and living”). In two versions of the Supper at Emmaus (c. 1560; Musée du Louvre, Paris, and Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden), he seems to have taken special pleasure in showing children and dogs playing together. And in the vast Marriage at Cana for the refectory of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, the most ambitious of Veronese’s banquet scenes, a pair of magnificent white hounds immediately draws the spectator’s attention to the center of the composition.

In the interior of the Villa Barbaro at Maser, where Veronese executed a rich and iconographically complex decorative fresco program about 1561, one of the rooms is traditionally called the Stanza del Cane, after a beautifully rendered little dog occupying a ledge high above the visitor. Veronese’s dogs are painted with such loving attention that they must reflect his own feeling toward animals—a feeling that perhaps is mirrored in the motif of Diana nuzzling one of her Greyhounds in the clouds of the Sala di Olimpo. The abundance and variety of dogs in Veronese’s art make it difficult to attribute specific symbolism to them—they are too numerous and appear in too many diverse settings. Veronese is said to have produced formal “portraits” of individual dogs, including his own, but his only extant painting in which dogs vie with the human figure for prominence is Cupid with Two Dogs (c. 1580–83; Alte Pinakothek, Munich). This painting shows a winged Cupid wearing a golden quiver and holding two black-and-white hunting dogs on a chain, a composition that has been interpreted variously as an allegory of the contrariness of love, faithfulness in love, and the restraint of the animal appetite for love.

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Hurry-Up Chocolate Cake

My dad loves the Hurry-Up Chocolate Cake. He makes it in 2 nine-inch rounds and it creates the perfect layer cake. The frosting is AMAZING!!

The rumor is that it's an old Mennonite recipe, but it was shared with us by our dear friend Marian from the Mile High City and, let me tell you, she's no Mennonite. It is simply the best chocolate cake you will ever put in your mouth. At least that's what I hear. You know dogs can't eat chocolate!

Did I tell you that lately I have a thing for raw carrots. Chomping on a raw carrot is kinda like chewing on sticks. ONLY BETTER!!

Friday, April 8, 2011

COLD IN CLEVELAND

Not too long ago we had the "opportunity" to visit Cleveland. And before you ask, YES it was for a dog show and NO the river was not on fire.

The best thing about our visit was the Ritz Carlton in downtown Cleveland. It was like an oasis in a big dirty desert. I must admit our after dusk and before dawn walks were a wee bit scary. But once we breezed through the doors of the Ritz it was like we were back in Oz again.

The staff treated us like doggy royalty. The gave us bags and bags of treats and a Ritz Carlton Cleveland water bowl (you wouldn't believe what that went for on ebay. KIDDING. It is on the floor in our kitchen and we love it. The blue matches our Limoges).

They even gave us a dog biscuit cookie cutter with the best recipe attached. We didn't have a stove in our suite (can you imagine!) so we had to wait until we returned home to bake up a batch. And, let me tell you, we love them.



We got a lot attention as dad, Rufus and I entered and sat down in the lobby bar. And even more attention as we were escorted out. SO...dad sat down in a chair smack in the middle of the reception area (where they do allow dogs) and ordered a Whiskey Sour his way. Well, he sent it back because he likes LOTS of fresh lemon juice. Here's how it returned. We weren't certain whether they were going for another Malcom Baldridge Award or if they were just being bitchy.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Lady GaGa for Dogs?

When I came across an ad for the OutFox Field Guard, I knew I no longer had to worry about what to wear to the Grammy's next year. I would out GaGa Lady GaGa.

And then I visited the OutFox website. Here's what I learned.

A foxtail is a spikelet or spikelet cluster of a grass, that serves to disperse its seeds as a unit. The spikelets or spikelet clusters of foxtails are adapted for animal dispersal and so can become a health hazard for dogs and other domestic animals. Grasses with this feature can be found all around the country, but are most common in the Western United States with the greatest foxtail problem occurring in California.

The OutFox™ Field Guard helps prevent barbed grasses from penetrating your dog's eyes, ears, and nose.

They even have an OutFox video.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Funeral For a Dog

We are running out to get this book.

A Love Triangle From Brazil to Brooklyn
By LELAND de la DURANTAYE

Thomas Pletzinger’s first novel, “Funeral for a Dog,” is about sex, love, Brazil, a form of ménage- à-trois, children’s books, Finland, dogs, Ping-Pong, New York — in short, the good things. But more than anything else, it is about what happens when a thing is lost: a Brazilian police dog loses a leg, a German- Finnish love triangle loses a member, a boy loses his friend, a woman loses her baby, an ethnologist loses his calling, a journalist loses his way.

It is relatively rare for contemporary German fiction to be translated into English, and unreservedly rare for a first novel by a young and largely unknown German writer to be published with such fanfare. “Funeral for a Dog” is full of strangeness, but it is not satirical strangeness or magical strangeness. It is, instead, realistic, and its main theme is the strangeness of loss. Given that the book centers on loss experienced as figurative and literal exile, it is bound to call to mind for readers of German fiction the haunting works of W. G. Sebald. What’s more, as in Sebald’s books, “Funeral for a Dog” is interspersed with illustrations that depict not central scenes but enigmatic details like a children’s drawing on a receipt. In contrast to Sebald’s writing, however, there is a great deal of beer-drinking and a great deal of blood. This extreme element (there is also a fair bit of vomiting) led some European readers to group it with a work at the opposite end of the German literary spectrum, one published the same year as “Funeral for a Dog” (2008): Charlotte Roche’s “Wetlands,” a phenomenally explicit (and phenomenally popular) book about sex, sexual fluids, sexual hygiene and the lack thereof. Though a ménage-à-trois is at the heart of Pletzinger’s novel, and though one narrator repeatedly mentions the dried menstrual blood he is unable to wash off, this is not done for shock value and does not feel gratuitous. In other words, the book has known such success not because it is in any clear literary lineage, nor because it discusses extreme states and epochal events, but simply because it is brilliantly constructed and finely written.

The novel’s greatest success is its intricacy of plot — an intricacy that is revealed only gradually. After a thoroughly confusing first few pages, the narrative settles into a story that is easy to follow and that slowly and artfully arrives at the point where those first confusing words make rich and moving sense. A journalist in a troubled marriage is sent to interview a reclusive children’s author, and learns secrets about the man’s romantic life that help him understand his own. The plot is complicated, but the things at its center are clear: a wildly successful children’s book called “The Story of Leo and the Notmuch” and a three-legged dog who will, as we can guess from Pletzinger’s title, die. In the interim the dog is several things. It is both a mascot and a symbol of the love triangle that occupies half the novel. It accompanies the three lovers from their first night onward; it is an ideal observer, present at all points of the story — at a magnificently described cockfight in Brazil, in New York on Sept. 11, in Finland for a momentous New Year and many other places besides. The dog also presents a paradigm for loss. It has lost something crucial, and yet continues (“Dogs get used to any loss”). Dogs do what the writer of the children’s book cannot — they “live in the moment.” The children’s author, on the other hand, lives in the past: he “collects fragments and assembles them into a world he can bear.” (Here and throughout, Ross Benjamin’s translation is stunningly fine, capturing as it does the wry wit, gentle despair and merry confusion of the original.)

The dog is indeed very much mascot, symbol and paradigm, but it is not much of a dog. It is kept supplied with beer and food, but the looks and leanings of a dog lovingly observed are nowhere to be found. It may seem petty to claim that the characterization of a dog is two- dimensional, but, well, it is.

The children’s book that sets the plot in motion, and brings it full circle, is unique within the novel in that it addresses loss directly. It is also the solution to a riddle: What happened to these people? One member of the love triangle, a Finn — touchingly described as “not beautiful in the strict sense, but nonetheless the most beautiful” — has arrived with a child of uncertain parentage. Another member of the triangle has died tragically. The path toward resolution is found in another book. Two narrators tell the tale. One is the journalist (who, in his heart, is an ethnologist). The other is the children’s author (who, in his heart, is in great pain). There is a mild doppelgänger effect between them — both are uncertain and inward, both bury their phones, both are confused by the women they love, both play Ping-Pong well. And there is another doppelgänger effect between the published children’s book and an unpublished novel — or memoir? — that the journalist discovers locked away in the guest bedroom he occupies. The journalist violates his host’s privacy, which may have been his host’s wish all along, and reads the mirror book to “The Story of Leo and the Notmuch.” Called “Astroland,” it charts the love triangle from Recife to Brooklyn, Helsinki to Lugano. It is incomplete. And it takes the journalist some time to realize that although he thinks there is no ending, he has in fact had the ending all along. It has been hiding in plain sight, between the lines of the children’s book.

As befits a book about loss, “Funeral for a Dog” does not end with the losing. There is a searing stage that is confusion, fury, despair, renunciation, flight — but it is not the final one. The novel’s lesson for child and man, man and beast, is that loving often entails losing, and that is horrible, sickening and frightening. But it is not the end. For just when you think there is nothing left to lose, you find something, someone, somehow — and it makes all the difference.