Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Posts
My Art History Blog
Parks, Hikes, Places to Play
Fellow Bloggers
Blog Archive
Labels
- art (30)
- audrey hepburn (5)
- beatles (7)
- bing crosby (7)
- birds (5)
- books (76)
- camping (9)
- can't sleep (13)
- celebrities project (20)
- Covid-19 (33)
- cross-stitching (2)
- danny kaye (8)
- dean martin (6)
- debbie reynolds (5)
- family happenings (123)
- films and television (67)
- garden (21)
- goals (27)
- grace kelly (2)
- hikes (52)
- historical tidbits (43)
- house projects (13)
- jerry lewis (11)
- jewelry (2)
- jimmy stewart (5)
- lucy (53)
- memories (50)
- miscellaneous (110)
- mom (38)
- muppets (5)
- music (45)
- poetry (3)
- pregnancy (14)
- quotes (1)
- recipes (3)
- rosemary clooney (3)
- running (5)
- sam (167)
- sammy davis jr. (4)
- sewing (1)
- shirley temple (4)
- singing (2)
- travels and vacations (80)
- violet (4)
7 comments:
Definitely Jane Austen.
Jane Austen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Despite the depth of my love for all things Austen, I think a coin with someone born within the past 100 years has a special significance and sweetness for his great legacy.
I think either Jane Austen or Emmeline Pankhurst. As much as I love John Lennon, I'm not sold on the idea of him being represented on a national coin. It just seems weird to have rock star on there.
Ooooh Jane Austen
austen!
Well, I ended up voting for John Lennon. I agree with Rebekah: I think that commemorating Lennon on a coin has special significance for his legacy, especially considering that he was born within the past 100 years. And I actually think it would be kind of awesome if a musician (an extremely influential musician) got put on a national coin.
I do think that Jane Austen or Emmeline Pankhurst are good options for coins, too. More women to be minted! :)
Post a Comment