|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Usually I'm pretty dense about noticing things that are very obvious to most everyone else. Even when I do notice something, I usually forget within a few minutes.
So, I was watching Smallville the other evening and Clark Kent's daddy, Johnathon Kent, played by John Schneider was driving in his pickup truck while listening to the theme song from Dukes of Hazzard on the radio. Interestingly (to me anyways), Schneider also played Bo Duke on the Dukes of Hazzard.
(I learned to read from comics, and I'm thrilled to be able to watch superman with my kids.)
I remember a few years back when Kasparov was playing Karpov for the world title, things were getting really tense. The competition had dragged on for weeks and these guys were getting frazzled. So they decide to have a break. Kasparov is boarding a plane and is asked whether he and Anatoly Karpov are doing as bad as all that. Without a pause he quips, "As the great Russian writer once said, 'The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.'"
I puzzled over this for some while, since I believed this was a quote from Mark Twain. After a little reflection, it occurred to me that the average Russian has probably read as much or more Mark Twain than the average American, and that a well-read Russian (as I presume GK to be) probably knows a lot more about Twain. Further, it was pretty clear that he would have to know that we would know this. My vague recollection is that Karpov was the Soviets' golden boy, and Kasparov was a pain for not doing the decent thing and letting him win. And I reckon this was Kasparov's way of tweaking authorities without being too obvious about it.
Makes me wonder how many things just go sailing past unnoticed.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
...a well-read Russian (as I presume GK to be) probably knows a lot more about Twain. another possibility is that Kasparov was as ill-read as Bobby Fischer apparently was, and was the victim of some bizarro agitprop. http://home.mn.rr.com/wwftd/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Possible, but unlikely. Kasparov may be strange, but he manifests his strangeness differently than Fischer. He's a polyglot and a mathematician. He's also pretty gregarious. He used to be something of an activist (not that that's a credential, I suppose). Maybe as an Armenian Jew in Russia, he was a little less apt to take things at face value.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
the average Russian has probably read as much or more Mark Twain than the average American
I find that very difficult to believe. It's been said that Mark Twain was the first truly and purely American writer, and he's still probably the most distinguished as such. I really doubt that Russian school children are required to read Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. Why would the average Russian care about a Missouri boy's trip down the Mississippi with a runaway slave? The book simply drips with American cultural history.
Unless the Soviets skewed Twain into a communist poster-boy, I can't see how they would be more interested in him than Americans.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I dunno. Grapes of Wrath was supposedly pretty popular over there as well.
I guess I don't think most Americans have actually read that much Twain. Read or heard about, yes. Actually read the words of, I don't think so. Most kids are going to read what's required in school, if that. I've read some Twain, but was never required to read it in any class. Mind you, he was mention in many classes. But we never read any.
OTOH, I get my info concerning Soviet reading habits from a single conversation with a fellow who told me he's quite popular over there, so I've reached a conclusion based on anecdotal evidence. Nevertheless, I'm convinced that GK was well aware of his life's work and that his remark was intended as a jibe.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: I was fortunate that my father bought a lousy Collier's Encyclopedia in early 1920's. I feel confident he only bought the encyclopedia to get the almost hundred volumes of Mark Twain that came with it. I wish I still had that set.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
Possible, but unlikely. Kasparov may be strange, but he manifests his strangeness differently than Fischer. He's a polyglot and a mathematician. He's also pretty gregarious.
He used to be something of an activist (not that that's a credential, I suppose). Maybe as an Armenian Jew in Russia, he was a little less apt to take things at face value.
When Kasparov played Nigel Short in London in 1993 it received a lot of coverage on Channel 4. During the 'intervals' the producers ran histories and bios of the two players. Here's what I remember about Kasparov. What you say above is absolutely true - he was a boy genius and never tired of learning. He was an Armenian Jew but he became Russian towards the end of the Soviet era and now has Russian citizenship. Being a polyglot, gregarious and a strategic thinker he was recruited as a senior adviser to the Soviet inner circle - a role he still maintains with Mr. Putin and his predecessor Boris Yeltsin.
Kasparov is well read and likes to broaden his knowledge with all forms of world literature and Twain would have been a natural choice since he was coincident with the other classic novelists such as Dumas, Hardy, Dickens, Tolstoy et al. For such a clear thinker it is hard to envisage how he made such a mistake when misquoting Twain. It could not be put down to fatigue or distraction. Kasparov leads a spartan life and is slave to his routine. A luxury apartment with only simple fittings, not married, no television or radio and he sleeps for only five hours a day whilst playing up to twelve hours of chess a day. He's a healthy eater (he doesn't smoke or drink) but not an exerciser. All his other waking hours are spent reading or advising.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
I guess I don't think most Americans have actually read that much Twain. Read or heard about, yes. Actually read the words of, I don't think so. Most kids are going to read what's required in school, if that. I've read some Twain, but was never required to read it in any class. Mind you, he was mention in many classes. But we never read any.
I read Twain at school when I was fourteen and was absolutely flummoxed by the dialect. After watching several several films and series about Huckleberry Finn I was aware of the story but the book opened my eyes to a whole new language. For a school text it was very long and quite unusual given its irrelevance to our society but I ploughed through it regardless. That's twenty years ago now and I can remember little of the content but there are two words that appear on the first page that fascinated me from the moment I saw them and they are forever embedded in my mind. Sugar Hogsheads. I just loved them. I was surprised when I discovered their true meaning but I never did find out how it came about.
Twain's writing is truly American but that's where the fascination lies with me - that the writing is in a familar language but a completely different style and culture than anything I have ever read. A few years ago I bought his collection of short stories and was pleasantly surprised that they are far more readable and entertaining than his novels. Sharply humourous too, which is what I like.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Re: Jazzo's comment It's been said that Mark Twain was the first truly and purely American writer
i think Washington Irving was the first. born 1783, and dead in 1859, (when Twain was 24) he was the first american writer to earn a living by writing-- (Twain could have done the same, but for poor investments. ) Irving became quite wealthy, and took a post as US ambassador to Spain.
most US reader know his "Rip Van Winkle" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow", some even realize he popularized the term "Knickerbockers" (still use by the NY basketball team, the Knicks,)in a series of articles for a NY magazine. he was the first to start the legend that Columbus was remarkable for not thinking the world was flat. (the same magazine column.) He also wrote a serious history of columbus's voyages.
i will agree Twain is read today by a much wider audience, and N. Hawthorn does too, but the first truly and purely American is Irving.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
absolutely flummoxed by the dialect.
I have trouble imagining you being flummoxed by a dialect considering your facility in detecting the various elements in mine in our brief meeting, but I guess, from small beginnings...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
I have trouble imagining you being flummoxed by a dialect considering your facility in detecting the various elements in mine in our brief meeting, but I guess, from small beginnings...Indeed. You've hit the nail on the head there, Faldage. Twenty years ago my current interest in identifying dialects was born with my aforementioned fascination and things progressed from there. I once was flummoxed but now am profound.  I love turning things on their head aswell now by trying to identify the sources of those dialects - as I did with you. I've found that a lot of 'New worlders' will use various slang words specific to their ancestors even if only within their immediate family. A lot of Scots-Americans will say 'aye' without even knowing it and, if you watch the Coens' film Fargo, you'll notice that the characters (all of them descended from Swedish settlers) speak with a pseudo-Swedish accent. Post-edit. Just realised that I've become addicted. Oh, God!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Thanks, Rubrick,
I didn't know he was an advisor to an inner circle, though I have some vague recollection that he wrote for a US newspaper for a while. That's an interesting fact to fit into my internal mosaic of him.
I'd heard he was going to Israel to set up a chess school and incorrectly assumed he would be staying, so that's where I thought his citizenship was.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Cool thing for a dad to do, Bill. Almost a hundred volumes is a lot of Mark Twain.
I felt bad that I'd never read any and I'd hate to leave this earth without at least a taste of every item on the buffet. I made a point of reading a number of his short stories and one of the novels. I have the others and they're on my list. I also read a few to my kids. Every time my 12 yo hears about france, she says to me, "Daddy, do you remember in the Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, where he said he 'heisted himself up like a Frenchman?'"
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: one thing that really burns me up is the fact that the "politically correct" assholes have been able to get Mark Twain's books removed from school libraries. Just because he uses the 'N" word he is accused of being racist. I will never forget the impact it had on me when I first read the passage where Jim and Huck are going down the river, and Huck is waked up during the niight by sound of Jim crying, and for the first time realizes how awful it was for Jim to be separated from his wife. No racist would write like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Bill,
I don't know the exact situation regarding MT in schools. I used to read up on book banning and censorship, but my knowledge is not current and my memory is very hazy.
I guess I think that people should have some say over what their kids read. I'm pretty liberal in what I share with my own kids. Heck, I read 100 Secret Senses with the F word and all that in it to mine. I allow my kids to curse (with some modest restrictions like they can't cuss in public) and the very first movie I took my youngest to (at 4 yo) was rated R (something like "the last dragon" with Sean Connery as the voice of the dragon). But it's exactly because I want (demand) the right to raise my kids according to my own conscience, that I believe that other parents should have the same right. For those people who really do find MT offensive, I think schools should make allowance for it. I don't agree with their assessment of MT and don't for one second believe the book is racist. Rather, he's portraying a racist society. We know this because we've actually read it.
I try not to make any judgement at all of those other parents' choices and hope that they will extend me the same courtesy. Rather than try to foist my opinions (that every kid should get a healthy dose of MT, for example) on these others, I would like a school that would accomodate these other parents. And I really think it would be easy to do, if we would try to be a little patient with each other. No need to draw lines in the sand. To the maximum extent possible, I think we should try to facilitate instead of mandate.
Now, if the books have actually been removed from a school library, that's very different. Even if MT's writings were racist, they would still belong in the libraries. Song of Hiawatha is certainly racist. (And if I remember, the one about the village smithy was antisemitic.) Kipling was absolutely a racist. And no school library should be without Longfellow or Kipling.
In a more modern case, I think Harry Potter is a great story for kids to read, even in class (particularly in class). But I know some parents think it teaches the occult and for them I think provisions should be made. Regardless of whether some parents are offended, HP should be in the school libraries.
There's a difference between what kids should be required to read and what should be available to all kids in the school or public library. Now I'm an atheist. I don't care what other people believe, but I know what I believe. I wouldn't mind a teacher, say, using the bible in a class, but if they started preaching or something I'd get irritated pretty quickly. Nevertheless, I'd be somewhat surprised (and would make loud complaint) if there were no bibles in my kids' school library.
Probably this subject is a YART, but I'm not aware it's been discussed since I've been here.
To summarize, I agree with you about MT. He should be in every public school library. And he should be read by all kids. He does have some works that no one should find offensive. I think even his "offensive" works are not racist and would hope every kid would get a taste of them. But I wouldn't want to force any kid to do something against his parents' wishes.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
if I remember, the one about the village smithy was antisemitichttp://www.bartleby.com/102/59.html???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: I can't imagine what made you think The Village Blacksmith antisemitic. And I would be interested to have you give a bit of detail as to what "atheistic" means to you.
The Biblical "God" who is just an immensely powerful human is of course absurd. But those who think the world came about by chance are just as absurd. Chance builds up briefly but soon tears down again. I cannot understand how anyone can believe there is no Supreme Being. He is just too marvelous for us to comprehend.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Thanks, that's not the one I was thinking of, so it's not the one about the smithy.
I just did a search and can't find the particular one. It's been about 25 years and I'm wondering now if I've confused the author. I'd be tempted to retract, except I have this very clear recollection of a very short poem - no more than about 12 to 14 lines, maybe, that was in the same book with Hiawatha.
It does seem possible though, that I misunderstood the reference in the other poem and got myself worked up over nothing.
Okay, let me drop this one for now and concentrate on Hiawatha. I loved the poem - one of my all time favorites. But I thought it was pretty racist (maybe that's not the right term, people seem to use that word for everything these days). At least it was seriously condescending - offensive even. Still, I loved it. And even if I didn't love it, I think it should be in school libraries, but that, say, native american kids shouldn't be compelled to read it.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Bill,
As I mentioned to Faldage, I got the wrong poem. Smithy must have been the one I really liked and I confused it with the other one that grated.
Regarding the atheism thing, it's not important to my point. Just an example. Let me make it general. I think X. I teach my kids X. I have no problem with other people (teachers, for example) reinforcing X to my kids. And since I think I'm right, on some level I think it would be good if other people taught X to their kids, but I know there are people who believe X' (not X). And so, if other parents find X really offensive, I wouldn't want to do an end run around them and try to teach their kids X against their wishes. (Because I wouldn't like it if they did that to me.)
There's a distinction between what I believe we should read, what I think we should compel others to read, and what I think we should have available for everyone to read.
As for the ultimate orgins of the Universe, I claim utter ignorance. I do distinguish among a. personal deity (as espoused in the Bible, the Quran, etc), b. naturalistic (mystical?) versions (Spinoza, Einstein, etc), and c. the general versions of creator and/or commander-in-chief. I reject 'a' outright. I don't even understand 'b' and as for 'c' I think my belief one way or the other would be irrelevant. I'm sympathetic to religion, though. I think that people can control what they profess and how they act, but that for the most part they can't control what they actually believe.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Re: ....At least it was seriously condescending - offensive even.... native american kids (say), shouldn't be compelled to read it.
if i omitted all the literature that was seriously condescending to women, i wouldn't have much to read.
writers, generaly write of their time... if literature is read, and explored, and put into context, it can still have value, no matter that it is, by our current way of thinking, seriously flawed.
Woman, the irish, poles, urkranians, negros, jews, blacks, chinese, japanese, aboriginal people from the americas, oz, india, the list of those slighted, and treated offensively goes on and on.. (the idea that literture classes consist of works entirely by and about dead white men has some validity!)
shakespeare is exceptional, he has both weak and strong men and women.. i don't think kipling would have included women at all, but his characters did need someone to be weak, and weepy, and to do their menial tasks like laundry, (but half the time is was a man-servant)-- and then you needed women to miss(sweet hearts back in england, lost and gone) or native women (hot, beautiful, and convenient for men to satisfy their lust with (but most of his characters where gentlemen, and wouldn't think to do that!, i'll grant)
even Harry Potter has Hermonine(?)-- a goody two shoes, nerdy, little tattle tale!
Dickens has great women-- a real wide range of characters from Dora, David Copperfields clinging, passive agressive wife, to Mdm LaFarge-- Twain doesn't! Polly and Tom's Aunt Bea are weak women, who look to men to solve their problems!
You might find with your daughters, as you look for books for them, there are very few with strong women (the exception is books written by women, about women, and generally considered for women.)
girls and women continue to read Little Women, or the Bronte sisters, or as we have discussed here Mrs Mike -- but woman's literature is still considered second tier. women still read all literature, men just read literature writen by men (a general statement-- just generaly true, not completely true.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I agree that I don't want to limit my own readings to things that aren't Xist. I was specifically referring to what we force other people's kids to read.
I'm one of those men who reads mostly male writers. I don't plan it. It just turns out that way. Well, I guess I do plan it in a way. There are women writers on my list, but they keep getting pushed to the bottom.
I suppose I could remedy that. I recently collected all the scraps of paper I had written down books on and was going to consolidate them, but the washing machine got to them before I did. My new list is pretty short and if I were inclined I reckon I could move some women up there. But I really try to keep on top the stuff that I'm really most interested in. For example, War and Peace I've been meaning to read for years and also Pride and Prejudice. But I've wanted to read W&P a lot longer. I started a coupla times and got sidetracked. That's really gonna be next. Then I'm thinking Longitude, but I'm not sure. Then maybe Frankenstein (hey, there's a woman). Assuming that's my order. It might not be. P&P is a ways down on the list, even the new one. If I get to her, it will be an accident really.
It would be good if I could read faster. I have pretty good comprehension, but I read very slowly. I guess I could read a little faster (not much), but I just don't enjoy things much when I do.
For my kids, I don't usually think about the role of the women, with one exception. I can't stand the beautiful, happy princess kinda stories. They're allowed to read them, but they know already that I'm not reading it to them. Usually I think about whether the story is going to be interesting to all of us. My girls have read some of the Little Women excerpts (I guess that's what they are). As I said, I don't really censor what the girls read. When we come across something stupid, we'll often discuss what was stupid about it. Don't you think so-and-so was a jackass? What could this person have done besides act like a bonehead? OTOH, I make a point to brainwash them pretty regularly about *something important*. At least once a week, I talk to them about sex, peer pressure, hormones, drugs, not waiting for a man or anyone else to solve your problems, what have you. Lotta repeats, so they get it all many times. Maybe that's insufficient. It's one thing to say "See this woman is a wimp" and another to let them see how a strong woman acts. On take-your-daughters to work day, I brought them to a meeting where my bosses were two women. I wanted them to see how women could boss men around. I'm not entirely oblivious to the issue. I suppose a little reading to reinforce it would be in order, if I could find something that we're all interested in. The reading thing is more of a bonding thing than an educational one. From the school's persective it's educational. But I've noticed behavioral changes depending on how frequently I read to them. I don't know. I need to think about this a while.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: I re-read P&P recently and reluctantly concluded I did not admire it. Her Mr. Darcy is a phony stuffed shirt in my estimation. He may be JA's idea of Prince Charming. One other thing. I just don't believe novelists' assertion that anybody falls instantly deeply in love. Not if they have any brains.
Little Women doesn't hide the propaganda well enough. I get a laugh out of the part where the girls take some lobsters "to the poor Irish children" to show their charitable consciousness. Rough, but nourishing, you know. Cheap then, but stupidly expensive now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Faldage posted: if I remember, the one about the village smithy was antisemitichttp://www.bartleby.com/102/59.html???Faldo, maybe he meant anti-smith-etic. You can see how the two might be confused!
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I've noticed there are a lot of things that are supposed to be really good that didn't do all that much for me. Even when I think the book is great on some technical level, or enjoyable at parts, I think it's been oversold.
Now I read Joyce's Ulysses a few months back. There were some pretty funny parts, but on the whole I've spent more comforting hours in my dentist's chair. Probably more than half of the book I spent wondering what in the hell he was talking about.
I've heard people talk about it and few lit majors seemed pretty impressed, but I read it because Robert Anton Wilson said no one had entered the twentieth century until he'd digested that great lump of tree flesh. I'd never read anything of RAW's, but a guy I respect has a high opinion of him. So I thought, what the heck. This must be 'a great book.' And maybe it is. But if I had to describe my experience with it in one word, it would have to be "agonizing."
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
more than half of the book I spent wondering what in the hell he was talking about.
I think with Joyce you have to concern yourself not with what the hell he's talking about but with how the hell he's talking about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
If you enjoy puzzles, there are all too many books that provide them. But none of the solutions to the puzzles are worth the effort. There is so much worth learning, I choose not to waste time on puzzles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,534 Likes: 1
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,534 Likes: 1 |
The (one) problem with being sensitive to parents' wishes about what their children will be "forced" by their school to read is that so many viewpoints abound that there is nothing that somebody somewhere doesn't find objectionable. Where then are Authorities to find material for a reading list which is offensive to no one and yet still contains literature? (Isn't that just another roundabout metaphor for "Politics as usual"?)
Oversimplified, unfortunately, but inescapable.
This just _has_ to be YART
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Ah, Bill, I love puzzles. Not all of them, but some of them. But it's like eating crawdads - you reckon at the start you're going to burn more calories getting through the shell than you'll gain from eating the meat. Also, there are some professions where solving puzzles is a good way to keep sharp. It's like getting to the interesting part without all the tedious junk that accompanies most real-world problems.
People read for different reasons. Many read to figure out how to do something. They also read for enjoyment, for enlightenment, for participation in humanity's conversation (bonding writ large). Maybe there are other reasons. Boredom? Showing off? Desperation? Pursuit of a good grade? 'Cause Daddy will tan my backside if I don't?
Anyways, I've moved Dubliners down near the bottom, which I reckon I'll reach in about 70 years.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
The (one) problem with being sensitive to parents' wishes about what their children will be "forced" by their school to read is that so many viewpoints abound that there is nothing that somebody somewhere doesn't find objectionable. Where then are Authorities to find material for a reading list which is offensive to no one and yet still contains literature? (Isn't that just another roundabout metaphor for "Politics as usual"?)
There used to be a column in my Sunday paper's literary section which asked well-known writers a series of questions. One of those questions was:
What books shoudl be made compulsory reading?
The writers were nearly all unanimous in their declaration that No books shoudl be made compulsory!
I agree with this. Whereas I quite enjoyed a selection of the books I read at school until I was about 15 I swear I will never look at Wuthering Heights or Castle Rackrent again. Same goes for a lot of the Shakespearean plays but they were a bit dull anyway.
A continuous assessment on a selection of recommended reading books would have whet my appetite for more.
Now I believe that the next point was what makes recommended or acceptable reading? Well, up until not so long ago even the recommended reading books in this part of the world were being fiercely doctored and censored by ignorant parents who were blaming them for their daughters' pregnancies (of course it had nothing to do with that randy farmer who had just drunk ten pints). But I digress....
People will find fault with every sort of book that's written - even the most intentionally harmless novels are seen as debasing or sexist or racist or sectarian or whatever. No book is acceptable to everyone. That's been pointed out quite a lot on this very forum using Mark Twain as an example.
I like Twain and his humour and his very observant views and deft handling of the tough and often violent and lawless place that was the mississipi mid-west in the latter part of the 19th century. We don't like the 'n'-word and avoid it these days as it is unacceptable, unnecessary and 'politically incorrect' (a term I particularly despise). However, in Twain's time it was common, as were slavery, lynchings, misogyny and bigotry and he includes it in his writing to reflect the contemporary languge of the day even if he did not use it himself or agree with it. Jim Conrad and his several books on the subjects of slavery, piratry and hard-living on the high seas is another example.
I've been dying to say it for ages but Eric Blair (better known as George Orwell) was a policeman in Burma for several years. He eventually quit as he could not endure the racism and hatred inflicted by the East India Company on the natives. Blair was completely anti-racist and he describes his feelings (and those of the bigots) in the excellent Burma days. Not a lot of racist language in his text but the feeling you get when you read the conceited dialogue of the British officers is akin to hearing the worst racist slurs. It made my spine bristle, anyways. Blair managed to convey these emotions to paper without ever giving the impression that they were his own. That is true genius. I digress again....
Recommended reading material shoudl contain a broad range of widely read material from various ethnic writers. Since they are well-read then they are acceptable to the masses. Since they are from different ethnic groups it will encourage learning and understanding of different ethnic groups, cultures and backgrounds. And, if they are based on wide-ranging issues (either contemporary or historical) then they will inspire debate. And that is good.
That's my rant for this month!! Boy it felt good!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
there is nothing that somebody somewhere doesn't find objectionable.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, wofa. To my shame, I have no idea whether my children's school system has banned certain things or not. I do know that, every so often, they'll bring home a slip that says, in effect, "The class is going to be studying XYZ. XYZ has ABC in it, that some parents in the past have found objectionable. If you do, we have an alternate work available."
I wonder, FF, if perhaps the reason you tend not to read women writers is that so often they tend to focus on emotional interactions, just as in conversations*? I think you guys, in general, tend to want to focus on the deed getting accomplished, and have less interest in the why. Note: I am not asserting that this is the way most women write--I've never made a conscious comparison. I do know that, to me, "romance novels" are not worth reading, and even in "real" novels, I can only take so much of 'Mary was in a dark mood, wondering if her love had deserted her'.
*Yeah, okay, I do this myself, but...it depends on who I'm talking to. I do pretty good "guy talk" when I want to!:-)
And I can keep my mouth shut, too, if that seems to be my companion's way. Silence doesn't bother me at all. I'd much rather people take my silence as indicative that I am a fool, than to open my mouth and remove all doubt. Though I've done that, too, on occasion...sigh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
the one about the village smithy: http://www.bartleby.com/102/59.htmlThe first two lines were particularly well-liked by we college lads who enjoyed visiting the ladies at Smith college, an all-female institution. ["Under the standing chestnut tree ... ] Ah, Longfellow!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Yes, i almost agree-- Rubrick, about compulsory reading list..i think they are OK if 1) they are short (one book a grade perhaps) 2) if it is okay to open dislike the book.
"Little women" was compulsory in 6th grade for me. (age 11/12) i hated it. I mean, i didn't think myself too poor, and here were these girls, living in a big house, (we lived in an apartment), with servants, (they had a cook!) and piano lessons, and art lessons, and going to fancy dress dances, and worried about their kid gloves!.. and giving away lobsters, and all the while complaining about how hard their life was, how poor they were, sob, sob.
i know now, that many of the things alcott wrote about and how she described the lives, described one of upper class standards, with low income, now that is! then i was still one of the poor irish
when i was older i liked the book.. but what really upset me at the time, was i got in trouble for not liking. i not only had to read it, i had to like it! i don't think compulsory reading lists are the problem, i think the problem is as much the idea that this BOOK the one they has finally made the list, must be enjoyed! I can understand you might have hated "wuthering heights" (i loved it!) and i bet any negitive comments about the book were not appreciated.
I generaly hate Hardy-- my daughter thinks he is a wonderful writer, i love george eliot, she thinks eliot is drivle. Who's right? who cares!
i like the idea of a list of 20 books, and you must read 4 or 5 from the list. this was (and is) still a common ploy. i read a lot of books i might have not otherwise picked up, except they were on a reading list. and since i could exersize some choice, i never felt duty bound to read something i disliked.. i could just switch to an other book.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,636
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,636 |
When my children were little, we had no TV  ! They loved me to read to them and were such voracious listeners that I opted to tape their favorite stories so they could listen to them whenever they wanted to, thus allowing them the repetition, and me the freedom to read new stories. My daughter's favorite story was "The Cat Who Walked Alone", by Kipling. I also purchased a few books on tape. "Huck Finn" was my son's favorite. The phrase "Tragedy, mostly."(from the abridged, spoken by the "Duke") is still one of our catch phrases. Here is a link to the original text with the original illustrations, if anyone would like to read the book. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/Twa2Huc.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
I've found that a lot of 'New worlders' will use various slang words specific to their ancestors even if only within their immediate family. A lot of Scots-Americans will say 'aye' without even knowing it
One such term I've heard in use in only two families is (and I've no idea of the correct spelling, so) hanyak, which is, as nearly as I can tell, a Scandanvian term about the equivalent yahoo (in the Jonathan Swift sense). Has anybody else ever heard of hanyak?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
From a phrase site, no clue as to authenticity:
hanyak: Refers to people who do not use common sense, are insensitive to others and their environment, and are generally just stupid about what they're doing and their impact on others
Example: Did you see that hanyak cut across three lanes to make the light? Or That hanyak just butt way in front of the line we're in!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
...often they tend to focus on emotional interactions, just as in conversations*? I think you guys, in general, tend to want to focus on the deed getting accomplished, and have less interest in the why. Although stereotypes are *made for a reason, does this mean the why is generally an emotional interaction? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Although stereotypes are *made for a reason, does this mean the why is generally an emotional interaction? Oh, shoot, I was afraid I was going to have to get more specific--thanks a LOT! Well, in a word...yes, that is what I meant in that post, though certainly not all 'whys' involve that! Here's an ex. of what I meant: let's say a leaky sink has been repaired: a woman is likely to say something like, "Oh, thank heavens that's fixed, because it was SO darned inconvenient to have to be mopping up all the time, and I was constantly having to make sure I had a good supply of paper towels on hand, and there were so many of them that I had to take out a whole extra bag of garbage this week..." Whereas a man is likely to say, "The sink got fixed because it was leaking"--if he even says anything at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
...a woman is likely to say something like, "Oh, thank heavens that's fixed, because it was SO darned inconvenient to have to be mopping up all the time, and I was constantly having to make sure I had a good supply of paper towels on hand, and there were so many of them that I had to take out a whole extra bag of garbage this week..." Whereas a man is likely to say, "The sink got fixed because it was leaking"--if he even says anything at all.After all that chatter I think a *man will be saying something completely different !   But those words just loose [Hi, Juan] the *affect when typed!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
But those words just loose [Hi, Juan] the *affect when typed!Well, gee, if you like, Sweetie, I can call you up and fill your ear with senseless garbage from here till tomorrow...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
Sounds like a forgery to me!
TEd wanders away looking for farrier weather
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I read Burma Days in just the last year or two. Highly acerbic. Really depressing. And brilliant.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I don't know. It could be. I think it's a lot to do with genre. I like a lot of hardcore sf. I really don't look at the author, unless she was recommended to me. I go by the blurb on the book jacket, mostly. Sometimes I'm lead astray.
I tried to read some women, just to try to read the stuff. So I've sampled Virginia Woolf and Sylvia Plath (Bell Jar). And I don't like either one. (Well, actually, I do like some of Woolf's essays. Amazingly well-written, but To the Lighthouse bored me to tears. It could be that your putative reason applies to why I don't like the female writing I've tried more than to why I don't seek it out. OTOH, I like Mary Stewart a lot (maybe 5 books), and George Eliot (only Silas Marner).
I like the Bolo series that Keith Laumer started (it's pulp, I don't recommend them, but I do love the stories) and I think some of the stories were written by women (I don't remember any of the authors' names). I also like James Tiptree junior and had no idea it was some old woman writing under a pseudonym. Again, I mainly go by how interesting it seems.
I don't like fantasy mixing with my sf - just one or the other. But Macaffrey's Pern stuff was pretty fun, though I only read 3 of them. That was enough. Still, I might try to get my kids into them.
I'm not sure it's that I have an aversion to emotional stuff, so much as an affinity for other things.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Absolutely, I agree.
There is so much great stuff out there that the chances a kid is going to find *something* interesting is much improved.
One of my best experiences in high school was my very last English class, which I took as an elective. Usually I just hated anything that wasn't science or math. But this was very different. First day of class we were given six pages, comprised of three lists of book titles of two pages each. Books from the second list were somehow (subjectively) classified as harder books than those in the first list. The third harder than the first two. Our assignment was to read two books from each list. You could start at the second or third list, but you couldn't go back to an easier list if you did that. If you wanted to read a book that wasn't on any of the lists, you could bring it in and the teacher told you on which list you could substitute it.
Most classes that didn't have to do with math or science just plain sucked. Since we moved around a bit (dad was in the army), I ended up reading Romeo and Juliet and Julius Caesar three times each. This class was different. It was called Honors Reading and I've always wondered why it wasn't available to nearly everyone. At the very least, things should be turned around. If we force people to read things, it should be in, say, the last two years. In, say, the K-10 years, there should be a lot of choice.
BTW, one of my picks was The Hobbit (forget which list it was on). A guy I really respected recommended it to me back in the 8th grade up in AK. I had tried to read it a few times and just couldn't get into it. Finally, with this course, I read the whole thing and loved it. After school, I immediately read LOTR and The Similarillion, which were the last books I read before leaving home. (I also read Catch 22 and Hiroshima in that class. And maybe White Lotus. I don't recall exactly. It was a long time ago.)
Anyway, it's true there will be some parents who will be pissed off at everything. But if we open things up, I think we'll find that kids are much more interested in reading than even they believe themselves to be. I didn't get near as much of the classics as I now wish I should have as a kid, but this one course (and another fortuitous event) made them seem much more accessible to me.
Soon after this course, I went to live with my teacher aunt for a few months. And that's where I completely changed my mind about the classics. (I recently wrote a letter to her friend to read at my aunt's 70th birthday party, thanking her for the experiences she gave me more than two decades ago. I think I was supposed to roast her, but I just couldn't do it.)
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: What are your thoughts about teen-age peer pressure when it comes to choices of both music movies, and reading? I don't remember any significant amount of peer pressure in my teens. I see more harm than good in it at present. Too many kids admire the wrong things.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Things seem to be accelerating, so what my kids face may be a little different than what I faced. In some ways better for them, in some ways worse.
Peer pressure can be good or bad. If one's kids are in with a group of kids with good values (i.e. values *I* agree with), then things can work to one's advantage. Unfortunately, television portrays parents manipulate children's friendships as terrible, judgemental, racist, harmful, irrelevant, etc. A main mission for now is to get my kids ready to deal with peer pressure. This is why I teach them about this junk and introduce them to things like sex, raunchy movies, etc, myself.
A woman I know insists that my kids know way too much about sex and far too soon. I don't think so. When my oldest was 6, she was propositioned for sex by two slightly older boys. She knew how to handle it. Being perfectly innocent, she didn't hesitate to tell me about it. Even my wife says my kids show me no respect. Ever since we watched Austin Powers, they've taken to calling me "fat bastard" in private. This *really* irritates my wife who insists my kids shouldn't get away with being disrespectful to me. Contrary to what she thinks, they idolize me. To be sure, they think I'm a wimp (which is true enough). But, really, they just plain idolize me - and they know very well how far they can push it.
I think one very important thing I do with the kids is watch this stuff with them and we talk about it. I give them my opinion of things. Kids give me theirs. Early on they just repeated whatever I said, but over time they've come to diverge, the oldest moreso, of course. I'm vaguely aware of some study done that shows kids who watch violent video games are much more likely to think violence is okay, but that when an adult talks to them about the violence they are no more likely to be violent than kid's who haven't played the games. I wasn't aware of this when I started out, and came to the conclusion intuitively. I don't claim this is what everyone should do. I don't believe in one-size-fits-all solutions. Parents need to be proactive, understand things, make an active decision one way or the other, pay attention, follow through.
Sad thing. I went to a parent-teacher night with my oldest's teacher. The kids had a test for us. They asked us questions about themselves on a sheet of paper and we answered and graded ourselves. I got the highest "grade" in the class. It was a C. No kidding. We live in a not-too-bad, multicultural, middle class, suburban neighborhood with a few boneheads, but mainly people who have a strong interest in their kids' educations. It seems obvious to me, though, that we have a few things that could use a little work.
In general, though, I think peer pressure is pretty strong for kids. Pressure to have sex. Pressure to slough off in school. Pressure not to perform. Pressure, pressure, pressure. I tutored for several years in a local (pretty famous) high school - little physics, little algebra, mostly geometry. Wasn't able to reach every kid, but a few I think I really touched. One kid in particular started thinking he could go on to college. "Do I need geometry to major in electrical engineering?" (Even worse - you need trig. ouch!) He was asking me questions, getting involved, inching his grades up. Another kid started in on him, "Estupido, blah, blah, blah." Only partly in English, but it was pretty clear his buddy didn't think too much of his intellectual pretensions.
The most obvious problem that every single kid I tutored had was lack of parental oversight. These kids were going out to parties several nights a week, or working at jobs, or playing baseball, or watcing tv. All of this took priority over doing homework. It's not clear exactly how much of the problem was peer pressure, per se, and how much was the natural tendency of anyone to avoid doing hard work. Maybe it was peer pressure reinforcing the natural tendency.
On the good side, I had the same situation over and over. I'd come in. Kids would be kicked back, staring off into space, not paying attention to any word I said. I'd ask them questions. They'd ignore. I'd persist. I'd keep explaining and asking, re-explaining and asking, etc. After maybe 10 mins they'd sorta discreetly look at what I was doing. After 20 they'd be actively involved. By the end of class, everyone or nearly everyone would be paying attention, joking about problems, actively involved. Fortunately, I got to work with small groups (5 max, usually around 3).
One kid was a muslim girl from whom I had to coax and cajole any participation at all. She just wouldn't try. Eventually, after maybe 2nd or 3rd meeting, she came out of the shell, gradually. At a later meeting, she voiced a startling discovery to me, "This is very easy!" No kidding? I think the pressure she got may not have been peer pressure exactly. But still it was pressure. She worked from a D to a B, btw.
All of this is anecdotal, of course. I don't claim to prove anything. I don't claim that my opinions are scientific, only that they seem reasonable based on my own experiences. I think peer pressure, like any other pressure, can be a powerful force, but that it's not insurmountable. I also think the subtle, pervasive pressure is often stronger than blatant pressure.
It just seems a lot easier to me for parents to teach kids how to handle pressure than it is to try to mask the pressure from them. Nevertheless, I support any active decision a parent makes and won't try to circumvent their wishes. This is just what I think. If someone else's kid asks me about sex (which they have), I gently redirect them to their parents. If they ask about god (which they have), I send them to their parents. If they curse in my house, I ask them "Do your parents allow that?" I don't watch rated R movies when other kids are at the house. I don't let my kids curse when other's kids are at the house. (I did offer to let a group of kids watch Shrek in my house recently, not having any idea that some parents don't want their kids watching it. It just didn't occur to me. Fortunately, a little girl spoke up. I wasn't being manipulative, though, just thoughtless.)
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: I like your attitude. It used to be that kids got almost equal amounts of character formation at home and in religious school. Now too many parents leave everything to the public schools. A partial vacuum gets filled by peer pressure. How stupid it is for highschool kids to be so concerned about what their peers think of them, since they will have an entirely new set of peers after leaving high school.
The opinion of teachers will be important to potential employers.
We have people who know a lot about how to sell things. Why don't we have people who know how to sell the value of education and character to kids?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289 |
St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland, is, I believe, unique in the academic world. They operate on what they call the "Great Books" method. The students spend 4 years reading 100 books, which the College thinks are the indispensible books for an educated person. (The list is revised periodically -- it's not always the same 100). It covers such diverse writers as Euclid, Freud, Isaac Newton, and, of course, "literary" authors. Science and math[s] are learned from original writers. Also, there are no professors, no lectures and no exams. The students are taught by tutors, as at Oxford & Cambridge. [Actually they teach themselves, guided by tutors.] Strange as this may sound, it actually produces graduates who are in great demand by corporations and other employers. I imagine they have a website where you can learn more about this program and the reading list. It's not a real old idea; although St. Johns is an old institution, it used traditional methods until the 1930's, when it was on the verge of going out of business and the Great Books program was invented to keep it going.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>I did offer to let a group of kids watch Shrek in my house recently, not having any idea that some parents don't want their kids watching it. It just didn't occur to me. Fortunately, a little girl spoke up. I wasn't being manipulative, though, just thoughtless.
I've only seen this film whilst half asleep over Christmas. Did I miss something? What is there to object to?
We've become regular cinema goers in the last year and our newly teenage children have become used to the flexible age game. We took them to see Billy Elliot, Bridget Jones, Oceans Elven and several other "15" films in the last year. I'd rather make my own decisions about what is suitable. They are pretty broad minded and since TV seem to think it is OK to show lesbian weddings (in Friends) at 6pm and they are allowed to stay up past the nine pm watershed there is little that hasn't been discussed at home or at school (these days complete with graphic illustrations and free samples). Most of the teen fiction that they read seems to cover the same ground although I'd love them to get onto soemthing a little more meaty. I was reading Solzenitzen at their age and I still have bad dreams from seeing "Midnight Express". Gratuitous violence isn't to my taste, so our DVD collection stops short there. Last night I hade the misfortune to see the last half hour of "Scream" on TV. I know that it is a spoof but I'm still not wild about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I've heard of The Great Books, but I wasn't aware it was used as a curriculum. I used to have a friend who started reading them for the heck of it. Was it Adler who was one of the moving forces for it? The same guy who headed the Paedeia committee?
Sounds like a great idea for kids who are into it, though I don't think it's something that should be coerced. Sounds like a very highly enriching experience.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
What is there to object to?
Several things. There's Shrek farting in the mud hole, there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures, there's torture (of the gingerbread man). Sure, it seems silly to me, but I don't want to argue with another parent about it, especially when they've been nice enough to let their kid come to my kids' birthday party.
I read Gulag I when I was about 12 or 13. I was just starting high school when I read III - gave me nightmares, but I don't think nightmares are necessarily bad things to have on occasion.
I waffle on the violence, depending on the movie. I liked The Quick and The Dead, for example, and The Man who Shot Liberty Valence, but I generally hate westerns. I liked Bridge on the River Kwai, and Stalag 17, and Starship Troopers (can't say it had very good acting), but generally hate war movies. Apocolypse Now was disturbing, but I had no trouble with the blood bath in the opening scene of Blade. It just depends.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Several things. There's Shrek farting in the mud hole, there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures, there's torture (of the gingerbread man). Sure, it seems silly to me, but I don't want to argue with another parent about it, especially when they've been nice enough to let their kid come to my kids' birthday party.
There must lie a great UK/US divide. I can't think of a single person that I have ever known who would object to any of those things. Farting, for example, is an essential (some would say the main) part of British humour.
I'd heard that some people objected to Harry Potter but at first I thought that it must be a joke. We just don't have a vocal conservative Christian right wing. I think that the only issue that I am really aware of is abortion. There has been quite a stink recently about a school which was caught teaching creationism and most of the newspapers ran articles trying to explain what creationism is (I've had to explain it to several people). The head of the school was on the radio this morning explaining that it was included as part of a religion course where several different religious views were discussed and no, it wasn't taught as part of the science curriculum as had been suggested, a teacher merely discussed it in class when he was asked a direct question. The coverage has been interesting. It seems to be a widely held view in the press that anyone who doesn't believe in Darwinism should be locked up and the key thrown away - a different kind of religious intolerance, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
(I'm one of the multitude of You-Essicans to whom British humor proves too often elusive.)
I *have* met a (presumably) former Brit who was a conservative religious type, so maybe their non-presence over there is due to yall's shippin' the odd bird over here. CUTITOUT!
Being raised around conservative religious types, I feel pretty comfortable with them most of the time. I may or may not agree with the reaction of the media over there to the "teaching of creationism," though I can sympathize with their apprehensions.
I'm a little disturbed by the attitude some people have towards conservative religionists. OTOH, it's very difficult to maintain your composure and be civil when the religionists are themselves very often insulting, coercive, etc.
In fairness, I usually am not part of these arguments and I only overhear snippets. It's very hard to tell who started what and why. I'm sure there's plenty of blame to go around for the nastiness. In those few brawls to which I have contributed, most of the time I don't even know how things went awry - even when I was there the whole time - though I'm sure I was partly at fault.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Mad Cows Dissected
You sound like the kind of person we need around here. Humour can be taught for a small fee.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
"Humour can be taught for a small fee." Dear jmh: I am a bit sceptical of that assertion. To be sure, humour is learned, but there are many who seem incapable of learning it. I never did learn to enjoy seeing Red Skelton or John Cleese fall down.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Well thank you. That's a very kind thing to say. And you and Dr. Bill are exactly the kind of highly cultured people I want to read my postings.
The criticisms I commonly get are that I write too informally, my references are too obscure, my sentences are too complex and often incoherent, and my diction is too pompous. Also the opinions I express are insipid, parochial, immature, and uninspired. Other than that, comments are generally favorable.
OTOH, a friend of mine was explaining to me over lunch that I could benefit from a few lessons in British humor. "Oh, God," she said, "that's just what you need."
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
What is there to object to?
Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. And then there's...
about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy.
(re: the very tall castle.)
Shrek: Do you think he's compensating for something?
(the singing welcome to Duloc)
Please....Keep off the grass, shine your shoes, wash your.....face!
In the scene when Lord Farquaad is watching the "video" of Fiona on the magic mirror while sitting in bed, if you look closely (just before he smiles and looks at the camera) you can see the blanket covering his lap rise up slightly.
And I'm sure there's something rude about the dragon and the donkey.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Humour can be taught for a small fee.
The word small being humorous?
[In the jargon of us lawyers, small fee is oxymoronic:
Their's not to reason why,
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wondered.
Honor the charge they made]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. The "problem" might relate to the much-misunderstood British pantomime (we've discussed it before, you know where the principal boy is a girl, the dame is a man and risque humour is interspersed with the stuff for the tinies [not tinnies]). Pantomime has always worked on several levels, pretty costumes, slapstick and down in the gutter (in the nicest possible way). The gutter stuff goes well over the head of the little ones but makes it work as family entertainment. Shrek works because it plays by the same rules. [But you knew that ] I heard a radio review of "Ice Age" the other day. It was felt that like all children's tales it is a therapy piece. In this case "be a team player" but the message didn’t work because it only attempted to appeal to the children and left the parents looking at their watches.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy
I think that they are onto something there. I've always been a little concerned about her. Do you thing she'll need long-term therapy when she gets older? Perhaps we should suggest that if she does have any children with the handsome prince, we should put them on the "children at risk" register, just to be on the safe side.
While we're at it, I hope that Hansel and Gretal are getting similar treatment. I think that prophylactic Prozac for all fairy tale characters would be a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures
Er, helloooooooo!!! It's a fairytale!!! What did you expect?
Do those same people have the same problem with Lord of the Rings? It also has magic and mythical creatures and a lot of sanitised violence to boot.
there's torture (of the gingerbread man)
Now, come on! [Jeremy Paxman emoticon] This is a mite ludicrous. I think that kids these days know the difference between a gingerbread man and an animate being. As for animated violence I don't think that it has adverse effects on children. Plenty of people grew up with the likes of Tom and Jerry without acquiring violent tendencies.
As for me I loved Shrek so much I bought the DVD. Okay, it's not as funny as Toy Story 2 (The Star Wars revelation in that had me in tears) but Eddie Murphy and Mike Myers playing off each other were priceless. The Monsieur Hood scene was the best, though, but sadly too short and I'd have loved to see it last at least five minutes longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. And then there's...
He was the baddie. If he was the nice guy then we wouldn't have a story. Even I understood that one.
about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy.
Nothing you don't hear on daytime television either side of the pond. Indeed you hear worse things on kid's soaps.
(re: the very tall castle.)
Shrek: Do you think he's compensating for something?
(the singing welcome to Duloc)
Please....Keep off the grass, shine your shoes, wash your.....face!
There's a story behind this. The producer of Shrek used to work for Disney until he walked out after a heated argument. The film is full of jibes at the Disney empire - including the Magic Kingdom castle and 'It's a small world'. Note also the name of the 'car park' in the grounds of Duloc and the guy wearing the large head at the entrance - all Disney references. Duloc is also an acronym. Can you guess what it stands for?
In the scene when Lord Farquaad is watching the "video" of Fiona on the magic mirror while sitting in bed, if you look closely (just before he smiles and looks at the camera) you can see the blanket covering his lap rise up slightly.
After five viewings I can't say that I noticed (although maybe I just wasn't looking). Farquaad was a little guy. Perhaps it was his knee? I'm sure that the animators wouldn't be that crass.
And I'm sure there's something rude about the dragon and the donkey.
Your imagination runneth riot. It was meant to symbolise love crossing many boundaries - just like Shrek and Fiona. Are you deliberately looking for faults where there aren't any to be found?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland, is, I believe, unique in the academic world. They operate on what
they call the "Great Books" method. The students spend 4 years reading 100 books, which the College thinks
are the indispensible books for an educated person. (The list is revised periodically -- it's not always the same
100). It covers such diverse writers as Euclid, Freud, Isaac Newton, and, of course, "literary" authors. Science
and math[s] are learned from original writers. Also, there are no professors, no lectures and no exams. The
students are taught by tutors, as at Oxford & Cambridge. [Actually they teach themselves, guided by tutors.]
Strange as this may sound, it actually produces graduates who are in great demand by corporations and other
employers. I imagine they have a website where you can learn more about this program and the reading list.
It's not a real old idea; although St. Johns is an old institution, it used traditional methods until the 1930's,
when it was on the verge of going out of business and the Great Books program was invented to keep it going.
Wow, Bob. That is so unorthodox but a brilliant idea. I'll check it out sometime. Two things. How do they know that a)All of the students have read the books? and b)How do they know that, having read the books, the students have digested the full meaning of the books? Do the tutors keep records of continous assessment?
I can only presume that the entrance exam to St. John's is based upon an already established passion for reading on the part of the student.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Well, I didn't discuss the issue with these parents, as I felt somewhat embarrassed that I had nearly shown the show to the kid in the first place and I didn't know how to broach the subject without sounding condescending.
However, I've heard what other conservative religious types have said about it and they have mentioned a few of these things.
There is a difference between LOTR (and chronicles of Narnia) and HP, Shrek. LOTR and Narnia were both written by christians (Tolkien actually helped convert Lewis) and Narnia is christian allegory. This, I have maintained for some time, is the real difference.
OTOH, I read an article somewhere the other day where a conservative religious type was going into some detail about his perceptions of the differences. In Narnia and LOTR magic are treated reverentially, and with some caution. HP and Shrek promote occultism by not engendering a reverence for magic. It sounds like cavilling to me, and many of these guys are trying to get HP out of the classroom and school (and public) libraries. In that situation, I wouldn't hesitate to debate the subject, but as I said, I thought it would be unpleasant to do it at a birthday party for my girls.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
There's a story behind this
I'm going to watch it again this weekend with this thought in mind!
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Rubrick, I can only assume that our US'n and Strine friends are not entirely speaking about their own views but interpreting the views of others. I think that their tongues are firmly in their er cheeks.
[to protect the little ones]I have a strong aversion to Disney and regard time spent in their theme parks as tantamount to torture. I thought that they deserved all they got when someone sued them for one of the Mickey Mouse characters removing his head in public.
By the way Whatdaya think of this. My daughter came home from school in a bad mood at having to watch some awful Disney thing for the nth time. She said that the teacher had been away and they could have watched the Simpsons but one of the children's parents had said that they weren't allowed to watch it. I blame Marge's liking for the odd six-pack, unless there are fairy stories buried subliminally in the story.
Perhaps that is why (apart from Salman Rushdie) no-one is too bothered about banning books any more, they are too het up about the misbehaviour of cartoon characters.
[/rant]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
i am with Jo-- i hate Disney-- its all so falsely sweet. god knows i had a terrible childhood.. but fairy tales were wonderful... at least my mother wasn't about to lead me off into a forest and abandon me, and witches weren't going to try to eat me.. and hansel and gretel were good kids, in no way did they deserve maltreatment. maybe that, more than anything else is a nice part of fairytales. bambi's mother dies. but bambi keeps on living. live isn't all fun, sweetness and pleasure. bad things happen, and yet we can go on. the old Disney had some of that.. but can you image Old Yeller being made today? now days everything has a happy ending.
well guess what? kids know its not true. kids from slightly disfucntional families can feel normal (oh household is just like the simpsons!) and yet recognize things should be better, but its not their fault. Bart doesn't feel guilt or think its his fault that homer drinks. bart is a nice strong character.
and fiona, is embarassed to be an ogre.. why? cause society values superficial beauty over personality, intelect, character. Sheik loves fiona, not the beautiful woman, but the personality, intelect and character. he too, feels unworthy of such beauty. but when fiona becomes a ogre, he sees her as even more beautiful
guess i saw different things in the film!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
There is a difference between LOTR (and chronicles of Narnia) and HP, Shrek. LOTR and Narnia were both written by christians (Tolkien actually helped convert Lewis) and Narnia is christian allegory. This, I have maintained for some time, is the real difference.
Okay, I'll admit that I didn't know that Tolkien and Lewis were reverential christians BUT I do think that Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs. The characters are trolls, dwarves, goblins and elves and the language is runic - nothing to even suggest Christian or any other major relgion. Okay, there is the symbolism of good versus evil and you could say that the fellowship was a sort of crusade but these are pretty borderline comparisons.
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I was a young devout Catholic when I read the series a good twenty years ago and I never made that connection. Where do the lion, the witch and the wardrobe fit into that comment?
OTOH, I read an article somewhere the other day where a conservative religious type was going into some detail about his perceptions of the differences. In Narnia and LOTR magic are treated reverentially, and with some caution. HP and Shrek promote occultism by not engendering a reverence for magic. It sounds like cavilling to me, and many of these guys are trying to get HP out of the classroom and school (and public) libraries. In that situation, I wouldn't hesitate to debate the subject, but as I said, I thought it would be unpleasant to do it at a birthday party for my girls.
Point taken about Tolkien and Lewis's treatment of magic but they both took their writing seriously and thus wrote from a more realistic point of view. Shrek and Harry Potter (I have neither read the books nor seen the movie so I am no authority) are whimsical stories for children and adults alike referencing earlier influences from which their authors most probably drew.
I can't speak for HP but Shrek never made me think of going out and ritually slaughtering a goat in front of a pentacle or sacrificing a virgin. Nothing occultish about it, I thought. But, to quote Shrek, 'an ogre will boil your eyeballs for jelly. Actually, it's quite nice on toast'.
It's only a bit of fun.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
hansel and gretel were good kids, in no way did they deserve maltreatment
Good kids? They murdered that poor forest woman for no better reason than their father thought she was an infidel. She saved them from starving or freezing to death out in the woods. All she asked in return was a little help in chopping some wood and fixing some dinner, and those "good kids" killed her for her troubles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771 |
OK, FF ~ I'll play out the Harry Potter issue with you. I'd argue that Rowling does portray a reverence for magic throughout the books. Everything that falls out of Dumbledore's mouth is warning the kids to be careful with the power they're learning. It seems to me that just because the protagonists use magic a little clumsily to attain their goals, that doesn't mean that it's treated irreverently. Harry, Hermione, and Ron aren't angels like Frodo (who bears the burden silently), but I felt the message in the HP books was pretty clear - use your power wisely. Shrek is more like the Terry Pratchett Discworld series, where magic is played for laughs. I don't particularly think there's anything wrong with that either. But that's why I'd never make it as a conservative Christian. Well, that's not the only reason...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs.
I'm not sure. These things are not mutually exclusive. I think his allegory is just not as transparent as Lewis'. It's not Christian allegory, per se, but more an allegory of the continuing battle of good vs evil, making sacrifices, is it moral to fight evil with evil (i.e. use the ring). I hadn't thought of the Norse and Germanic origins, but it seems obvious now that you point it out.
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I was a young devout Catholic when I read the series a good twenty years ago and I never made that connection. Where do the lion, the witch and the wardrobe fit into that comment?
To answer your question, the lion is Jesus Christ, the witch is Lucifer, and the wardrobe is the plain (or plane) on which the battle for the soul transpires. If I recall the Lion dies and is resurrected in the very first book. And in the last book they all go to heaven. If you were to read them again now, I'm sure it would be very obvious to you.
Even though I see it as Christian propaganda, I still highly recommend the entire series to young and old alike. I've read the first five books to my kids and they enjoyed them quite a bit. And I read the whole series to myself when I was maybe 20 or 22.
whimsical stories for children and adults alike referencing earlier influences from which their authors most probably drew.
Well, yea. It causes me some mental duress to try to see things from their perspective, because for the life of me it seems utterly ludicrous.
I mentioned that I grew up in a pretty conservative environment myself, so I'm kinda used to being around people whose views may seem skewed to the great bulk of humanity. And I doubt not a whit that some of my own opinions would be similarly assessed and dismissed. But I was at a brat meeting a few years back. (Brats are the children of military personnel.) I was at a table with some other former brats - I'm used to the nationalistic comments and the occasional intolerant remark - but I was really floored when one of the group began talking about HP and how Rowling had not really written the works herself. Not at all. It was actually the Devil hisself that wrote those books through her hand, via a process called automatic writing. I thought he was kidding at first, but he never dropped the pretense. And what was worse is that the others at the table were each nodding their heads in a vigorous up and down motion.
Being the unprincipled person that I am, I held my tongue and listened to him continue this rant for some time, with vocal and animated gestural encouragement from the assembled company. See, it's a clever ploy by the devil to make children think that magic is not dangerous, so they'll be tempted to try it themselves. It's all part of the same insidious plot that brought us Dungeons and Dragons. FOR GOD'S SAKE, the spells in that evil HP series are *REAL* spells! Don't you understand that? It's all real! That bastard is teaching *REAL* spells to *OUR* children! How can I make you understand this simple fact? The consequences of failing to recognize and thwart this diabolical plan will be terrible and irreparable. If you don't go back to your home right now and send out letters to prominent authorities protesting these books and demanding that they be expunged from our shelves of our public school libraries, you will be playing right into the hands of Satan himself! This fellow actually has pamphlets back home that explain all this to you and he'd be happy to mail them to you.
I wish this were satire, but I couldn't make anything like this up. I don't think there's enough fertilizer on the planet to inspire this. I suspect it's not the fertilizer so much as a particular kind of mushroom that gets mixed in with it that fosters this sort of imagination.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Regarding Shrek:
It's only a bit of fun.
I absolutely agree.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: Belief in magic by adults would be laughable, if it were not for the fact that groups of them can be dangerous. The terrorists willing to commit suicide in the belief that they will be rewarded with 72 virgins in the hereafter exemplify this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
FF:
I too have run into people like that; south of here we had a fundy preacher burning the HP books page by page in front of a group of six- to twelve-year-olds, all chanting in unison, "Burn in hell, burn in hell, burn in hell" as the pages were fed into the barbecue.
On the other hand, we have a prominent leader who is truly protecting the morality of our fellow citizens by draping statues in the great hall at the Department of Justice to prevent the viewing of naked b----ts. This is the same person who says of the eventual trials of the "detainees" at Camp X-Ray, "Even if they are found not guilty, I have no intention of releasing them." Of course that's not really going to become an issue because conviction is pretty much a foregone conclusion.
Wee, I must run to an organizational meeting of MMM, Make Mastectomy Mandatory. We just got a large donation from Enfamil, and we're going to start pushing for laws to lop off the breasts of all females at puberty. Just think, we'll cut down on the energy wasted in adolescent masturbation, women can save money by not having to buy brasseires, and no more concerns about breat cancer.
TEd
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
It brings out the worst in me. I can tolerate anything (well almost) except intolerance. I've seen JK Rowling speak several times now. One point that she made quite strongly is that she gets letters from time to time from people who assume that:
a) she believes in magic - she doesn't (every now and then she comes across someone who gives her a knowing look and asks about ingredients for spells - she tells them very clearly that IT IS ALL MADE UP)
b) she thinks that boarding schools are a good thing - she doesn't, it is just that children are not allowed to have adventures in the real world (I've mentioned this before). They are barely allowed to cross the street without an adult.
By the way Helen, if you find Hermione at all unsympathetic it may be because she is based on the author, who describes herself as a bookworm at school. Hermione may have her head in a book but she is not a sneak and she does get better as the books go on, honest!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I never made that connection.
If you were to read them again now, I'm sure it would be very obvious to you.
Very much so.
When my children were small, I made a practice of reading all the books that they were reading. Intending to given them those Chronicles, had the foresight to read the entire seven volumes first. The parable doesn't become evident until the final volume, but there it is striking.
Expressing no objection to proselytizing literature, I did and do think it quite a bit forward to proselytize to children in a form disguised from their parents.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear Keiva: I am sure that in your place I would have been seriously annoyed to find a proselyting message in a book meant for children, where no warning had been given. Particularly if it were spelled out clearly enough that my children were likely to be influenced by it. But that would make it propaganda, and unlikely to sell at all well, and likely to provoke widespread condemnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 477
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 477 |
Chronicles, had the foresight to read the entire seven volumes first. The parable doesn't become evident until the final volume, but there it is striking.
Guess it depends on your background, Keiva. For me, the parable was *quite* apparent, right from the first book, but then ... that was the world I grew up in. FWIW, I loved escaping into the wardrobe with the kids, in my imagination. (I even got to be one of the animal characters in a puppet show of TLW&W.. such fun!) I think the fact that the Narnia series - like HP - appeals to both children and adolts (sic) alike, is the genius of it. IMHO.
Hev
post-edit: I think I made it sound like I lived in Narnia. Only in my dreams ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Dear Hev, In the words of FF, "Usually I'm pretty dense about noticing things that are very obvious to most everyone else." [ at self -e]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs.
Though Tolkein was certainly a religious person, he said himself that his religion had no impact whatsoever on his writing. He said he wanted to create a new mythology for the British Isles, based, I suppose, loosely on the pre-existing legends. The main backbone of his stories was the languages that he created. He was a lingusitics professor, ya know. He also just wanted to create his own little (read vast and complex) world. Don't we all?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
He was the baddie. If he was the nice guy then we wouldn't have a story. Even I understood that one.
He might have been a baddie, but I can't remember ever calling someone a F*** Wad. Haven't even heard the term since my teens (when I heard it way too often). I don't have a problem with the movie, but that was a little too unsubtle for me.
After five viewings I can't say that I noticed (although maybe I just wasn't looking).
I didn't notice it either, and couldn't see it when I re-watched it last night. There were some quite heated newsgroup discussions about it though.
Are you deliberately looking for faults where there aren't any to be found?
I simply provided an answer to a question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
The parable doesn't become evident until the final volume, but there it is striking.
I agree with hev, below. It seemed pretty obvious to me from the beginning. Also, he made a point of jibing agnostics and parents who allow their children to call them by their first names in the very beginning.
OTOH, I was old enough by the time I read them that I might have gotten a heads up on the content. I really don't remember.
I agree on the general point of writers (or anyone else) trying to make an end run around a parent's wishes, but you know I read A Wrinkle in Time to my kids and caught religious references that I did not catch when the book was read to me by a fourth grade substitute teacher. It's not real obvious that the religious overtones are as accessible to children as they are to adults.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
He might have been a baddie, but I can't remember ever calling someone a F*** Wad. Haven't even heard the term since my teens (when I heard it way too often).
hehehehe ... ya know .... even after you brought this up the first time, I didn't understand what you were talking about, but I was a little embarrassed to ask. Thanks for making it explicit.
I don't have a problem with the movie, but that was a little too unsubtle for me.
But a little too subtle for the denser of us.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
He might have been a baddie, but I can't remember ever calling someone a F*** Wad. Haven't even heard the
term since my teens (when I heard it way too often). I don't have a problem with the movie, but that was a
little too unsubtle for me.
Ah, now I get it. I wasn't aware of the term until now but I guessed there was a Fark in there somewhere. Now you mention it it is far from subtle.
I didn't notice it either, and couldn't see it when I re-watched it last night. There were some quite heated
newsgroup discussions about it though.
Obviously they have nothing better to discuss other than animated characters' erections. Give me words anyday.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Tolkien talked in a radio interview yonks ago about the moral underpinnings of LOTR, and he stated quite clearly, I thought, that it was good versus evil and that although he personally was Christian, he wasn't trying to write religious allegory. Unlike C.S. Lewis, of course, who was. Hell, I was 10 or 11 when I first read TLTWATW and even I worked out for myself what was going on. You'd have to be pretty thick not to spot the parallels if you'd been the good little Sunday school attender that I was at that time. But, like FF, I liked the books and didn't hold that against them. Trying to read too much into an author's motivations is a bit like the Noddy books thing. Homosexual propaganda? Gimme a break! Enid Blyton wrote the damned things, not Rita Sackville-West! 
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
and he stated quite clearly, I thought, that it was good versus evil and that although he personally was Christian, he wasn't trying to write religious allegory.
You and Jazz have both said this, now. Perhaps I misused the language. I didn't mean to imply (or state, if I did state) that LOTR was religious allegory.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Rita Sackville-West Oh, I've never heard of her. Is she a relative of Vita or is she related to the Sackville Bagginses?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
Noddy is homosexual propaganda???? I must go back and re-read Enid Blyton some time.
Acksherly, going back to the earlier part of the thread about male and female writers, I have to admit once I started reading by myself I read voraciously without caring whether the authors were men or women. My childhood favourites were Enid Blyton (perhaps George was meant to be a pubescent lesbian?), E. Nesbitt, C. S. Lewis, and Tolkein. There were hundreds of others I read, but although I was vaguely aware that there were such things as books for girls, I don't remember thinking much about who the books were actually by.
If I look at my shelves now, again I don't think either sex predominates. No doubt some writers write particularly for one sex or the other but then whether they are men or women I find them equally uninteresting.
Being very good and not saying a word about the aspersions cast on the young lady who wrote an account of certain late events which came under my own observation and, indeed, in which I played a small part myself.
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,317
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
583
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
