I'm not getting into the evolution question for the moment: my brain is already in knots on the other thread... I like people who ask interesting questions!

posted by MyopicBookworm at 6:11 pm (EST) on Aug 21, 2008

Heya..

I only just saw your comment! I did see your post, and replied. I have yet to reply to your reply because, er, I haven't been bothered. Lazy. Etc.

I appreciate the debate by the way, although I really do just prefer warm fuzzies and hugs. Disgusting. ;p

posted by Severn at 2:00 am (EST) on Aug 19, 2008

Thanks for your recent posts about the Chinese controversy. I wonder if it is no more complicated than this: If people like you, they will give you the benefit of the doubt. If they dislike you, they will continue to find reasons to dislike you and disagree with you -- no matter the subject. Argument and logic have nothing to do with it. Therefore it is in my interest, and everyone else's, to get along with as many people as I can, so that when they see my name they get feelings of warmth and joy rather than irritation and defensiveness.

If only I could! I'm working on it.

posted by deniro at 1:04 pm (EST) on Aug 15, 2008

See http://www.librarything.com/talktopic.ph... . It'd be cool to get his file. But I am at a dead-end so far. Maybe we can call or I can visit the Archives after the fuss dies down?

posted by timspalding at 11:33 am (EST) on Aug 14, 2008

I know Eurydice is your special friend, but maybe you need a few more . . .

posted by ggchickapee at 9:39 pm (EST) on Aug 12, 2008

Calm down, Oakes. It is automatic, I promise. It happens once or twice a day, and is usually spam, not lots of posting by a member. I just made today a "new day," resetting all numbers, the fastest way to fix it.

posted by timspalding at 8:32 pm (EST) on Aug 11, 2008

I just got an automatic email that you were tagged for spamming. This is an automatic thing. You hit the limit. As I know you were not spamming, but just replying, I will take this away as soon as I can. Give me a second; I have to change the db.

posted by timspalding at 8:29 pm (EST) on Aug 11, 2008

Incidentally, the whole point of my original note was not to call you out—the sanction was a mere mention of the term—but to protect myself from charges of favoritism. I get that charge regularly because many members are aware we are related and you are frequently in hot arguments. Most of the time, your words are perfectly within the Terms of Service, whatever others think. But calling a member "girlish"? Come on.

posted by timspalding at 7:45 pm (EST) on Aug 11, 2008

Ah! I almost gave you Zulieka Dobson.

posted by Eurydice at 12:13 am (EST) on Jul 18, 2008

You've read 8000 books?

posted by deniro at 9:17 pm (EST) on Jul 9, 2008

"...if anything, the swamping factor appears to have only gotten worse..."

Firehose meet mouth, indeed! However, I like the way the new Home page handles it, actually. In contrast to Connections, in which you get an infinite-seeming stream of books that people have added, on the new Home page, you get the most recent ~15, which is more manageable.

posted by Carnophile at 8:29 am (EST) on Jun 27, 2008

Fancy meeting you here, and seeing that we have so many books in common! I think you ran a telemarketing campaign for me many years ago at the Delaware Symphony. Cheers! Curt Long

posted by clong at 7:38 am (EST) on May 25, 2008

I'm working on recommendations, and using yours and mine as a test case. You need Herodotus!

posted by timspalding at 10:13 pm (EST) on May 24, 2008

But you forgot my query. ;) Where did you go?

posted by Eurydice at 2:13 am (EST) on May 11, 2008

Responding to the comment left to me ...

Frankly, I use "Deist" rather loosely, yet prefer it to Athiest because it's closer to where I stand. I don't deny that there could well be some "entity-ness" to the universe, but the specifics of how I envision that manifesting (the usual "Brahman/Atman" stuff, "stained-glass window" UU pantheism, Native American borrowings such as "the Beauty Way", etc.) is rather constantly in a certain state of flux; over-laid, naturally, with the clichés of "theoretical physics as mysticism" (picturing a Deity which had set up the vast and varied permutations of the Multiverse like some infinite field of dominos, and is watching this play out after having "flicked" the first tile).

While these conceptualizations would disqualify me being "a card-carrying atheist", they also put me in a position where I strongly suspect that ALL religions, by the time they've become religions, are less about TRUTH and more about control, power, and group identity.

The concept that there is some "big human ego"/"super daddy" which was capable of forging the Universe (let alone the myriad universes of the Multiverse), yet gives a flying fuck about the micro-managing crap in the Bible, Koran, Avesta, Vedas, etc., seems mind-boggling improbable. To such an entity, we would mean less than the mites that live in our eyelashes' follicles, yet to the religious this entity is an unblinking presence that is ever sifting our thoughts and actions, looking for the slightest variance from the doctrines of their particular sect.

Humans are always dangerous in groups, and given an excuse (and "the Word Of God" is a heck of an excuse) will commit the most heinous acts almost at a whim (if I really dug through some of my recent reading I could find references to some fascinating psychological studies to this effect), if these are perceived to be either beneficial to the group, or pleasing to the power structure. As Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." ... and religions are rife with those who would happily use the power & control of belief to destroy everything which was not in perfect lock-step with their particular flavor of faith.

Much like the classic story of the river-crossing scorpion (which fatally stings its transporting benefactor), I feel one must be constantly away of the NATURE of Religion and of the Religious. No matter how nicely they might comport themselves in a given situation, torture, execution, and massacre are always only a few sermons away.

Anyway, the "Deist" (in the classic mode of the Enlightenment) view of a "God" that set the world/universe/multiverse in motion (and then went to get whatever the Deity equivalent of a beer is), is the closest easy approximation that I have to use as a label for what I'm able to posit as a "religious view", so I trot it out every now and again.

posted by BTRIPP at 11:53 pm (EST) on Apr 13, 2008

Just read that thread. Thanks for pointing it out. Silly people with too much time on their hands. I liked the fact that you tried to get people to talk about books. Your brother has a terrific site here.

posted by steiac at 10:49 pm (EST) on Mar 28, 2008

How did you ever get the fist name Oakes? I've never seen that before.

posted by bigal123 at 12:10 am (EST) on Mar 26, 2008

Sorry, I didn't realize that was the depth of the situation. The only thing that I saw was this one thread and just assumed that you were being rude for no apparent reason. I'm laughing now because now that I understand the situation in full context I can feel your frustration. I don't really know how to deal with this though.

As an aside, on the Obama Watch thread, in retrospect I was completely out of line by writing five "posts" in succession. However, I was just so annoyed and yes angry, by what I perceived to be a discussion that could have potentially lead us nowhere politically, that I just vented all of my built up frustration at this political season all on one thread. So, while it was directed at conservatives, it was, although I didn't make it explicit, directed at everyone who is trying their damnest to keep us from genuinely discussing the issues that affect us all, be they liberal, conservative, or whatever.

My point was that we have to ignore the people who try and demagogue situations for purely political purposes and honestly talk about the issues, or else we'll just be reduced to 'liberals did this' or 'conservatives did this' and we'll all be worse off because of it.

-bigal

posted by bigal123 at 12:07 am (EST) on Mar 26, 2008

Every time I end you email I get a nasty response from Yahoo. Have you got another email address I can send them to. Are you auto-forwarding to Yahoo?

posted by timspalding at 12:52 pm (EST) on Mar 24, 2008

(and let me know if I sound sexist, racist or anything elseist here)

Just humorist. She does look like a man eater!

posted by ggchickapee at 12:26 pm (EST) on Feb 16, 2008

Hi Oakes. What happened was that I added you to my "intersting" list (actually you were the only person on it) but then whenever I went to the "recently added" part all I got was your recently added books. Now there's nothing wrong with this, except that your library is as vast as the ocean or the sky. Or both, plus the volume of the local supercluster. So I had trouble getting the recently added stuff from the other "top 50 similar libraries." The upshot is, you're now firmly ensconced in my mental "interesting libraries" list anyway. And I may add you back to the LT list (thus preventing it from being the empty set)...

Sheesh, long-winded, huh? You can tell I'm a professor; we love the sound of our own voices (occupational hazard)...

posted by Carnophile at 7:04 pm (EST) on Feb 11, 2008

Which tags will he choose? Which tags will he choose?

Not that I'm watching or anything....

I suggest there is still a black area of remiss tagging into which certain books... disappeared.

posted by Eurydice at 4:29 pm (EST) on Dec 21, 2007

Hayek seems to have defined 'discovered law' as any law derived from authority, particularly (or perhaps only) religious authority. He divided law in some of his early work into 'natural', 'discovered', and 'man-made'.

"Radicals ro Capitalism" is on my must list, which unfortunately grows faster than I can read books from it.

FYI - I lived in Chicago from 3 winters (76-79), and at the time I recall them as most snow on record (84"), coldest (34 consecutive days where high was below zero in Jan-Feb 78), and broke both records. Loved Chicago, but that's why I live in Texas.

Lou Imholt

posted by ServusLibri at 3:40 pm (EST) on Dec 8, 2007

I just read one of your posts in the "books that are disturbing" thread, and I wholeheartedly agree with you about that Dr. Seuss story. It terrified me as a child, as well. I could never articulate it well to others, and most people had never heard of the story at all.

posted by monohex at 9:42 pm (EST) on Nov 17, 2007

Sorry to hear you had to drop out of the marathon. Probably the best thing to do though, with an injury plus the heat.

I haven’t run any marathons recently. Pathetic really. At my last milestone birthday, I was in the best shape of my life. Set PRs at every distance except the marathon, and missed that one only due to a bout of Montezuma’s Revenge. Unfortunately, that was the year I took up quilting. I have learned that one cannot make a habit of blowing off workouts to piece quilt blocks. Especially true for anyone over 40.

I am trying to get back into shape so I can do some races next year. I am not fast at all, but races do motivate me to train. I definitely won’t be running Chicago ever; my legs turn to lead on level ground. Fortunately we have lots of hills here; for example, Sound to Narrows is my PR (and favorite) course for 12k. This course is very near to Fort Lewis, and they have a military category in the race. I just love those final hills, where I overtake dozens of young bucks who go out too fast. They can’t believe it! Yay for masters running!

posted by oregonobsessionz at 6:04 pm (EST) on Nov 12, 2007

Hi - Your reference to length of hair didn't catch my attention until I was reading through that thread again. Nice photo - is that from this year's race? How did you do? I seem to remember reading that the weather was unbearably hot.

Not for me. I die in the heat, and my legs hate flat terrain. I actually do better times on hills. The Humboldt Redwoods is top of my list, if I can just get back in shape for that sort of thing.

posted by oregonobsessionz at 11:13 am (EST) on Nov 12, 2007

I love the 'absence of tags' tag.

Sincerely yours,

Tag Spy No. 1

posted by Eurydice at 1:02 am (EST) on Oct 30, 2007

Hey,

I just read your review The Foucault Reader. I actually have to deal with people who think he is brilliant. Since my discipline is history, I can recommend this book: Keith Windschuttle, The Killing of History: How Literary Critics and Social Theorists are Murdering Our Past (New York: Free Press, 1997).

On my third draft of this comment I see that you own it. I am almost through it, and find it witty and instructive. If you haven't started it, I will quote a pertinent section from Windschuttle's introduction:

"One of the reasons the humanities and social sciences have been taken over so quickly by the sophistry described in this book is because too few of those who might have been expected to resist the putsch understood what its instigators were saying. The uninitiated reader who opens a typical book on postmodernism, hermeneutics, poststructuralism et al must think he or she has stumbled onto a new foreign language, so obscure and dense is the prose. Now, this happens to be a very effective tactic to adopt in academic circles where there is always an expectation that things are never simple and that anyone who writes clearly is thereby being shallow. Obscurity is often assumed to equal profundity, a quality that signals a superiority over the thinking of the uneducated herd. Moreover, those students who put in all the work needed to comprehend a dialogue of this kind very often become converts, partly to protect their investment in the large amount of time already committed, and partly because they are bound to feel they have thereby earned a ticket into an elite. Obscurity is thus a clever way to generate a following."

To quote a quite hilarious footnote: "Typically, one follower of the French postsstrucuralist philosopher, Jacques Derrida [a Foucault buddy], claims that clear writing is the sign of a reactionary, Mas'd Zavarzadeh has dismissed a critic of Derrida because of 'his unproblematic prose and the clarity of his presentation, which are the conceptual tools of conservatism.'"

Regards,
Gene Rhea Tucker

posted by tuckerresearch at 7:54 pm (EST) on Oct 28, 2007

hi

I always understood that it was Harlan Ellison who wrote Venus on the Halfshell; this is the first I've heard of Farmer's name being associated with it. Given your comment on the book, you have a perspective of your own. Is it Ellison, Farmer, or someone else entirely? Would I win ten dollars with my answer?

danielx

posted by danielx at 3:25 pm (EST) on Oct 26, 2007

Thanks for the comment! I am very impressed with your library, I keep finding books that look so interesting. My tags are, in part, a product of years of neurosis and despair during which I was forced to turn to my books for meaning and comfort. Ahh! Life!!!
By the way, do you recommend the book "The Witch of Prague?" It looks interesting.

posted by sullivsar at 11:39 am (EST) on Oct 24, 2007

Oakes,

I just read your review of The Rise of Endymion, and thought I would toss my two pence at your question.

When Dan Simmons wrote Aenea as 'just another person' who happened to have special powers, he did it intentionally. You probably noticed that in Endymion. In fact, he goes almost overboard (through Raul's journaling) to make that point to the reader.

The reasoning I got for that decision was featured prominently toward the end of The Rise of Endymion, when everyone begins to take steps toward the enlightenment that Aenea had embodied: A normal person can better himself/herself to that point. If he had made Aenea into something special beyond that, he would have made that enlightenment unavailable to anyone else.

That's my interpretation. What are your thoughts?

-Danny

posted by buchleser at 10:31 am (EST) on Oct 18, 2007

You are right, I do not have too many books on Christianity and Catholicism, but only because I can find all of them in our seminary's library. So, I buy mostly those on the Classics, and on my particualr interests.

posted by Romanus at 9:42 am (EST) on Oct 5, 2007

I hope you don't mind my adding you to my list of "interesting libraries" - we share 145 books! Moreover, I have found your reviews also very interesting and enlightening (I particularly appreciated your review of Dawkins 'The God Delusion').

posted by Romanus at 3:59 pm (EST) on Oct 2, 2007

Most unfair. Especially for some of them. Mind you, my last foray came to $5 for 4, and I thought that was poor (- at the shop in question).

posted by Eurydice at 2:22 am (EST) on Oct 2, 2007

I'm envious. :) Especially of the Woolrich, which I've wanted for a while. Nice job... I shall have to focus on something besides breadth, representativeness, and obscurity if I want to stand up beside you! ;)

(Followed by the question: IS there anything else?)

posted by Eurydice at 2:14 am (EST) on Oct 2, 2007

I didn't know Harlan had material available via iTunes - although it makes sense if they cut a deal with Dove Audio. I think there might be two readings of that story done by Harlan. There was the one done originally for Alternate Recordings/H.E.R.C. back in the 1970's and (I think) a newer version done for Dove Audio for the 2000X audio anthology featuring a more mature Ellison voice. In neither case could you describe his voice as mellifluous but I think the newer version is better. YMMV.

- Barney Dannelke

posted by Dannelke at 11:25 am (EST) on Sep 20, 2007

Ah, of course. :)

posted by Eurydice at 12:50 am (EST) on Sep 20, 2007

Hi,
you have M. Parris as author of "Great Parliamentary Scandals". We could combine the authors Matthew Parris, but that might get confusing if people enter books by some other M. Parris, so it would be nice if you make the simple change to your entry.
That's a great library you have, in more than one sense!
Regards, Jim Roberts

posted by jimroberts at 7:20 am (EST) on Aug 16, 2007

Oh, the honor of helping push you past the 7,000 mark! - Even if I DID ruin your life...

;)

posted by Eurydice at 11:31 pm (EST) on Jul 28, 2007

Aw, come one: the "Gor" books are good fun, and nothing to be ashamed of...

posted by MyopicBookworm at 3:40 am (EST) on Jul 28, 2007

Hello,

I noticed we share quite a few titles. I prefer non-fiction, but occasionally have to read something a bit lighter.
My reviews are based mainly on accuracy, reference information, & originality [of the subject &/or point of view]. And about like everything else is my life, go from one extreme to the other, being rated very high, or very low.

(Please do not critique my writing. I know that I am not a professional!)

posted by theselkie at 10:33 am (EST) on Jul 20, 2007

re: Christopher Hitchens review. "WE" dock him a star????? Just curious.

posted by Ibreak4books at 10:36 am (EST) on Jul 6, 2007

Hi, I noticed several chess titles in your catalog and thought you may like to check my forum site out- www.ChessForums.org, we have a dedicated section to chess books and recommended reading you may be interested in, thanks, Greg

posted by gregfindley at 6:31 am (EST) on Jun 30, 2007

(Envy, sheer cumulative envy, moves me.)

posted by Eurydice at 1:48 am (EST) on Jun 24, 2007

May I come read your books?

posted by Eurydice at 1:47 am (EST) on Jun 24, 2007

Good batch of new reviews!

posted by ggchickapee at 11:47 am (EST) on Apr 9, 2007

Done, sir. Thank you much, both for the books and for keeping me on the straight and narrow as far as their proper and accurate cataloguing goes. ;)

posted by dreamingtereza at 10:40 am (EST) on Apr 9, 2007

I'm actually very anti-Libertarian, both philosophically, and in a lot of practical areas too. Best luck, though.

posted by gabriel at 5:36 pm (EST) on Apr 8, 2007

Alas, I have not done it justice; but I did meet the time.

Dare I even put a name to you, O Man of Masks? :)

posted by Eurydice at 12:50 am (EST) on Apr 2, 2007

Addendum:

As far as leaving you in the lurch, I didn't realize that it was you who had made that statement. I thought she had really found that direct statement in my writings and thought I would have a point to clarify for her. I am rarely that direct in my posts. Much to my chagrin, I saw that it simply exposed another point for a shot at you. I apologize to you for the second time in 24 hours.

posted by markmobley at 12:57 pm (EST) on Mar 3, 2007

Again, I would need quite a bit of space to make my beliefs clear but I can do this:

I would say that the Muslim religion is wrong, inherently wrong. You hit on some very important issues that I would define as wrong. But wicked is a word I use very judiciously. I tend to apply it to specific actions. Of course, those actions usually come from a system of thought (like Islam). But it is the interpretation exhibited by the application that I apply wicked to. I often accuse people within Christianity (my own denomination and congregation) with wickedness based on their interpretation of what I consider very good truths, but use them to hurt people. Jesus often did that with the Pharisees.

I see your point about conceding too much, though I am not sure that I agree. When I look back on our posts, I found that I was talking (and thinking) about governments and religious leaders and not speaking about the religion in general. It seems that you might have been leaning more toward the religion in its entirety.

My method of persuasion is to convince you that I am a reasonable and rational man, get you to lower your defenses, and slip in "truths" one at a time. Long years of public speaking and private counseling. Once the walls are up, I make no progress and have no interest in comparing "shwartzes" (to steal from SpaceBalls).

I have quite enjoyed the histrionics of the last couple of days. You would be quite the pub companion my friend!

posted by markmobley at 12:33 pm (EST) on Mar 3, 2007

Upon re-reading the post, that comment about you came across harsher sounding that it was meant. Somewhere in the back of my mind is a post you wrote about late-nights a few months ago and I tried to play off of what I remembered you saying. Of course, I did poorly. I hope the rest of my compliments offset the sad word choice. I really do have loads of fun with this and hope I don't bore everyone to death.

The hospital run did turn out miraculously well (oh, the fun of language). The kid from our congregation had a pretty nasty cut but that was all. No seat belt, Camaro, lots of rain, testosterone: a bad combination. The State Trooper was quite amazed at the outcome. It is always nice to get a win.

Sorry about you having to work. It is a bummer.

posted by markmobley at 3:15 pm (EST) on Mar 2, 2007

Sorry I wasn't around for the fireworks last night. Had to make a late-night pastoral run to the emergency room. Apparently I missed quite a bit of fun...

posted by markmobley at 12:41 pm (EST) on Mar 2, 2007

Well, then, you've got me. :)

posted by Eurydice at 1:01 am (EST) on Mar 1, 2007

What can I say, Eyes didn't do it for me, and I started skimming halfway through. I can't give a lot of stars to something I didn't enjoy enough to finish...

posted by ben_a at 4:35 pm (EST) on Feb 17, 2007

THe one that I found was Worlds of Cthulhu 1 :)

posted by Tarkeel at 9:36 am (EST) on Jan 17, 2007

I see you have the Worlds of Cthulhu magazines, but with incorrect editors listed. According to the printing in the magazines, Keith Herber is listed as the official editor for #1 & 2, and Adam Crossingham for #3 & 4.

It would be nice if you could fix these, so that all the copies may live together :)

posted by Tarkeel at 3:02 am (EST) on Jan 12, 2007

Welcome back! Things were languishing a bit without you.

posted by ggchickapee at 12:00 am (EST) on Dec 10, 2006

Ok, thanks. Guess I will see if I can find it one day.

posted by bluetyson at 9:02 pm (EST) on Nov 14, 2006

Hi OS,

I didn't even know there was such a book as the Lanague Chronicles until today.

Does this relate at all to Healer, which I always liked a lot? (that is if you have read it of course).

Thanks,

bt

posted by bluetyson at 7:23 am (EST) on Nov 8, 2006

Well I'll probably have a lot of difficulty too--but tenacity is a good thing for the most part--just as long as it doesn't cross the line into knuckleheadedness. One of the real interesting books from my list is the Soldiers of Salamis by Javier Cercas. It's based on a true story about a very prominent member of the Spanish Falange. In the last days of the war he was a prisoner of the Communist 5th regiment led by General Lister. One night all the prisoners are lined up to be shot. He is in the back row and as the shooting begins falls backwards and down a slope into a forest or something like that. There are two or three others with him and a search party sets out after them. He doesn't go very far--is hiding in the woods and one of the men (an older man--say in his 30's) finds him--has his gun on him--looks him in the eye and walks away. This man then was able to escape and later on became the father of a famous spanish novelist. His name is Rafael Sanchez Ferlosio. Sanchez Ferlosio tells the story to Javier Cercas--a newspaperman who sets out to find a man--because something about that story stirs his memory about another story he heard from a Chilean leftist political refugee and another very famous writer Roberto Bolano and as it turns out Bolano had met the same man (when he was a teenager) who saved Sanchez Ferlosio's father and Bolano helps Cercas to track him down in an old folks home in France and the man tells his own story of what, where and why and what happened to him afterwards. A very good book.

In any case there will be always some meeting of the mind between rational people no matter what their beliefs. At least I think so.

posted by lriley at 8:28 pm (EST) on Nov 5, 2006

Well I don't mind being corrected although it might be grudging at times and frustrating for someone else to put up with so you are warned. My father and I have been arguing about this for quite some time (he grew up listening to Father Coughlin) and sometimes it segues into Pinochet-Allende. Have to be careful with him though--sometimes he gets really mad and he has a heart condition. Anyway I welcome recommendations on alternative sources.

posted by lriley at 7:02 am (EST) on Nov 5, 2006

Oakesspalding--someone actually started up a Spanish Civil War group but hadn't posted anything. It's a very small group--I started a thread listing sources that I knew of and remember you starting your own thread on the subject a little while ago--anyway if you're interested you probably could add some more to the list and maybe from a little bit different perspective. It's one of my favorite subjects and it's always a good thing to challenge yourself with something different.

posted by lriley at 8:44 pm (EST) on Nov 4, 2006

Oakes!

Brilliant review of Dawkins' The God Delusion. Its so refreshing to see mere mortals who have such incisive wisdom and can cut through the PhDs and the reputations to the core of the reasoning, appraising it without any measure of self-doubt.

Well done!

posted by HTL at 7:21 pm (EST) on Oct 25, 2006

Mmmmmmmmmm . . . Pimm's. Haven't had a Pimm's Cup in a long time, but used to be quite fond of them. That was my "house cocktail" one summer. Didn't realize it was gin based. That makes sense, though, given it's herby flavor and national origin.

posted by ggchickapee at 1:15 pm (EST) on Oct 22, 2006

Thanks! I got tired of being a Cat Doge.

In re Martinis:

As much as I believe that a "martini" by definition should be gin, I have lost almost all my tolerance for gin and only indulge on rare occasions. So the drink in my hand is a vodka martini, or "vodkatini" if you will. A drink that always seems sort of 1970s to me -- not in a cool, retro way; more like in a Dick Cavett kind of way.

But my days of three martinis are long past. It's true that "one are too many, two are never enough," but three leaves me with a spike in my head. My dad always says that martinis are like breasts -- two are perfect, three are wrong.

Of course, Dorothy Parker said it best:

I like to have a martini,
Two at the very most.
After three I'm under the table,
after four I'm under my host.

;)

posted by ggchickapee at 12:08 pm (EST) on Oct 19, 2006

What happened to your review? I went back to quote exactly what I meant, but I can not find it.

The problem is, I suspect, that most Christians (at least those I know who have read the book,) are frightened that their entire view of this world and the next is called into serious question. Most will dismiss the book as faulty, then quote a passage that conflicts with church doctrine or the Bible itself. I am sure that is what I was referring to and what I meant.

-Jim

posted by rmckeown at 2:41 pm (EST) on Oct 8, 2006

Writing 'real reviews' takes a lot of time so I certainly can't blame people for taking shortcuts. For whatever reasons, I have been writing more of them over the past several months than I have ever done. The mood, I am sure, will pass. (Didn't Dr. Johnson tell us that anyone who claims to write for anything but money is a liar? Perhaps we can infer from this that anyone who writes for free is a fool!) Maybe I will start using the 'Comments' column more often to place minor observations or unpolished notes...

Your point about McVeigh could be quite correct, though all the material O'Brien dredges up was certainly available before his book on Jefferson saw the light of day. In the circle of sophistry of the racist far-right the claiming of Jefferson is, I believe, a fairly old maneuver. ...But in the specific case of McVeigh and also the American racialists in general you could well be right. Your Jefferson quote is indeed everywhere among them and your quoting it is quite to the point.

The strength and weakness of web-groups and email lists is this: they are mostly populated by people with either some enthusiasm for something or some indignation about something. And it is by pressing these buttons (enthusiasm, indignation) that there groups and lists survive. I would very much like to see a forum emerge where we could gather and _think_ about these guys in a non-hysterical manner. LT would be a great place for that to emerge. It contains so many people who actually read and are interested in different schools of thought.

I would love to see a forum in which (say) Marxists, Libertarians, Fascists, Catholics, Postmoderns and Straussians meet to discuss different texts. (Not debate, the world is full of debates.) Actually I would love that. All I ask is that we come to each author (of whatever school) with an open mind and a willingness to hear what is actually said in the text. (I would exclude Stalinists and racists, however. I have argued with both, and they so rarely say anything besides slogans wrapped in attitude that it is hardly worth the effort.)

But look at the forums we have. Both 'Political Philosophy' and 'Philosophy and Theory' have already grown too big. And, since they are made up of so many different types there isn't anything one can say that doesn't push some ones buttons and thus invite some hysteria. Perhaps at some point, after communicating with more people here at LT, a private group, consisting of several different schools of thought could be formed. Hopefully, keeping it private would contribute to keeping it from turning into a forum in which one feels called on to display either ones moral perfection or ones theoretical perfection at every turn...

The problem is that most people do not want to learn. They already 'know' -i.e., they are devoted to some ideology or revelation- and thus only have a 'party line' that they continually regurgitate. I think small closed groups of people from different philosophical or political or theological backgrounds prepared to hear what a text of a thinker has to say is our only hope... And that may be no hope at all.

Joe

oakesspalding wrote:
Joe:

Sorry for taking so long to respond. Yes, you actually write real reviews, unlike your humble correspondent who is usually too lazy to go past jotting down a few opinionated sentences. :) I have enjoyed perusing your reviews. I shall take a slight issue with one of your points however. Re: T. McVeigh: I doubt that he felt an affinity for Jefferson because Jefferson was a racist. Like most people who hadn’t read O’Brien or similar, I do not think Mcveigh was really aware of Jefferson’s racist views, though, I could be wrong. Rather, I think McVeigh appropriated a legitimate and somewhat admirable Jeffersonian slogan--”the tree of liberty must occasionally be watered by the blood of patriots” (or is it “tyrants”?)--and used it to justify the murder of innocents. (Better, perhaps, to use that slogan to justify slave revolts!)

Should I try to revive the Ethical Theory Group? Any ideas?

Cheers!

Oakes

posted by pomonomo2003 at 9:02 am (EST) on Sep 13, 2006

*doffs hat*

Thank you very much. It's a fine supplement, though Delta Green: Countdown's Russian section contains a homage to it that is really rather excellant.

I wouldn't regard including gaming material as padding. They form part of my library and I want to know what I have. Claiming that game books are illegitmate seems a little odd as there are hundreds of people with manuals and other examples of technical writing on their LTs.

posted by kindermord at 5:36 am (EST) on Sep 13, 2006

Then I'll have inspiration - and company.

At least you will not die, at 79, with your virtual library woefully incomplete.... Still tottering over to type in all that pristine data before your last gasp (of which we dare speak only in jest), and managing three books, on a good day, in your retirement! No, my friend: for you, the leisure of refinements, corrections. By action and resolve, you've cut this huge task's burden from your back... and left only accomplishment in your wake. ;) ;) ;)

posted by Eurydice at 5:55 pm (EST) on Sep 10, 2006

It is confusing to me that I can't see the message that I reply to when I am replying to it.

In any event, yes, it is interesting that the Classic Liberals group is not more active. I checked them out before starting Political Conservatives, but as they seemed pretty quiet, and because I thought the group name may be too "nuanced" as you call it, I started the PC group.

One of these days, I will get busy and write some book reviews. But first, I have to finish a summary judgment brief that is sucking up all my time and brain power. It's too bad, because normally my job is not such a distraction.

posted by ggchickapee at 8:17 pm (EST) on Aug 14, 2006

Dang! I just read your long post on the Political Conservatives page, and all I can say is -- get out of my brain. Are you my long lost twin? You wrote what I would have written, were I not hampered by un-honed writing skills and adult-onset ADD, which gives me the concentration abilities of a parakeet.

posted by ggchickapee at 1:28 pm (EST) on Aug 14, 2006

Oops! I just joined a group that no longer exists. Did you change the name of the Ethics group?

posted by ggchickapee at 12:22 pm (EST) on Aug 12, 2006

Reply to both your messages:

1) I don't mind you sharing my comments or your replies -- they are here on your page anyway for all to see. And I did think the whole Booze invitation discussion was pretty funny.

2) I will join the Ethics group. Thanks for the invite. If I promise to participate only while sober, can I get CLE credit? ;-) I have a reporting deadline coming up.

posted by ggchickapee at 12:20 pm (EST) on Aug 12, 2006

Oakes,

Thanks for the support regarding library puffery. Please don't sweat a few journals, I'm talking about things like a thousand knitting magazines and people's wish lists, etc. It just seems vaguely fraudulent to me, especially the wish lists. Per Tim, we're only supposed to add things with which we have an actual connection, and I'm pretty sure he's talking physical connection, not psychic.:)

Modesitt is a bit of an aquired taste with a different, but interesting, writing style. The problem with him is that after awhile, despite different settings and stories, his main protagonists begin to seem remarkably similar (i.e., mostly males with untapped/unused/unwanted abilities who can't quite seem to figure out what's apparently obvious to all the female characters around them, until such time as tragedy strikes one or more of those females); still, I do like most of his works. I wish you luck finding the Ecolitan books at your local Borders; my local B&N doesn't have any. However, you can usually find them at used bookstores without too much trouble if you have one or more near you.

Take it easy.

posted by bookstothesky at 1:50 am (EST) on Aug 12, 2006

The answer is that I am an idiot. I meant to invite you to join the Political Conservatives group -- in which case, I hope my message made more sense. I'll try it again, so you can click to join.

You are still welcome to join the Booze! group, although I should warn you that they don't seem to be very active. Maybe to busy mixing drinks.

posted by ggchickapee at 7:32 pm (EST) on Aug 10, 2006

Hello, Oakes,

Thank you for the invitation to join the Libertarian Science Fiction group; I accept, with pleasure.

posted by bookstothesky at 12:09 am (EST) on Aug 9, 2006

I will respond in more detail when I have time, but I'm 51 and have done four marathons and hundreds of smaller races. Best time in marathon 3:40, in the 19.00s in 5k, and 39 in 10k, all many years ago. Relay was three days across the mitten of Michigan with 10 person teams.

posted by Keener13 at 7:55 am (EST) on Jul 19, 2006

Oakes,
So I join Librarything tonight, add only a handful of books, look at my profile and see that we share four books already. Which is not a big deal in itself, but we also share 1) the same last name - no u Spalding and 2) apparently, a love of running. Just finished a relay across the state of Michigan last weekend.
Guessing by the stride in your pic, I'm guessing you finished a 5K.
Steve Spalding

posted by Keener13 at 10:34 pm (EST) on Jul 18, 2006

I quoted from your profile when writing about LibraryThing on my weblog. Let me know if you mind...

http://www.randomjottings.net/archives/0...

--John Weidner

posted by weidners at 10:43 am (EST) on Jul 2, 2006

I found it:
Inoteca and SUBA!
Sabine :))

posted by saschihonl at 2:59 am (EST) on Jun 14, 2006

Hmm... I don't see "sci-fi" in my tags. Maybe you're thinking of someone else...

Re: my 3.5 star rating for the Bible, I suspect most lovers of Strunk's dictum "omit needless words" would agree that Lao Tzu has those ancient Jewish dudes beat by a mile! (Or a li, if you prefer.)

I mean, c'mon! Decide which creation story you're gonna plagiarize, fer cyrin' in yer milk! Genesis is a holy mess. ;)

posted by szarka at 5:29 am (EST) on Apr 13, 2006

I see that you have "Foucault's Pendulum." Have you read it (or any Eco)? I'm considering doing so - in fact, I've been courting it during my last few outings to Myopic, but I am not sure if I want to start with "Foucault" or with "The Name of the Rose." Any thoughts?

PS: I am thoroughly enjoying the LeGuin!

posted by dreamingtereza at 1:35 pm (EST) on Apr 3, 2006

Scratch that. I DO have The Long Divorce, and found it disappointing.

posted by Eurydice at 3:55 am (EST) on Apr 3, 2006

Hey Oakes,

I note that we both read that Scalzi book within 5 days of each other. Give a cal if you'd like to discuss, and know that I hate you for a very specific, individualized reason.

posted by ben_a at 10:34 pm (EST) on Mar 29, 2006

Thanks! :)

posted by saschihonl at 10:10 am (EST) on Mar 27, 2006

RE: Beauty. "She'd been fifteen when the curse struck her" (p. 3).

RE: 50's. I'd rather WRITE one - you should stick around. ;)

posted by dreamingtereza at 8:29 am (EST) on Mar 21, 2006

I DOUBLE dare you.

posted by Eurydice at 4:49 pm (EST) on Mar 6, 2006

Go ahead - rate it. I DARE you!

posted by dreamingtereza at 10:38 am (EST) on Mar 6, 2006

Cheers for pleasant comment Oakes! Glad you liked london, as you say it is a bit expensive now, but lots of people can scratch a living on low wages, so don't let that put you off. Will leave a few lines on Sour Sweet, surprised I haven't because I enjoyed it, even though I read it a few years ago.

All the best
Richard

posted by wrichard at 1:40 pm (EST) on Feb 2, 2006

...and, apparently, we are also in part responsible for the C.S. Lewis recommendations under the entry for Story of O. ;)

posted by szarka at 11:17 am (EST) on Dec 9, 2005

*chuckle* Actually, LT recommends Theories of Surplus Value for a lot of books I own, because it's counting the three volumes as three copies of one book, and doesn't take into account duplicate copies.

posted by szarka at 11:10 am (EST) on Dec 9, 2005

Nietzsche was a fruitcake.

Concise, comic, seasonally appropriate - and correct!

What more could one ask for?

posted by Eurydice at 8:14 am (EST) on Dec 1, 2005

Dear Oakes:

I suppose I'm EASING into this. ;) I sat down to work on it today and then got distracted. And I'm a little discouraged that so many of my books are still in boxes. Of course, you're welcome to help! I haven't NEARLY as many books as you do, so there's no need for you to feel threatened by my progress!

trischa

posted by dreamingtereza at 9:35 pm (EST) on Nov 19, 2005

I cannot believe I found someone else who owns I, Martha Adams. Holy crap, what a turd. But an interesting turd, nevertheless.

posted by lundblad at 10:37 pm (EST) on Nov 15, 2005

I've read most of Wilde, though I'm particularly fond of the plays. I find that much of my persuasive writing style is based on him.

Pearce is a good biographer, though I haven't read his work on Wilde; he's done marvels with Tolkien and Lewis, though.

posted by amvhoward at 7:54 pm (EST) on Oct 16, 2005

Since you seem to also have a fairly healthy interest in fantasy/sci fi lit crit, have you tried Brian Attebery's Strategies of Fantasy?

posted by amvhoward at 11:39 am (EST) on Oct 8, 2005

Yes, that's the one! However, I threw it aside fairly early (- most unusual), and actually got rid of it last time we moved. Rather harsh of me, and possibly not deserved: I just remember being terribly put off by the seemingly unsuccessful effort at dialogue infused with the 'spirit of the age'... it felt clumsy to me, and an inept attempt to ape history is one of those things I judge harshly - and not, necessarily, with full justice (or knowledge?). I hope that's disclaimer enough!

Still, I really was charmed by Three Coffins, and more Carr is now on my list of 'things to look for'.

Julie

posted by Eurydice at 10:17 pm (EST) on Oct 6, 2005

The Three Coffins arrived today, with remarkable expedition. I managed three pages in a waiting room blaring MSNBC, and am hooked despite the uncongenial beginning. It's delightful.

Thanks,

Julie

posted by Eurydice at 9:35 pm (EST) on Sep 30, 2005

I'm so glad!

I have a few literary disagreements, too - including the Dostoevsky issue - but love the feel of the book. The fact that it touches on some of the opinions in which I differ from Fen & Cadogan - much less the way it does it - endears them (and it) to me.

Hope you enjoy the resolution!

Julie

posted by Eurydice at 4:30 pm (EST) on Sep 30, 2005

If only I could afford the transport home, I'd do it in a flash! :)

And, I thank you; all is well enough.

I haven't read The Three Coffins; but I've gone ahead just now and ordered it. With the Chesterton angle - as well as the accolades - it has a lot of appeal. My thanks on the recommendation!

Hopefully The Moving Toyshop won't disappoint. It's marvelously quirky, whimsical, and literate in a very odd way. - As in the peculiar but entirely literal application, in the story, of a title borrowed from Pope ("With varying vanities, from every part/They shift the moving Toyshop of their heart", The Rape of the Lock, Canto I); or the centrality of Lear - a particular lorry-driver - and perhaps my favorite parts - literary games instigated by Fen while waiting in a pub.

Best wishes,

Julie

posted by Eurydice at 1:44 am (EST) on Sep 28, 2005

Obviously, your library has my admiration, and if I could justify doing so, I would gladly steal large portions of it.

It'd be a finicking job, though, hauling out only the selections I wanted, and rather difficult as to logistics and morals - so I'll have to abandon the idea, charming as it was. (For me.)

Nevertheless, it's nice to see someone else appreciate Edmund Crispin, Chesterton, Stout, Tey, and others more "requisite".

My regards,

Julie

posted by Eurydice at 5:18 am (EST) on Sep 27, 2005

hello, is it really necessary to get a paid account? Can't we just set up a wishlist on amazon.com with our library of books?

posted by hanz at 9:55 am (EST) on Sep 22, 2005

Congratulations on the 2000 mark!

posted by Aquila at 9:46 pm (EST) on Sep 19, 2005