Ok, here anything goes, and I am starting with a comment I lifted from another thread:


Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you feel that they [The Residents] may well have affected David
> Lynch's visual sensibilities?
>

Their song BLUE ROSEBUDS seems to be close, and it also has the word "velvet" in the lyrics.
I find the section in italics, which comes as a reply to the first section, to be inspired absurd cruelty. I am curious, how well does it pass for poetry (not technically necessarily, but imaginatively)?


BLUE ROSEBUDS

I love you and cause I do
My sky has changed
From grey to blue.
But blue's not just
A color of the rainbow.
It's shade is not a hazy hue
But pure and hard
My blue sky blue
It's like a Roman candle
Coming rosebuds.

"Your words are empty hollow bleatings
Of a mental crutch.
They're open festered indigestion
With a velvet touch.
An ether eating Eskimo
Would gag upon your sight,
Convulsed into oblivion
From laughter or from fright.

A coma with a sweet aroma
Is your only dream,
Malignant with the misconception
That a grunt can gleam.
Your lichen covered corpuscles
Are filthy to my fist.
Infection is your finest flower
Mildewed in the mist."

I love you and cause I do
My sky has changed
From grey to blue.
But blue's not just
A color of the rainbow.
It's shade is not a hazy hue
But pure and hard
My blue sky blue
It's like a Roman candle
Coming rosebuds.
Blue Rosebuds.

BU-URRP! Oops, excuse me.

HEY! Stick to the topic, will ya!

I am.

Oh! Right!

In the context of the song (or poem), who or what is the persona who speaks the italicized reply?

I need to get my head around what *might* be going on, then maybe I can look at it more closely.

I mean, at first glance it seems like a legitimate poetic structure, to my inexpert eye sensibilities.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the context of the song (or poem), who or what
> is the persona who speaks the italicized reply?

The first section is a man speaking romantic nonsense to a woman. The italicized reply is the whining voice of the woman. That is how I interpret the song.

Well then, it's really *nasty*, isn't it?

Why the repetition of the first stanza as he final stanza, after the nasty commentary, do you think?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well then, it's really *nasty*, isn't it?
>
> Why the repetition of the first stanza as he final
> stanza, after the nasty commentary, do you think?


Because he is a stolid blockhead who doesn't get her message, too stubborn and self-occupied to care or even listen. :/

Anyway, I think the stanzas in italics have a rich and imaginative vocabulary. I find it alluring in a horrid way.

By the way, about the "Eskimo" reference: The Residents made another LP record called ESKIMO, which is an acoustic landscapes/musical audio storytelling of Eskimo culture; including walrus hunt, arctic hysteria psychosis with soul disembodied in the dead of winter darkness, evil spirits, and a shaman Angakok sorcerer conjuring with a spell escaping from his lips a giant sea snake that rises above the billows and wiggle before the assembled crowd on the shore with its head in the clouds. Not so far separated in tone from CAS in Hyperborea actually.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well then, it's really *nasty*, isn't it?
> >
> > Why the repetition of the first stanza as he final
> > stanza, after the nasty commentary, do you think?
>
>
>
> Because he is a stolid blockhead who doesn't get
> her message, too stubborn and self-occupied to
> care or even listen. :/
>

But on second thought, after listening to the song again, no, I would say that is not the case at all. He admires her brilliant biting wit so much, compared to his own lame ability, that he becomes even more obsessed and enamored of her, despite her cruelty and rejection. He repeats his fawning words, because he is under her spell.

Not an uncommon situation at all. For example, it can be seen in the first lines of CAS's "The Enchantress of Sylaire".

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He repeats his fawning words, because he is under her spell.

BLUE ROSEBUDS

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > He repeats his fawning words, because he is
> under her spell.
>
> BLUE ROSEBUDS

Thanks for including the link, K; I'd never actually heard anything they did.

I have two responses:

1) The Residents must be what's termed "an acquired taste", right?

2) It'll be a long time before we hear another band's cover of "Blue Rosebuds".

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks for including the link, K; I'd never
> actually heard anything they did.
>
> I have two responses:
>
> 1) The Residents must be what's termed "an
> acquired taste", right?
>
> 2) It'll be a long time before we hear another
> band's cover of "Blue Rosebuds".

1. Yes, of course. It is not regular rock'n'roll. It is a different mindset and a different approach for the listener. It is avant-garde, it is humor and fun, and it is for a bizarre aesthetic experience. It is not music you dance to. And it is not something you put on the record player when you have invited over a girlfriend. Must all music be pleasant? I might ask the same question of movies, or literature. I had school mates in my late teens who were both horrified and ridiculing me for listening to this, implying that I was sick. Screw them. I think that was simply a mediocre lack of imagination and humor, an overly anxious need to be conformed, only willing to do what is socially approved.

The more you listen to it, the more you will hear that this music really swings in appealing rhythm, with powerful contrasts of sounds. It is primal in its force. Screw social conformity.

2. I don't know about that, other bands have made covers of their songs. But their style is very difficult to imitate. They are unique and genius.

This is a piece of popular music that really appeals to me. Recorded in maybe 1969, I think:


[www.youtube.com]


Let me now if you connected with it, or not, please.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is a piece of popular music that really
> appeals to me. Recorded in maybe 1969, I think:
>
>
> [www.youtube.com]
>
>
> Let me now if you connected with it, or not,
> please.


That is a video of the female Mexican volleyball team. The background music sounds to me newer than 1969... Sounds like popular feel-good music, smooth, streaming out of cars street-cruising down the boulevard, music that panders to either love seeking, social connection, good times, or personal success, or something else I can't quite grasp. Nothing provocative about it, sounds inoffensive. Spiritually sparse. I don't dislike it. But not swept away by it either, ... perhaps would have, if I had grown up in a different social environment.

I generally prefer more aggressive guitar-driven music, different forms of metal, classic 1950s-70s rock'n'roll, Neil Young, or classical music (Mozart, Bach, ...), experimental (The Residents), mystical like Mike Oldfield, Clannad, Ravi Shankar, 1920s jazz (Bix Beiderbecke) and other historical forms that take me away from modern society.

Sorry. Bad link.

This one:

[www.youtube.com]

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry. Bad link.
>


WHAT!? :(


Yeah, the music on this new link was a lot more interesting.

From previous thread...

Quote:

Knygatin
Passive-aggressiveness is part of every civilized culture. Otherwise our society would have looked like a battlefield out of R. E. Howard's Conan. In European culture the intellectual debate has evolved to sidestep violence. The more repressed communication in Japanese culture can have some negative neurotic side effects, for sooner or later energy has to go somewhere. Akira Kurosawa's films examine this, and, I am sure, so do also many modern Japanese films that I have not seen.

I think it also goes into some negative areas, like porno, etc.

That there is a lot of apparent pressure is evident, and there are many safety valves.

I am not sure that the tradition Japanese view of the emperor being a literal descendant of the sun (god), and the Japanese people are hence related, but one step removed, to the sun as well--and all this implies--can survive in an increasingly cosmopolitan and interlinked world. This was workable in isolation (and to a degree Japan seems to be drifting toward isolation, relative to the 60s-90s) but the defeat in WWII changed all that.

Quote:

Knygatin
Europeans have much respect for the sophistication of Japanese culture, especially the samurai tradition, and of course technology, have made a great impression. Likewise Japanese are very curious about Western culture. There is a polite but dedicated fanbase in Japan for almost every little obscure underground cult band or artist we have (and most of us don't even know about). The Japanese are very enthusiastic. But this extreme open-mindedness also make them vulnerable and run the risk of threatening Japanese culture, from destructive liberal capitalist influences flooding the country.

Not sure I'd consider the Japanese "open-minded" so much as seeking a solid ideal to use as a template. With the unmasking of the emperor as a privileged common man, the central mystique of Shinto was broken into a million pieces. It was as if the Pope was forced by circumstance to state, publicly, that he had never had any sign, whatsoever, from the deity. A whole lot of Catholics would be devastated, but they had at least their underlying ethnic cultures to bolster them--the Irish cpuld go back to drinking, the Mexicans could go back to worshipping Xiuhpilli, or whoever--but the post war Japanese did not have even this. They had to confront the idea that there was nothing special about them, as their mythology implied, in the bigger picture, and as insular as they tended to be, this came a a shock.

I think that they then emulated the habits/customs of the victors--who, face it, were extremely kind and generous in the context of history and of Japanese experience as victors, themselves--sort of a large scale Stockholm Syndrome. They were already about halfway there, owing to the foreign policy of the Meiji era, which emphasized westernization and modernization.

So traditional Japanese culture can semi-survive in an isolated society that does not need to compare itself to the rest of the world, but outside of this space, those Japanese who are living and have lived in a more open environment, really aren't much like those still imbued with the culture. These "transplants", like my wife, retain the *core* values, like loyalty, industry, honor, collective effort, respect for elders, but balk at the levels of male domination and social stratification of many Japanese nationals.

As always, these are only my opinions and could be wrong.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 28 Aug 20 | 02:08PM by Sawfish.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sorry. Bad link.
> >
>
>
> WHAT!? :(
>
>
> Yeah, the music on this new link was a lot more
> interesting.


I should hope so...! ;^)

What did you think?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sawfish Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Sorry. Bad link.
> > >
> >
> >
> > WHAT!? :(
> >
> >
> > Yeah, the music on this new link was a lot more
> > interesting.
>
>
> I should hope so...! ;^)
>
> What did you think?


I don't know. Sounds jazzy New Yorkish, or east coast big city music. Someone else should be better suited to comment that music. It was better varied than the first link you posted, which I made an effort to analyze.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From previous thread...
>

Thank you for the further clarifications about Japanese society.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Knygatin Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Sawfish Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Sorry. Bad link.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > WHAT!? :(
> > >
> > >
> > > Yeah, the music on this new link was a lot
> more
> > > interesting.
> >
> >
> > I should hope so...! ;^)
> >
> > What did you think?
>
>
> I don't know. Sounds jazzy New Yorkish, or east
> coast big city music. Someone else should be
> better suited to comment that music. It was better
> varied than the first link you posted, which I
> made an effort to analyze.

First time I heard it, it grabbed--it was so different from anything else on popular radio (yep, was being played on the same stations that would play Janis Joplin, et al).

I've come to view it as an episodic glimpse into a living, self-induced hell, done to a sort of dirge.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I know that this thread is really intimidating. It looks like a big black hole among the other threads.

But anyway. One thing I don't like with e-books, is that many of them don't respect the author's original grammatical structure. They put an empty space in between every new paragraph, which I find very annoying. Then you don't know where the author actually intended the text to be divided into a new section. Perhaps you guys don't mind so much? Perhaps the spaces are meant to make the reading easier on the eyes?

Funnily enough that app I mentioned - Calibre - allows you to reconfigure your ebooks. One option is removing the space between paragraphs (something I've always found really annoying) which in turn means they automatically get indented. I always assumed indented paragraphs (sans a space in between) were a European thing, whereas block paragraphs were an American thing? But maybe not? (Block paragraphs are a common feature of work emails over here).

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know that this thread is really intimidating. It
> looks like a big black hole among the other
> threads.
>
> But anyway. One thing I don't like with e-books,
> is that many of them don't respect the author's
> original grammatical structure. They put an empty
> space in between every new paragraph, which I find
> very annoying. Then you don't know where the
> author actually intended the text to be divided
> into a new section. Perhaps you guys don't mind so
> much? Perhaps the spaces are meant to make the
> reading easier on the eyes?

Definitely there are shortcomings, but I view e-readers like a confirmed drinker would view a small hip flask: not the optimum, nor enough, but can get you by in places where a full bottle would be--AHEM!--inappropriate.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When there is a space between paragraphs, it means that there is either a change of scene or jump in time. It is a bit like new chapter, but less marked. If I understand correctly.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Funnily enough that app I mentioned - Calibre -
> allows you to reconfigure your ebooks. One option
> is removing the space between paragraphs
> (something I've always found really annoying)
> which in turn means they automatically get
> indented. I always assumed indented paragraphs
> (sans a space in between) were a European thing,
> whereas block paragraphs were an American thing?
> But maybe not? (Block paragraphs are a common
> feature of work emails over here).

Hi, Cathbad. Calibre sounds interesting. I would like to ask some specific questions about it and to construct a couple of use scenarios for both .mobi and .epub files. While I'm happy enough with e-readers in general, I'm not happy about file management of the content--easy portability, etc.

I don't really care all that much about original spacing, etc. I think it's possible to butcher the spacing, and I see a lot of this, and apparently incorrect lettering from OCR scans of originals in the Project Gutenberg files, but I'm so happy to be able to have the content, gratis, that I'll blow right past it.

Besides, sadly, it appears that final proofing for hardcopy publications is slipping significantly...I see crud in hardback all the time now...

Do you have time to respond to the questions?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When there is a space between paragraphs, it means
> that there is either a change of scene or jump in
> time. It is a bit like new chapter, but less
> marked. If I understand correctly.

It suggests a discontinuity of some kind, to me, although I've never seen a written explanation for this sort of use of whatespace, or any "rules" for its use.

Do you recognize a difference in intent between a three dot (or asterisk) break and extra space? I hadn't thought about it before, but a three dot break always indicates a hiatus is *always* a passage of time, I would suspect, and in that sense is a more forceful or explicit version of extra whitespace used for the same purpose.

I'm not a big fan of using punctuation to place ambiguity in a reader's mind for artistic effect; to me, punctuation is best as a clarifier. I would prefer to see intended ambiguity introduced thru word choice--as in Seer of the Cycles.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I always assumed indented paragraphs
> (sans a space in between) were a European thing,
> whereas block paragraphs were an American thing?
> But maybe not? (Block paragraphs are a common
> feature of work emails over here).

Every paperback and hardcover I have read, both English and American, every book, have indented paragraphs (except the very first paragraph in a novel or short story). If there wasn't indenture in conversation text, for example, it would be impossible to follow who is saying what.

And an e-book is after all supposed to represent a book, not the structure of email communication.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Do you recognize a difference in intent between a
> three dot (or asterisk) break and extra space? I
> hadn't thought about it before, but a three dot
> break always indicates a hiatus is *always* a
> passage of time, I would suspect, and in that
> sense is a more forceful or explicit version of
> extra whitespace used for the same purpose.
>

This is my understanding:

The three dots in a sentence, marks a brief stall, to let what has been said before in the sentence take root before continuing, or to make an extra mental effort to add a last thought that relates to it, and so complete the sentence. It imitates hesitation halt in real thinking or conversation.

The — sign is similar to the three dots, but marks that you are saying the last thought with strong emphasis. You want to make a strong point with the last words.

The asterisk marks a reminder of a side-thought concerning something that is related to the present text, that you would like to mention in passing, but which may be too long or distractive, so you place it at the bottom of the page instead.

The extra space means end of scene, next paragraph beginning something new in the story. Or a jump in time, for example from bedtime till next morning.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cathbad Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I always assumed indented paragraphs
> > (sans a space in between) were a European
> thing,
> > whereas block paragraphs were an American
> thing?
> > But maybe not? (Block paragraphs are a common
> > feature of work emails over here).
>
> Every paperback and hardcover I have read, both
> English and American, every book, have indented
> paragraphs (except the very first paragraph in a
> novel or short story). If there wasn't indenture
> in conversation text, for example, it would be
> impossible to follow who is saying what.

What are your feelings about unconventional punctuation that some authors seem to insist on?

Me, I've never seen that it *adds* anything, but at the same time, after I got used to it, it didn't actually impair my enjoyment, either.

Seems to me like a non-issue, perhaps a statement of ego as much as aesthetics.

>
> And an e-book is after all supposed to represent a
> book, not the structure of email communication.

It's a compromise; it's not an either/or. A lot like mass-publication softbacks as compared to premium hardbacks.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> What are your feelings about unconventional
> punctuation that some authors seem to insist on?
>
> Me, I've never seen that it *adds* anything, but
> at the same time, after I got used to it, it
> didn't actually impair my enjoyment, either.
>

Actually, I don't know what that is. It doesn't ring a bell for me. Something connected with modern writers perhaps? I don't read much of modern writers.

Cormac McCarthy is a good example. He uses no quotation marks.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A dash (instead of quotation marks) is a very 19th century European thing. Maybe French? The Irish writer James Joyce wrote all his books using a dash instead of quotation marks, with the result that his many imitators do the same. Nowadays, I think it's meant to indicate to the reader that this is a serious 'literary' work. Personally I don't like it, but (as with anything) you get used to it.

Browsing the internet suggests block paragraphs may have become more popular due to how text is formatted by computers/computer applications, ie, most blogs and websites use block paragraphs rather than indentation - this website being a case in point!

McCarthy uses no marks to indicate direct speech; it's all contextual. I don't think he accomplishes anything by this, but it's easier to get used to than I had thought.

Still, to me it comes off as gimmicky.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry that I failed to replay earlier, Knygatin.
> To my idiosyncratic ideas of politeness, that's
> rude, and I don't want to be rude.
>
> If you want used non-backlit, in Kindle format,
> this is a decent choice:
>

Ha ha, nothing rude there, and no obligations to me. ;) Thanks a lot for all the information about e-readers you gave me in the Weird Folklore thread. If I can't make up my mind about which one to settle for from that, I never will. Not a 100% sure though I really want an e-reader. As mentioned before, I enjoy reading digital pdf books (all epub and mobi can be converted too) on my computer screen, which is good size. When travelling, I usually bring a paperback, or light book, along; I can smell the paper too.


>
> ... two things make
> e-readers worth having: you can get many free
> books online, just spontaneously, and I'm a real
> tightwad--as I small kid, I thought Scrooge McDuck
> was cool, far cooler than Superman, Sgt. Rock,
> etc...
>

Then you're not a bibliophile, I guess? Loving books as objects in themselves. From time to time I have payed a lot for certain books I really want to own. Or sacrificed time, searching for them.


For those who are loosing sight, I'd also recommend audio books. Not all are good, but if you find a good narrator it is a real pleasure. In ways, even better than reading.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sorry that I failed to replay earlier,
> Knygatin.
> > To my idiosyncratic ideas of politeness, that's
> > rude, and I don't want to be rude.
> >
> > If you want used non-backlit, in Kindle format,
> > this is a decent choice:
> >
>
> Ha ha, nothing rude there, and no obligations to
> me. ;) Thanks a lot for all the information about
> e-readers you gave me in the Weird Folklore
> thread. If I can't make up my mind about which one
> to settle for from that, I never will. Not a 100%
> sure though I really want an e-reader. As
> mentioned before, I enjoy reading digital pdf
> books (all epub and mobi can be converted too) on
> my computer screen, which is good size. When
> travelling, I usually bring a paperback, or light
> book, along; I can smell the paper too.
>
>
> >
> > ... two things make
> > e-readers worth having: you can get many free
> > books online, just spontaneously, and I'm a
> real
> > tightwad--as I small kid, I thought Scrooge
> McDuck
> > was cool, far cooler than Superman, Sgt. Rock,
> > etc...
> >
>
> Then you're not a bibliophile, I guess? Loving
> books as objects in themselves.

Yes, that's correct, and it occurred to me that for biliophiles, e-readers aenot nearly as attractive.

> From time to time
> I have payed a lot for certain books I really want
> to own. Or sacrificed time, searching for them.
>
>
> For those who are loosing sight, I'd also
> recommend audio books. Not all are good, but if
> you find a good narrator it is a real pleasure. In
> ways, even better than reading.

Thanks!

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To past the time, I'd like to ask the derivation of the members' posting names--their "handles".

Mine is simple...

I saw the movie Das Boot in the theater when it came out. I was strangely taken with the image of the laughing, playful sawfish on the conning tower of the U-96, the titular submarine. What got me about it was that it was rollicking, humorous, and in the film there was virtually nothing in the lives of the crew, or the function of the boat, that was in any conceivable way lighthearted or jolly, and the bitter irony was something I liked, so...

[www.themodellingnews.com]

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you. I thought 'Sawfish' was a humorous affirmation. Like, that you can effectively saw apart other posters' arguments. It is a very energetic image.

Knygatin is a misspelling, it should have been Knygathin, but was too late to correct after I had registered. It is the forename of Knygathin Zhaum, a favorite character, from the story "The Testament of Athammaus". His body is very plastic and formable, even his nose and face twist and stretch. It is a metaphor affirmation for my mind to remain flexible.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... It is a metaphor affirmation for my mind
> to remain flexible.

And invulnerable, like Knygathin Zhaum.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you. I thought 'Sawfish' was a humorous
> affirmation. Like, that you can effectively saw
> apart other posters' arguments. It is a very
> energetic image.
>
> Knygatin is a misspelling, it should have been
> Knygathin, but was too late to correct after I had
> registered. It is the forename of Knygathin Zhaum,
> a favorite character, from the story "The
> Testament of Athammaus". His body is very plastic
> and formable, even his nose and face twist and
> stretch. It is a metaphor affirmation for my mind
> to remain flexible.

Hah! I should have recognized it!

I *really* liked his character, what we saw of it. He was, truly, A Force of Nature(tm) more so than a conventional character. A lot of what happened made me laugh...the futility of the legal system in dealing with him, his apparent passivity while in captivity, his outrageous selection of victims after each "execution", the mass stampede out of Commorium (a sort of urban flight to the Hyperborean suburbs? ;^) ).

Naw, I don't think about "winning arguments": our exchanges are to me pleasant and collegial. That's why I'm here. I also have opinions and usually have spend some time formulating them, so I may diagree, sometimes, but really, I want more to get my *ideas* right (logically sound) and have no silly notion that I have all the answers, because life has taught me that no one does.

To that end, I'd like to think that I'm flexible enough to modify my opinions--after all, I want to "get it right", not *be* right...

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ... It is a metaphor affirmation for my mind
> > to remain flexible.
>
> And invulnerable, like Knygathin Zhaum.

HAH!

...and outrageous!!! ;^)

It was as if he headed up a Pleistocene outlaw motorcycle gang!

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I knew the source of Knygatin's name, but didn't realize he placed so much meaning to it. Great stuff! And ever since I learned about Sawfish's Hawaiian experience, I merely assumed his name was based on an old Polynesian tradition. Sawfishes were regarded as sacred animals. Wasn't expecting the actual inspiration!

My username is derived from the passive protagonist of a story CAS never finished, which can be seen here: [www.eldritchdark.com]

I'm hardly an old man like the narrator, but in two decades I will be, and I've been mentally preparing myself for it. I like the sound of the name, which reminds me of a fire slowly easing into a smolder after a huge conflagration. Something peaceful but energized, much like the passive yet energetic character who sees and learns some weird things.

I don't try to win arguments much myself, rather just sit on my rocking chair and pass the time whittling away at something!

Sometimes I use "Extollager." This is from the label the Kentish villagers applied, around 1820, to Samuel Palmer and his fellow young artists. Palmer is my favorite artist (I don't say he is the world's greatest artist!). You can find examples of his work online. To oversimplify, it falls into three periods:

1.His visionary period
2.His relatively conventional period, in which he painted many landscapes
3.The period of his late etchings after Milton and Vergil

The book to get hold of is Geoffrey Grigson's Samuel Palmer: The Visionary Years. The Yale book Samuel Palmer: Shadows on the Wall is good for color reproductions of his work.

[www.goodreads.com]

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Samuel Palmer is my favorite artist (I don't say he is
> the world's greatest artist!).


I love his painting of a shepherd dozing in the sunset, surrounded by his sheep. It is the cover of my John Keats collection. If there is a heaven on Earth, that way of life is it.

Hespire Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm hardly an old man like the narrator, but in
> two decades I will be

I would have guessed, from your mental style of approach and good penetrativeness, that you are born in the 80s or early 90s, but your experience seems to tell you must be older.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hespire Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > I'm hardly an old man like the narrator, but in
> > two decades I will be
>
> I would have guessed, from your mental style of
> approach and good penetrativeness, that you are
> born in the 80s or early 90s, but your experience
> seems to tell you must be older.


That's because I'm not like most people. I wanted to avoid mentioning this but I spent much of my life as a socially isolated slave of my Asian family. I only learned how to get out of it very late in life. The primary reason my wife became my ex-wife is because my growth was stunted for so long, but I don't want to talk about that here, friendly as you all are.

Cathbad was a druid from an old Irish Epic - the Tain. The story has a huge cast, which means no head-scratching when you have to decide on a name for your new avatar!

Samuel Palmer's work always looked amazingly modern to me - not unlike the sort of graphic art that was common back in the Sixties and Seventies.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Samuel Palmer's work always looked amazingly
> modern to me - not unlike the sort of graphic art
> that was common back in the Sixties and Seventies.

My mind reels here. Do you mean those posters that sometimes used black velvet for the blacks, and very bright colours in-between? This makes me miss the 70s so much, that I want to go back in a time machine now immediately.

LOL. I was actually thinking in terms of his black and white stuff, as it reminds me a lot of certain British illustrators - Charles Keeping, for example

[thekeepinggallery.wordpress.com]

[commons.wikimedia.org]

Sure the subject matter is very different, but the technique is kind of similar - basically, pen-and-ink, with heavy black outlines enclosing a finer network of lines - the suit of mail in the case of the viking, the leaves of the oak in the case of 'Early Morning'.

My guess is I probably saw Keeping's stuff first and when I saw Palmer's work, assumed they were the same generation? I remember being surprised at the similarities (which don't seem so pronounced now, in fairness).

I've been thinking today of some of the authors I've read, and it occurred to me that there are guys I'm *supposed* to like (or their work, rather), according to my old profs, but did not, and do not.

Fitzgerald is one of them. Never could get my head around *why* The Great Gatsby is thought to be special.

Any other EDers have similar experiences with well-respected authors/works?

On the other hand, Stephen Crane completely blows me away...

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Looking thru the photos of CAS on this site, looking at some of the rural backgrounds, were like a trip back into my youth.

Of particular nostalgic interest is this one:

[www.eldritchdark.com]

On the desk in front of him is something many older people who lived their youth in CA would recognize instantly: an abalone shell.

These were *all over the place* so far as availability. In the 1950 and 60s, these shells were still readily available on the beach, in various stages of being eroded by wave action, and many people were still able to harvest large ones off the rocks of the Central CA coast at low tides. I, myself, in the early 70s, was able to find small ones the size of silver dollars secreted in rock cracks. These were too small to take. I could still find the occasional medium-sized shell on secluded beaches. This was in San Luis Obispo county, just south of Monterey county.

Just outside Santa Barbara, along US 101, was an abalone processing plant, with a pile of these shells the size of a large haystack. These were still being commercially being taken from the Channel Islands, just off the coast, into the 70s.

Now, none are available in the wild. It's less over-harvesting (although that was certainly a factor) than understanding that the abundance in the 19th to mid-20th C was the result of a confluence of unique environmental factors.

Based on the shell and the likely timeframe ascertained by his apparent age, this photo would have been from when he lived in Pacific Grove, which was very near a rocky area that likely would have once had lots and lots of abalone.

Times change; nothing stays the same...

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have one of those shells too, given me perhaps by grandparents from California. The iridescence intrigued me as a youngster.

When we first moved up here (OR) in the late 80s, we liked to go from PDX to Manzanita, on the coast.

There was this little side road almost at the coast we could take, and it took us past on old house, the poured cement foundation walls had shells like this embedded in the cement, as a sort of rustic decoration. This shows that there were certainly quite a few up here, too.

The house has been gone for maybe 20 years now.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CAS feels that the best use of what we *do* have
> intellectually is thru creativity; I differ with
> this since I have little-to-no creativity within
> me. I use my puny intellect to stay out of
> trouble.
>
> That's about it. I am really good at staying out
> of all sorts of "trouble": financial,
> interpersonal, professional, etc.
>

I moved this response here from the big poetry thread.

I meant creativity in a broad sense, not just in art or literature. I believe every living thing is born with a measure of it; it is our right. We are a microcosm reflecting the greater Cosmos.

Surely you have been able to compose a pleasant dinner, furnish your home, or solve a convoluted problem at work, or in some other way rearranged molecules to make reality better. Then, I think, in some sense you have used your intellect creatively.

Staying out of "trouble" could also be a creative activity I guess, like inventing ways or using the body smoothly, to avoid being detected if there has been excess, or else mastering frugality in every path of life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 7 Oct 20 | 02:37AM by Knygatin.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I meant creativity in a broad sense, not just in
> art or literature. I believe every living thing is
> born with a measure of it;
>

I think Arthur Machen wrote that even the stones are alive. Then creativity is in all material. It is inherent in the atoms.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> I think Arthur Machen wrote that even the stones
> are alive. Then creativity is in all material. It
> is inherent in the atoms.


Ah, the all abiding silence is music to my ears. Perhaps the enormity of this revelation I have exposed has left everyone speechless. :D

Since we're talking usernames, mine comes from a piece of concept art for the video game Torment: Tides of Numenera.

[www.artstation.com]

Just liked the sound of it, to be honest.

Anyway, I saw in Forum Settings a reference to private messages, but how do you even send a private message here?

Here is some more ear-candy from The Residents. (Warning, only for those ready to take the plunge into the unconventional and socially outrageous.) This is not music to make you feel good or harmonious. It is weird aural landscapes mixed with humour. There is rhythm in it for sure, it even rocks, but it is done the wrong way. Over time it grows on you. It has been compared to worms crawling in the back of your head, or the irresistible pleasure of picking at a scab that has not healed.

All songs are from the record DUCK STAB.

Constantinople
Possibly The Residents' most famous song. Archetypical of their rebellious sound.

Sinister Exaggerator
Atmospheric and spooky.

Bach Is Dead
Humorous squeaking violin.

Birthday Boy
I am not exactly sure what, but something with this birthday party goes horribly wrong.
Some very fine counterpoint between the song and the traditional Happy Birthday tune.

Laughing Song
Drawling madness.

i love the residents!

🎩
👁️

Baby boomers. Pluto in Leo. And Neptune in Libra. There is the whole issue in a nutshell. No more need be said.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Baby boomers. Pluto in Leo. And Neptune in Libra.
> There is the whole issue in a nutshell. No more
> need be said.


Says it all, in *many* ways...

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I liked some of the other records from that company better; the first Residents album was unmelodic beyond endurance to this listener, other than one track with characteristic reverb-tinged vocal repetition ("you care for France and we care for You"). Their intentional anonymity was in keeping with the record label's mysterioso image.

jkh

Veering off, just completed "Berlin Alexanderplatz" and wonder if anyone else here has read it.

It is a very ambitious aesthetic effort that mostly works. It's unusual enough for me to want to discuss it, bit I sure don't know where to try to find someone who has read something as recondite as I think this is. I had been aware that Rainer Werner Fassbinder had done a series of it for German TV in the 80s, I think, but didn't know that it was taken from a serious piece of literature.

This is at least as good as Dreiser, or Crane's Maggie, a Girl of the Streets. Lots more ambitious in structure, too.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I heard of Berlin Alexanderplatz many years ago, but never read or watched, myself.

That's where I was until about 3 weeks ago when I got the book in part because I was currently reading some translated German stuff and had read Hans Fallada's The Drinker in comparative lit back in college. He was in the Weimar time range, also.

Oh, well...

A lot of this stuff has a unique "feel" to it and I wonder if it's Teutonic cultural sensibilities, just as the French seem to have a sort of distinct cultural outlook, or simply te translations, or what.

Again, feels like Dreiser.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’ve focused on British and (in translation) Russian literature, and Icelandic sagas, Hawthorne, etc. I’ve read, as far as German originals (in translation) go, Hoffmann, Adalbert Stifter (Biedermeier), Sebald. I’ve read the Divine Comedy and Manzoni’s The Betrothed and that’s about it for Italian....

Do you see a cultural ethos that seems to have any consistent association with the various cultures represented by these authors?

I'm thinking it's either one of two things: a) a very subtle, but consistent set of signals, or b) I'm fooling myself.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well, I suppose none of them is simply trying to be all Clever and Ironic. I just don’t have an interest in that kind of thing. (No use, in fantasy fiction, for Cabell.)

They’re all pretty much free of the stuff about equality and gender and diversity that is so boring now. That is mostly a dead end, I’m thinking. It’s all about “transformation,” not transaction, by which I mean politics for grownups, the necessary business of getting along with people in an imperfect world, etc.

The authors I indicated have connection with the Western world.

I tried out David Foster Wallace. I couldn't stick with any of his stuff, and it was perhaps because he was being all Clever and Ironic.

Pynchon, too, is to me nearly unreadable, but for different reasons I think. I tried really hard on Gravity's Rainbow, but could not make that difficult connection. Conversely, with Berlin Alexanderplatz, there was some level of difficulty in getting into the flow of it, but I somehow stuck it through, and now I keep thinking about it, and this is one telltale sign of both a good book and a good film, for me. It's got sn underlying melodramatic tale--something like characters in Threepenny Opera--but there's an integrity and honesty that does not alter the plot for a characteristic melodramatic outcome--which one kinda expects as the resolution, and yet the actual resolution feels exactly correct and also the most likely. Plus, on consideration, confirms a valuable insight on the nature of life.

You know, it just now dawns on me that it's harder to categorize why it is an author loses you than the reverse, simply because you cannot bear to read enough of it to begin to properly analyze it.

I'm going to try giving the Russians a go. Can you suggest a place to start?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I read some Tolstoy years ago - ‘War &. Peace’, his stories and half of ‘Anna Karenina’. Maybe start on the stories? I thought they were pretty good. Not just Tolstoy. Pushkin. Gogol. Plus there’s a book by Turgenev called ‘Smoke’ which is well worth checking out.

I think a lot of 19th century literature has a strong narrative thread, which is a big part of its appeal in our post-modern times - e.g. Middlemarch is basically a soap, albeit a good one.

Thanks, Cathbad!

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish asked, "I'm going to try giving the Russians a go. Can you suggest a place to start?"

When I taught a course in Russian lit in translation, I assigned a short story and a novella at the start, giving a sense of the land. These were

1.Turgenev's "Bezhin Meadow"
[www.ibiblio.org]

2.Chekhov's "The Steppe"
[www.online-literature.com]

Long works from which I selected assignments included the following (not all of them in one semester!), always in the translations by Pevear and Volokhonsky:

Tolstoy: War and Peace; Anna Karenina
If one is wary of tackling either of those two long novels, I'd recommend the novel The Coassacks and the novellas "Father Sergius," "The Devil," "Master and Man," etc.

Dostoevsky: Demons, The Brothers Karamazov

I might also have chosen Crime and Punishment once.

Gogol: Dead Souls -- I used the translation of Pevear & Volokhonsky, but I understand that the Guerney & Fusso version (Yale) is regarded as superior by at least one authority; that is the one I will almost certainly read next time. Despite the title, this is, in fact, a masterpiece of comic writing. It is one of very few literary works that has had me also weeping and gasping with mirth! When I assigned Gogol, I believe he came before Tolstoy or Dostoevsky.

I typically ended the course with Solovyov's "Tale of the Antichrist," from Three Conversations, which is a particularly good thing to read after the Dostoevsky novel. Solovyov was something of a disciple of Dostoevsky, and his "Tale" is interesting as a sort of companion piece to Dostoevsky's "Grand Inquisitor" in The Brothers Karamazov.
[archive.org]
That's not the translation I used, but it's what I found online.

For a modern Russian work, I would assign Eugene Vodoloazkin's recent fantasy/historical novel Laurus.


Other Russian works I can recommend include Aksakov's A Russian Gentleman and (perhaps even more) Years of Childhood, as translated by Duff; Paustovsky's Story of a Life: Childhood and Schooldays, translated by Harari and Duncan; Skrebitski's In the Forest and on the Marsh; Arseniev's Dersu the Trapper.

I warmly recommend these Russian movies: Solaris; Russian Ark; The Return; The Island (Ostrov).

[en.wikipedia.org])
[en.wikipedia.org]
[en.wikipedia.org])
[en.wikipedia.org])

There are others I like but these are ones to start with.

I love Serge Schmemann's book Echoes of a Native Land. He is an award-winning American author who went to Russia to seek his roots.

I rarely recommend TV or cinematic adaptations, but I do like the circa 1978 British miniseries of Crime and Punishment with John Hurt as Raskolnikov. Hurt is actually too old for the part but aside from that is pretty great. The adaptation isn't 100% faithful but it's worth watching.

There are several Russian miniseries that are good to watch after you have read the books. The subtitles can be pretty bad.

[www.amazon.com]

[www.amazon.com]

Finally, I loved Ian Frazier's Travels in Siberia.


Dale



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 23 Jan 21 | 10:29AM by Dale Nelson.

Excellent reading/viewing list, Dale. Thanks!

I'll bet some of this is public domain, and I can likely download it. Otherwise, I'll look for ebook versions at the library.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It just dawned on me and needs exploration, of course.

When thinking of discernable "cultural influences or characteristics", as I had raised in passing earlier in this thread, I started thinking: how might I characterize German writers, French writers, Jewish writers, British writers, etc?

Now this relies a good deal on broad generalization, and we can certainly find exceptions, but I've read some translations of modern French writers, not a lot of them, but enough to form an impression that they do two things that seem to set them apart, in terms of narrative sensibilities: the central characters, who are often a stand-in for the authors (as it often is for many western cultures) are inordinately self-absorbed, and yet will forgive themselves of anything, it seems.

They are remarkably guilt-free, whereas the few Germans I've read are very far from guilt free--seem to recognize and attempt to adhere to a common standard of community behavior-- even pre-war writers, and I mention this is to separate the influence of post WWII contrition.

Then it hit me: the French seem to be a lot like the Jewish writers in their self-absorption, but are largely free of guilt and angst, for the most part. There almost seems a sort of fatalism,or at least stoicism about events as they occur.

The French writers seem to have a lot in common with the cats I've had.

Thoughts/opinions?

Far too generalized, and disgustingly insensitive? ;^)

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish wrote, "I'll bet some of this is public domain, and I can likely download it. Otherwise, I'll look for ebook versions at the library."

Yep -- I've indicated sources for some public domain items. However, in my experience, reading the Pevear & Volokhonsky translations has enhanced my experience of Dostoevsky. I'd read Demons before (as The Possessed), and Brothers Karamazov and Crime & Punishment in other translations. I much prefer the P&V. For Tolstoy, if the Aylmer Maude translations are available in the public domain, those might do fine instead of P&V. Indeed, I think their translations of Tolstoy have come in for some criticism from one credible source (as well as getting a lot of praise). You should be able to get used copies of any of these from abebooks.com or the like at decent prices.

By the way, Vodolazkin's The Aviator was really good too, though I'd say start with Laurus.

I liked the Strugatsky brothers' sf Roadside Picnic and mean to read it again one of these days.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23 Jan 21 | 11:50AM by Dale Nelson.

For me, "insufficient data" -- as I often have to admit to the missus -- to say much about French and German literature -- French especially.

I don't feel I have enough to be definitive, either, and yet...

In a way, it's like the "beauty thread" a few days ago: it is something I definitely feel, but grapple with the attributes.

It's difficult for me to let something go if I intuitively get a sense of a seemingly unmistakable characteristic. For the beauty debate, I could *feel* that your direction and ultimate intent, as far as I got it, had validity, but I become obsessed with characterizing things in detail (a foul materialist, you see), at their constituent parts, and I was really getting nowhere on "beauty"--even though I felt *something* that might be termed "beauty" certainly exists.

Now the same for this "cultural traits" stuff but it's much less slippery because it's possible to grab a handhold on the general topic because I think its constituent parts are clearer.

For example, in modern French fiction, very often there is a sort of searching for the individual's philosophic place in the universe, and this seldom included the idea of a theological framework; it can come off as a sort of moral malaise that is inevitable--and the voice knows this. This quest is fairly consistent in the modern French writers I've read, and so much alike that I want to extrapolate for sake of any initial default position (so as to clearly identify it for testing) that it does indeed exist and is a fairly common concern in modern French cultural thought.

Now compare this to modern Irish fiction. I don't see the quest in the same way, at all, and I believe that much more of Irish writing is informed by a cultural adhesion to their perceived nation/race--their "Irishness" informs their idea of who/what they are, and hence how they think.

I read once where the idea is that the French are symbolic parricides--with regicide being a sort of national parricide--they know it deeply, and it is reflected not as guilt, but as independence from a father figure--but now lacking a central mooring. Recognized authority is missing, and indeed, not even possible.

Really, they come off as a bunch of Hamlets, not that he was a parricide, but in the way they morosely seek their place in the universe.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What you're saying about French and Irish contemporary fiction sounds plausible to me, but my opinion would be worth almost nothing.

You said, Sawfish, "For the beauty debate, I could *feel* that your direction and ultimate intent, as far as I got it, had validity, but I become obsessed with characterizing things in detail (a foul materialist, you see), at their constituent parts" -- I read that and wondered if scrutiny for "constituent parts" is something that doesn't work with the beautiful. Putting it oversimply, is the beautiful something that must be contemplated as a whole -- however imperfect and partial our awareness of it -- before we focus on parts? If I examine the parts first, will I ever attain to an apprehension of the beautiful? Now I think, given the imperfection of one's attention, sensibility, etc. that one will often begin with a partial and imperfect awareness of the whole, but that's not the same thing as trying to build up logically from parts to whole.

That, by the way, might relate to my conviction that, often, a literary work must be reread before one can say one has rightly read it. Conversely, there are works of literary craft that can be fun to read but that have little to offer in a second reading unless enough time has passed that one has forgotten a lot. I'd cite Stephen King's 11/22/63 as an example of this. I like that book, for the most part, but when I read it the second time (after a lapse of several years), I didn't have the sense that there was much there that I hadn't got the first time. The things I liked the first time, I still liked, and things I didn't, ditto. But the first time I read the Dostoevsky novels that I mentioned earlier today, they were less engaging than on subsequent readings.

I bought the first two Calvin & Hobbes albums, and enjoyed them a lot. I also used to read and collect all of the Fawcett or Coronet pocket books with Peanuts (Charlie Brown, Snoopy and friends). Obviously they are related and closely comparable, both very well drawn. Calvin & Hobbes perhaps more technically conspicuous. But I think I prefer Peanuts. The humour is warmer and has more subtle psychological depth.

But I would not associate either of them with Beauty. Elegance of line, perhaps, extreme skill and sureness of drawing hand, humour and sharp insight. But too stylized, mannered, and flat, to have anything of beauty. I think Beauty requires more complexity, and a certain animated asymmetry inside the harmonious proportions, to make it come alive, like in Nature.

The Far Side by Gary Larson is another great one, suitable for those who appreciate the weird. It always reminds me of Lovecraft. I have only seen a small part, but my single favorite frame shows a couple on the beach, the man sitting down by the sea, and his fat trash wife standing a bit further up, back to him, looking after other people and more mundane things. Meanwhile a fish in a small bowl with wheels rolls up from the sea, circles the man to observe him, and drives back down again, before he can collect his wits to call on his wife. One can imagine her reaction, when he later starts telling, and reassuring her.

More on the Russian topic -- take a look at Russian Folk Tales, illustrated by Ivan Bilibin, translated by Robert Chandler (Shambhala/ Random House 1980), if you can.

In case I'd be introducing someone to new things --

Borodin's "In the Steppes of Central Asia" is a lovely tone poem/symphonic fantasy
Tchaikovsky's Serenade Melancolique
Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, orchestrated by Ravel
Stravinsky's Rite of Spring

Not be be missed!

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What you're saying about French and Irish
> contemporary fiction sounds plausible to me, but
> my opinion would be worth almost nothing.

Well, we differ, but so what? :^)

>
> You said, Sawfish, "For the beauty debate, I could
> *feel* that your direction and ultimate intent, as
> far as I got it, had validity, but I become
> obsessed with characterizing things in detail (a
> foul materialist, you see), at their constituent
> parts" -- I read that and wondered if scrutiny for
> "constituent parts" is something that doesn't work
> with the beautiful. Putting it oversimply, is the
> beautiful something that must be contemplated as a
> whole -- however imperfect and partial our
> awareness of it -- before we focus on parts? If I
> examine the parts first, will I ever attain to an
> apprehension of the beautiful? Now I think, given
> the imperfection of one's attention, sensibility,
> etc. that one will often begin with a partial and
> imperfect awareness of the whole, but that's not
> the same thing as trying to build up logically
> from parts to whole.

Nope, that's backwards from how I'd do it.

I would perceive something as beautiful, then address the attributes that *might* account for why I found it beautiful.

Without something like that, it would be very hard, if not impossible, to discuss objects of beauty unless all parties discussing a "beautiful" object had seen it or otherwise directly experienced it.

Otherwise, if party A says a certain Titian painting is beautiful, but party B has never seen it, to accept it as beautiful, or even that it *might* be beautiful, requires a gigantic leap of faith by party B in favor of party A.

Many, myself included, are not prepared to take that leap.

>
> That, by the way, might relate to my conviction
> that, often, a literary work must be reread before
> one can say one has rightly read it. Conversely,
> there are works of literary craft that can be fun
> to read but that have little to offer in a second
> reading unless enough time has passed that one has
> forgotten a lot.

Agreed.

There are many works I've read in excess of 10 times. The Tin Drum probably 3 times; Journey to the End of the Night 3 times; Catch-22 possibly 15 times. Some earlier Vonnegut; much of Hemingway multiple times, except for when he slid over to being too maudlin.

Etc.

> I'd cite Stephen King's 11/22/63
> as an example of this. I like that book, for the
> most part, but when I read it the second time
> (after a lapse of several years), I didn't have
> the sense that there was much there that I hadn't
> got the first time. The things I liked the first
> time, I still liked, and things I didn't, ditto.
> But the first time I read the Dostoevsky novels
> that I mentioned earlier today, they were less
> engaging than on subsequent readings.

Good point.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23 Jan 21 | 01:30PM by Sawfish.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I bought the first two Calvin & Hobbes albums, and
> enjoyed them a lot. I also used to read and
> collect all of the Fawcett or Coronet pocket books
> with Peanuts (Charlie Brown, Snoopy and friends).
> Obviously they are related and closely comparable,
> both very well drawn. Calvin & Hobbes perhaps more
> technically conspicuous. But I think I prefer
> Peanuts. The humour is warmer and has more subtle
> psychological depth.

What? You didn't like when Calvin and his little girl neighbor were playing doctor and she complained to him (the doctor) of an injured fingeranil and he replied:

"You need a pre-frontal lobotomy.

"I'll get a saw..."

;^)

>
> But I would not associate either of them with
> Beauty. Elegance of line, perhaps, extreme skill
> and sureness of drawing hand, humour and sharp
> insight. But too stylized, mannered, and flat, to
> have anything of beauty. I think Beauty requires
> more complexity,

Possible, for sure.

Do the Cubists appeal?

> and a certain animated asymmetry
> inside the harmonious proportions, to make it come
> alive, like in Nature.
>
> The Far Side by Gary Larson is another great one,
> suitable for those who appreciate the weird. It
> always reminds me of Lovecraft. I have only seen a
> small part, but my single favorite frame shows a
> couple on the beach, the man sitting down by the
> sea, and his fat trash wife standing a bit further
> up, back to him, looking after other people and
> more mundane things. Meanwhile a fish in a small
> bowl with wheels rolls up from the sea, circles
> the man to observe him, and drives back down
> again, before he can collect his wits to call on
> his wife. One can imagine her reaction, when he
> later starts telling, and reassuring her.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wonder how much of the French mindset is due to WWII? (Vichy France, etc).

The Irish have an almost unhealthy preoccupation with ‘Irishness’, maybe because they share a common language with two much larger and more dominant cultures (ie, the UK and the US) leading to inevitable - and constant - comparisons.

Stephen King's 11/22/63. I actually think the earlier part of this book - the bit about the local butcher who the mc knew would end up killing his family - was a lot more interesting than the main act. Plus the basic concept would have worked just as well as a short story.

Roadside Picnic is the only work by the Strugatsky brothers that I read! There’s another work by them that’s popular and that I only heard of recently - Hard to be a God.

Has anybody read The Cyberiad by Stanislaw Lem?

Sawfish wrote, "if party A says a certain Titian painting is beautiful, but party B has never seen it, to accept it as beautiful, or even that it *might* be beautiful, requires a gigantic leap of faith by party B in favor of party A."

Not if B already has reason to believe that A possesses knowledge and taste. For example, I've been tracking down and reading things that C. S. Lewis enjoyed (e.g. from mentions in his published letters), and this has led me to many literary works I might not have tried, or tried so soon, or even have ever heard of, and that I have enjoyed a lot. In fact, I write a column about Lewis's reading for the New York C. S. Lewis Society, which has had over 50 entries -- and that column was started after several articles on Lewis's reading that had several works per article. A good example is Margaret Kennedy's comic novel The Feast. I'm confident in saying that, apart from Lewis's praise in a letter, I might never have heard of it otherwise, or ever had reason to try it. Well, I got it from a library and loved it, and then bought a used copy in dustwrapper, knowing I will want to read it again. I realize that I'm straying a bit from the topic of the Beautiful, specifically, here. So I'll take something from the pictorial arts instead. I already loved Samuel Palmer's early and late art. I read that he was an admirer of Claude Lorrain, so I looked into his painting, & liked that much as well. I approached the latter already expecting to appreciate it.

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish wrote, "if party A says a certain Titian
> painting is beautiful, but party B has never seen
> it, to accept it as beautiful, or even that it
> *might* be beautiful, requires a gigantic leap of
> faith by party B in favor of party A."
>
> Not if B already has reason to believe that A
> possesses knowledge and taste.

No, to me this surrenders judgement to an external arbiter of taste. I don't by default do that.

At most, if I have had personal experience of an individual and they have impressed me with a combination of valid and understated knowledge and personal integrity, at most I'd think that what they said has a better than even chance of being something I *might* agree with.

Frankly, I would expect everyone I deal with to do the same with me and my stated positions: maybe I've got it right, but best to double check.

> For example, I've
> been tracking down and reading things that C. S.
> Lewis enjoyed (e.g. from mentions in his published
> letters), and this has led me to many literary
> works I might not have tried, or tried so soon, or
> even have ever heard of, and that I have enjoyed a
> lot. In fact, I write a column about Lewis's
> reading for the New York C. S. Lewis Society,
> which has had over 50 entries -- and that column
> was started after several articles on Lewis's
> reading that had several works per article. A
> good example is Margaret Kennedy's comic novel The
> Feast. I'm confident in saying that, apart from
> Lewis's praise in a letter, I might never have
> heard of it otherwise, or ever had reason to try
> it. Well, I got it from a library and loved it,

First, expressing praising a novel is *far* from ascribing beauty to an object.

However, it was important to actually experience the novel before you concurred, right?

That's essentially what I'm saying: no judgement without personal experience of it.

Now, further consideration: did Lewis say "why" he thought highly of it, or was did he just express admiration for it, but with no further qualifications or information? If the former, he gave you concrete reason why it might be worthy; if the latter, you are relying on his judgement, alone.


> and then bought a used copy in dustwrapper,
> knowing I will want to read it again. I realize
> that I'm straying a bit from the topic of the
> Beautiful, specifically, here. So I'll take
> something from the pictorial arts instead. I
> already loved Samuel Palmer's early and late art.
> I read that he was an admirer of Claude Lorrain,
> so I looked into his painting, & liked that much
> as well. I approached the latter already
> expecting to appreciate it.

Your list of referrals on Russian lit are something like this, Dale. You are a qualified student of the same stuff I enjoy, and I expect that these will be worthwhile--much better than selecting someone at random from the Indianapolis phone directory (thanks, David Letterman!) and asking them for recommendations.

But gosh, we're different in so many ways that I doubt that I'll like even 50% of the stuff you recommended.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm not saying much more than this:

1.If I have reason already to think that A possesses knowledge and taste, I am likely to consider the work of art or literature, and
2.if I don't like it, I may figure the problem is likely to be with me; that I am too narrow in my tastes, etc. However,
3.I don't automatically assume that A is infallible.

I owe an enormous debt to people, mostly writers, who have led me to books, music, art that I might not otherwise have known of or that I might somehow have thought was "not for me" for no good reason. At my present age, in my mid-60s, indebtedness to such people is one of the chief facts of my life of which I am aware.

Makes sense, Dale.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kipling Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I liked some of the other records from that
> company better;

I like Mark of the Mole a lot. God in Three Persons is another masterpiece, but very, very creepy. Later in their career The Residents made some more "normal sounding" records, for example the jazzy, funky Tweedles!, that musically evolve around the subject theme of a would-be clown who ruins his own career because he is so sexually obsessed, being completely controlled by his penis. Great music, but also very creepy.


> the first Residents album was unmelodic beyond endurance to this listener, other
> than one track with characteristic reverb-tinged
> vocal repetition ("you care for France and we care
> for You").

I don't recognize that line. Was it from Meet the Residents?

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Has anybody read The Cyberiad by Stanislaw Lem?


I have it on pdf, but have not read it. I have only read his Solaris, one of the best science fiction books ever, tremendously bizarre weird phenomena on display in it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24 Jan 21 | 06:47AM by Knygatin.

The Cyberiad is very different from Solaris (to the extent that it's hard to believe the same man wrote both books) - ie, a series of humorous, philosophical parables charting the rivalry between two robots, one always trying to be more inventive than the other.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Cyberiad is very different from Solaris (to
> the extent that it's hard to believe the same man
> wrote both books) - ie, a series of humorous,
> philosophical parables charting the rivalry
> between two robots, one always trying to be more
> inventive than the other.

You liked it? I have a few others on pdf: Eden, The Invincible, and The Star Diaries. Perhaps you are enthusiastic about one or more of these?

I've actually only - I think - around three Lem books. Solaris, The Cyberiad, and a collection of mock reviews (in essence, interesting ideas that Lem decided not to follow through on). I read Solaris a long time ago, but would say that liking Solaris doesn't necessarily mean you'll like The Cyberiad, which is blackly comic. Personally, I loved it.

This being, as I take it, an omnium-gatherum thread, I thought it appropriate to mention a favorite short novel, The Young Visiters, by Daisy Ashford. For goodness' sake skip the introduction by J. M. Barrie and begin here:

[archive.org]

The only thing you need to know from Barrie's preface is that it's presented as the work of Daisy Ashford, who wrote the novel at age nine. It is what used to be called, I believe, a silver fork novel, that is, a story of romance set among the relatively wealthy in England.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 26 Jan 21 | 01:29PM by Dale Nelson.

"...wrote the novel at age nine..."

I once saw a preserved two-headed calf at a carnival, and I also saw Jake, the Alligator Man, but...

;^)

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I stayed a night or two at a monastery in Oregon many years ago. The monks had a small "museum." One of the monks of former days, it seems, had taken an interest in taxidermy, and I recall a stuffed snake that looked rather like a cane.

In fact this monastery also had a two-headed calf.

[www.atlasobscura.com]

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I stayed a night or two at a monastery in Oregon
> many years ago. The monks had a small "museum."
> One of the monks of former days, it seems, had
> taken an interest in taxidermy, and I recall a
> stuffed snake that looked rather like a cane.

Speaking of cane, I have just purchased a wooden cane and am eagerly waiting for it to arrive in the mail. It is of multi-use; I am not in direct need of it for walking, but may well be as I get older. Foremost it is meant as a weapon for self-defense. Excellent for blocking, striking, and the crook of the crown can be used for hooking and pulling around neck and legs. It is the only weapon that is fully legal to bring along, everywhere you go around the World, even aboard flights. Although you should not say that it is for self-defence, but rather a walking cane, a mobility aid device. They are not permitted to question or deny you that right. However if you say it is for self-defense, they may take it from you.

Thanks for the tip. I have been thinking about getting a cane for similar reasons, though it's more loose dogs that concern me than bipeds.

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One of the monks of former days, it seems, had
> taken an interest in taxidermy, and I recall a
> stuffed snake that looked rather like a cane.

Canes that transform into serpents must be a classic element in fantasy literature, although I do not recall specific examples right now.

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for the tip. I have been thinking about
> getting a cane for similar reasons, though it's
> more loose dogs that concern me than bipeds.

Or bears perhaps up where you live? Although a pepper spray would probably be safer. But it is a myth that bears attack humans, unless cornered. We are not part of their food source.

Some dogs might be a problem. Though having dangerous dogs on the loose is criminal. I have never encountered such a situation myself. On the other hand, I avoid bad neighborhoods, primarily because I can't stand the ugliness of it. A happy dog running up to me poses no problem for me, quite the contrary.
If you strike down a dog, you will likely have a whole flock of bipeds going after you. :/

A basic move to learn with the cane, is to swing it fast in controlled twirls by your side, and in figure eights from side to side, and above your head. That will keep away most threats, holding them at distance.

Re dogs. Experience has taught me that it's often enough to stoop down (as if you were picking up a stone) to deter most dogs.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Re dogs. Experience has taught me that it's often
> enough to stoop down (as if you were picking up a
> stone) to deter most dogs.


Hence one of my revolving sigfiles...

"It is Pointless, and endless trouble, to cast a stone at every dog
that barks at you."

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In addition to conventional canes, there are a number of canes on the market that have concealed blades. There are even a few that have single-shot firearms--.410 gauge shotguns and the like.

There are umbrellas with some of these capabilities, too. Plus useful in the rain.

And the old stand-by, the Asp baton. Basically a 2-foot piece of re-bar, when expanded.

Weaponry is deeply in the genes, I think, ever since knuckle-dragging days.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Re dogs. Experience has taught me that it's often
> enough to stoop down (as if you were picking up a
> stone) to deter most dogs.


My experience is that if I stoop down, dogs come running up to me, wagging their tail and eager for me to throw.

I love dogs. By all means, I like cats too, although I don't have much experience with them.

Good Grief! I would never throw stones at barking dogs. What kind of barbaric behavior is that?! That sounds more like something you'd see in the Middle East.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love dogs. By all means, I like cats too,
> although I don't have much experience with them.


As regards cats, my daughter when about 3 years old summed it up nicely:

"Cats don't care. They just don't care."

If you understand them in that context they are a lot of fun.

I wouldn't expect a lot more from them in that respect, however.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good Grief! I would never throw stones at barking
> dogs. What kind of barbaric behavior is that?!
> That sounds more like something you'd see in the
> Middle East.


I must be getting senile...

You're not the same Knygatin who speaks avidly of martial cane twirling, are you?

:^)

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I might have given the impression that I have more troubles with dogs than I do. Dogs give me almost no trouble. Curs, now, they're a different matter.

No, really.

No bears around here, alas!

I’ve never thrown a stone at a dog, and hope I never have to! That said, an aggressive dog will generally turn tail and run if you stoop down. I guess that means somebody must throw stones at them occasionally?

Re cats. I remember doing a first aid course years ago. The instructor also drove an ambulance. Occasionally some elderly person would die of natural causes at home and they’d be first on the scene. If the body had been there a while and the deceased was a dog owner, the body was untouched. If the deceased was a cat-owner? Specifically a person who owned a large number of cats? Well, let’s just say there was rarely enough left over to fill a bodybag.

They don't care, they just don't care... :^)

I've always had dogs and/or cats. Mostly cats for a while because I have lived in cities for quite a while, and I like larger dogs, so...

They are quite different, as you suggest, and if you like them, it's for separate reasons.

Dogs are a lot like Rousseau's noble savage; many are unbelievably loyal. Very many will commit and go to the wall with you, as need be.

The actual central attraction of cats--the one that makes them the most popular small mammal pet--is that they are *seductive* in a sensuous, vicarious way. Not sexual--so no jokes now!--but here is a truly beautiful small, finely featured animal, physically phenomenally graceful. You never tire of just looking at them--and if you've had a girlfriend or wife like that, you'll understand what I mean. From every angle they are a treat to behold--eye candy, for sure. And it never stops, never gets old.

They seem to show affection (I'm talking about the cats again, let's make it clear), but it's very shallow in almost all cases. They can be quite indifferent, but contrast this to dogs--an indifferent dog is almost a oxymoron, in my opinion.

Many of them--in my limited experience, most--seem to prefer to be around women. Make of it what you will.

I'd like to have both dogs and cats again. For the last few years, it's been cats.

Maybe the best comic--but accurate!--sense of the human-animal relationship comes from the following witticism:

Dog/human, as seen by dog: "He feeds me. He must be God."

Cat/human, as seen by cat: "He feeds me. I must be God."

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’ve always had both. I’ve never had a small dog, but I think some of them do have big personalities? Like Jack Russells? Currently I have a lurcher and three cats. Like you say, every so often you have this epiphany; here’s this creature that can survive just as well in wild (although this might not be as true in the US) as it can outdoors, but which is also quite happy to clamber up onto your lap, if only to benefit from your body heat. Also the only real difference between a tiger and a cat is size. Cats move in the same economic way. Like a lot of predators they’re patient and they’re slow until they have to be fast. The downside is the bird kill, most of which ends up under my bed.

Yeah, and here's a revelation: I had always thought that cats (we have three male siblings) were used to rid human habitation of rats.

However, it appears that the reverse is equally true. The cats bring live rats (*rats*, not mice--they bring those, too, but...) into our formerly rodent-free house, unless you are very careful. There was one instance where a rat that one of them brought in escaped, and nimby evaded capture for 4 days, hiding under heavy furniture (piano, bookshelves, etc) until one morning I awoke to find his dismembered remains on the dining room floor.

Jack the Ripper would be a good name for a cat, I think.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nice! We moved up into the hills and our cat (who wasn't mad about the move anyway) died of old age. Within a week there were mice everywhere. Plus rats squabbling up in the attic. So we needed cats, for sure. That said, I do think they bring plenty of vermin in with them and often don't bother killing it or - like you say - the rat/mouse gets away and ends up hiding in your shoe or a pair of discarded trousers, which can be pretty unpleasant when you get up in the morning.....

Good observation!

I think the cats kill some and scare the bejeezus out of the rest so that they stay well away from where the cats live, unless brought back in as hostages.

When lived on the central coast of CA I used to have large mixed breed dogs, whom I liked a lot, too. They liked riding in my pickup, etc.

But not eye candy, that's for sure!

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Good Grief! I would never throw stones at
> barking
> > dogs. What kind of barbaric behavior is that?!
> > That sounds more like something you'd see in
> the
> > Middle East.
>
>
> I must be getting senile...
>
> You're not the same Knygatin who speaks avidly of
> martial cane twirling, are you?
>
> :^)

I guess we could say that bipeds are the only ones I mistrust. The other species are more predictable and innocent. Bipeds, of bad conditioning and background, tend to be calculating, false, hypocritical, neurotic, confused, mean and dangerous; the only species that has actively, calculated through the large brain, turned away from God and Nature, and entered darkness. To lesser or greater degree. A misfit, quite tiresome to deal with. Basically misled from early age through culturally enforced conventions and bad genetic heritage. Many have an ongoing existential struggle to get back to Truth, meanwhile being socially unpredictable. Not all. Not the few enlightened. Simply put, I don't feel safe walking around in big cities and decadent societies.

If I were to meet a dangerous dog (a barking dog is not the same as dangerous) attacking me, I would of course defend myself. But it would be highly unpleasant. A biped criminal threatening me, on the other hand, I would gladly give a good bashing.



Thank you Cathbad and Sawfish for your interesting observations of cats and dogs. I really enjoyed that. I am sure you know of Lovecraft's interesting essay "Cats and Dogs" (which can be found online). He favored cats, and I am sure he experienced their sensous seductive beauty in the way Sawfish describes above, but used other words, seeing cats as very high standing, dignified, and aristocratic. Fritz Leiber was also obsessed with cats, and they frequently appear in his writings.

I am afraid I cannot add much to these observations, I have related to animals subconsciously and intuitively, without thinking much about it. I simply enjoy the company of dogs. The only thing I am aware of, is that you must be perceptive in the present and true to yourself and the dog. Like with humans. Giving and receiving.
Dogs are goofy, and I like that. They make us laugh. They teach us to be joyful. They never hold a gripe, always trying to please and cheer things up. Always generous. They guard our home, and help us in the hunt. They are at the same time completely dependent upon us. That is why I find it heartbreaking if people are cruel to them, like being cruel to children. Same with all other pets.
Now, dogs which are indifferent, are so because they have been seriously mistreated when raised. Dogs are social beings, they are not meant to be chained and isolated outside in a yard.

Being a pleaser, co-dependent, a dog-person, I have sometimes been attracted to anti-dependent cat-women (we tend to look for qualities we miss in ourselves), and cat-men in terms of friendship, and have learned my painful lessons (and true completion can only come from within). Anyhow, from an aesthetic perspective, I prefer cute dog-girls to beautiful cat-girls. Although it is not always quite that simple. People can be a little bit of both.

Excellent post, K.

Interleaved, below:

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Knygatin Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Good Grief! I would never throw stones at
> > barking
> > > dogs. What kind of barbaric behavior is
> that?!
> > > That sounds more like something you'd see in
> > the
> > > Middle East.
> >
> >
> > I must be getting senile...
> >
> > You're not the same Knygatin who speaks avidly
> of
> > martial cane twirling, are you?
> >
> > :^)
>
> I guess we could say that bipeds are the only ones
> I mistrust. The other species are more predictable
> and innocent. Bipeds, of bad conditioning and
> background, tend to be calculating, false,
> hypocritical, neurotic, confused, mean and
> dangerous; the only species that has actively,
> calculated through the large brain, turned away
> from God and Nature, and entered darkness. To
> lesser or greater degree. A misfit, quite tiresome
> to deal with. Basically misled from early age
> through culturally enforced conventions and bad
> genetic heritage. Many have an ongoing existential
> struggle to get back to Truth, meanwhile being
> socially unpredictable. Not all. Not the few
> enlightened. Simply put, I don't feel safe walking
> around in big cities and decadent societies.

Yes, same here.

For what it's worth (probably nothing), I think a lot of what you observe--correctly, in my opinion--about humans also applies to primates in general. I think it's just a nasty, highly opportunistic branch of the animal kingdom, and maybe I've shared this with you, but...

About 40 years ago, watching a Jane Goodall documentary on chimps for the nth time, it stuck me like a thunderbolt: all I will ever need to know about humans I can learn from a Goodall documentary, and extrapolate for intellectual sophistication.

So humans share all the same negative traits as the hyper-social ape species--chimps, baboons, etc.--but are simply better at it than the apes.

I'll go on record with that one, too.


>
> If I were to meet a dangerous dog (a barking dog
> is not the same as dangerous) attacking me, I
> would of course defend myself. But it would be
> highly unpleasant. A biped criminal threatening
> me, on the other hand, I would gladly give a good
> bashing.

Yes, me too.

>
>
>
> Thank you Cathbad and Sawfish for your interesting
> observations of cats and dogs. I really enjoyed
> that. I am sure you know of Lovecraft's
> interesting essay "Cats and Dogs" (which can be
> found online). He favored cats, and I am sure he
> experienced their sensous seductive beauty in the
> way Sawfish describes above, but used other words,
> seeing cats as very high standing, dignified, and
> aristocratic. Fritz Leiber was also obsessed with
> cats, and they frequently appear in his writings.
>
> I am afraid I cannot add much to these
> observations, I have related to animals
> subconsciously and intuitively, without thinking
> much about it. I simply enjoy the company of dogs.
> The only thing I am aware of, is that you must be
> perceptive in the present and true to yourself and
> the dog. Like with humans. Giving and receiving.
> Dogs are goofy, and I like that. They make us
> laugh. They teach us to be joyful. They never hold
> a gripe, always trying to please and cheer things
> up. Always generous. They guard our home, and help
> us in the hunt. They are at the same time
> completely dependent upon us. That is why I find
> it heartbreaking if people are cruel to them, like
> being cruel to children. Same with all other pets.

Yes, there's no excuse for this that I'd accept. What are offered as exculpatory "reasons" sound to me like excuses.

When I retired, and afterward when I got bored, I thought about some kind of "public service"-oriented volunteerism, and you know what? The ***ONLY*** thing that had any appeal, at all, was to volunteer at an animal shelter of some kind.

As my mobility decreased rapidly, this never came to pass, but oh, well!

>
> Now, dogs which are indifferent, are so because
> they have been seriously mistreated when raised.
> Dogs are social beings, they are not meant to be
> chained and isolated outside in a yard.

Nah. This is why I go with cats at present. I can't stand to see dogs in quarters that are too close for them. They don't actually complain, but when I take them out and I see what they do, I know, for sure, that they need sufficient space.

The cats I always let roam freely. They are sort of the OG bad-asses of the domesticated animal world. Kill-or-be-killed types, at the core. E.g., when they first step outside, they sorta look around, casing the situation, like George Raft in the old gangster movies.

And in an odd sense, it is spiritually liberating to consider that right now, your cat, who is indoors to provide you with opportunities for worship (as they see it), could, if they wanted, be outside roving. They are here because at this moment they *want* to be.

Now, it's likely because of a comfortable sofa, and not the pleasure of your company, but still...

>
> Being a pleaser, co-dependent, a dog-person, I
> have sometimes been attracted to anti-dependent
> cat-women (we tend to look for qualities we miss
> in ourselves), and cat-men in terms of friendship,
> and have learned my painful lessons (and true
> completion can only come from within). Anyhow,
> from an aesthetic perspective, I prefer cute
> dog-girls to beautiful cat-girls. Although it is
> not always quite that simple. People can be a
> little bit of both.

Hah! Interesting observation about women. I can *see* it, too....

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wonder if there'd be interest in a discussion of our spending on books. You might know Orwell's essay "Books vs. Cigarettes."

[www.orwellfoundation.com]

I began to record cost of each book I bought in May 1986. Oddly, it seems it never occurred to me to do anything much with those data till this month.

Today I calculated that, for the most recent 26 years of my fulltime employment -- I am retired now -- I spent 2.5% of my average annual salary (before deductions for taxes, contributions, etc.) on books.

Even though many of those books ended up being ones I would give away (sometimes unread, sometimes having read them), they have been a remarkably economical expenditure given their importance for my spiritual, intellectual, imaginative, professional, familial, social, and recreational life and activities. I'm thankful for them.

For one perspective, even at my most lavish, I never came within several hundred dollars of what a pack-a-day smoker spends on cigarettes if I figure $5.36 per pack (North Dakota 2020 average price) or $1,956 a year.

If you've never read that Orwell essay, you might take a look at it -- it's fun to take that angle on book-buying.

I'm a super tightwad and for years bought only the cheapest used versions of books I could find, or used the public library, and later Project Gutenberg.

I usually asked for books for Xmas or my birthday.

So no real record for me.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hear what you’re saying re dogs, Knygatin. I think dogs invest more fully in you and thus you in them. You’re their whole world. So while I’ve always shed a few tears when a dog of mine died, I’ve never done so for a cat. By extension, a dog will miss you. A cat will not (unless it’s hungry).

As Sawfish says, part of their charm is that they’re pretty independent but choose to spend some of their time with you. Which is nice.

Re Books vs. Cigarettes. My grandfather grew up in Galway and remembers two labourers comparing notes about what they got paid, one grumbling that his outlay on cigarettes and booze meant that he’d nothing left over to spend on himself. I was a smoker many moons ago, and that attitude is pretty representative. An addiction has to be fed, regardless of the cost - even if means skimping on other necessities like food. A packet of cigarettes is around fifteen euro in Ireland. A large paperback costs around the same. So I guess that’s 365 books that you’ll never read. But a smoker won’t see it that way (well, with the exception of Orwell!).

Another factor is that these days (if you have an ereader) you can download a lot of stuff off the net for free, as the older works are long out of copyright - e.g. I downloaded a Father Brown omnibus a few years back from the Internet Archive; the formatting was as good as any mainstream ebook. Also ‘Witchwood’ by John Buchan (based on Dale’s recommendation). So the monetary value you put on a book (especially if you factor in libraries) is very much a moveable feast.

That said, I can appreciate the pleasure of owning a physical book. I wonder how much this has to do with nostalgia, though? Most of the books I buy are duplicates of books I read as a teenager or in my twenties.

"two labourers comparing notes about what they got paid, one grumbling that his outlay on cigarettes and booze meant that he’d nothing left over to spend on himself" -- what a great anecdote! I immediately read it to the missus.

"Most of the books I buy are duplicates of books I read as a teenager or in my twenties."

Thereby hangs a tale?

I've done some of that, for sure, & even bought books I read when I was just a boy, e.g. a couple of Robert Silverberg juvenile sf novels.

Telling, huh? I used to have a lot of SF paperbacks. Not so much now. I only see one book on my shelf that I borrowed - and that was thirty years ago - ie, Lewis's 'Allegory of Love'. I did buy a copy of a book I loved as a kid only recently (which thankfully turned out to be every bit as good as I remembered): 'The Land of Green Ginger'.

The Land of Green Ginger -- I'm thinking that was a book Lin Carter promised to reprint in the Ballantine fantasy series, maybe? Never did, though.

I didn’t know that! I only discovered a few years ago it was written by the same guy who wrote the screenplay for The Wizard of Oz.

The Land of Green Ginger is a comical, arabesque fantasy: the kind of book that’s written quickly, but written well, and is usually a sort of one-hit wonder for the author. In fairness, Aridizzone’s illustrations are a big help.

I'm going to have to get my hands on that book, Cathbad.

[tolkienandfantasy.blogspot.com]

Weirdly enough, of the books listed I have three - plus I bought the Prince Prigio hardback online (again a duplicate of the one I had as a kid). I don’t know how I came by the Sylvie & Bruno edition, which was as amiable as it was forgettable - except for The Mad Gardener’s Song, which I kind of liked, and which I used to know by heart. I read Face in the Frost a few weeks ago, based on a recommendation by somebody on another forum.

I’ve read quite a few of the others (MacDonald, Nesbit etc) but an equal number are completely unknown to me - and probably easier to source now (ie online) than they were back then, so I might just check them out. Thanks for the link!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 31 Jan 21 | 06:21AM by Cathbad.

Thanks for your responses to my previous post.

Regarding buying books, I would never compare books to cigarettes or drinking. It is degrading. Like saying, "Since I don't smoke anymore, I can now waste my money on books instead". But it is true that drugs may leave you with little money for else. (I used to smoke for a few years when younger, and drink at bars, and could see it was a waste of money, as well as damaging to my health.)
I don't have a budget for books, and don't buy them on a regular basis or as habitual expenditure. I only buy the books I need and truly want, like clothes, furniture, and other household necessities. I should say bought, for I consider my personal book collection about complete. Today I rarely buy books. The last real investment I did in books, was some ten years ago, when I updated my Tolkien set with the HarperCollins 70th and 50th Anniversary edition. If it is something I am curious to read, but not necessarily needs to stand on my shelves, I either borrow it or get a pdf. I never buy ugly books. I always choose the nicest edition, within certain cost limits. I like cheap paperbacks about as much as hardbacks, as long as the design and cover art is to my liking. The most I have payed for a new book was $60 for an Underwood-Miller in slipcase and lovely marbling. The most I ever payed for an antique book was around $300; I would never go higher than that amount for a book, and don't like paying that much, but on the other hand, this was only a single occurrence. I don't mind buying print-on-demand books, if they look nice. But there has to be true dedication and passion behind the design and artwork. Occasionally I have printed my own books on a library Xerox, glued bindings, and made dust wrappers, when no other acceptable edition was available.

This is an interesting thread, conceptually.

It's revealing two (at least) main ways of seeing a "book": as a concrete, manufactured object; and as the intangible content conveyed as ideas or intellectual revelations.

I truly enjoy handling a first rate hardbound book, and they are very pleasant to read, too. But thinking about why it is that I seldom buy books any more, and when I do seldom fork out top-dollar--or even close--it's because at some point I conceptually separated the content from the object, and as much as I like the object, the content assumed supremacy, and if I can get the content at low cost, or better still, for free, that's the way I'll go 9 out of 10 times.

That said, from earlier days I tended to buy books by authors that I liked, and I read, and re-read them. A great example for me is Raymond Chandler--reading his Marlowe series is like taking a vacation in both time and place. It helps that I spent a lot of time in LA, and lived there for a while, and actually saw much of the setting he described, but that's how that category of authors works for me.

Other favorites of this type: Robert F.Jones, Newton Thornburg, Hammett, Lovecraft, CAS, Hemingway, Machiavelli, Crane, and a few others.

It's odd, too, that the attraction of each of these authors differs somewhat. E.g., much of Jones' writing is a primer on actual, gut-level traditional masculinity, offered not as an observation, but thru credible modeling by the male characters. In this sense he is like Hemingway. And both handle female characters very poorly, in my opinion. Anti-Flauberts, I guess.

Similarly, Machiavelli tells you all you need to know abut hierarchical human interactions, all you need to do is to scale the observation to the situation you observe for a preview of what's coming, or is likely to come.

Crane is perhaps the most naturally visceral writer I've encountered. Not forced, but natural. Read "Manacled".

Some I have become saturated with and no longer go there regularly, others I re-read from time to time--CAS and HPL are among this number and basically that's why I'm here, folks.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish wrote, "it's because at some point I conceptually separated the content from the object, and as much as I like the object, the content assumed supremacy, and if I can get the content at low cost, or better still, for free, that's the way I'll go 9 out of 10 times."

Most of my Machen is printouts in large type from free online sources. One reason I kind of like that is that, around Machen there hovers this mystique about the books -- rare editions coveted by connoisseurs, etc. I react against that.

I've just calculated my lifetime expenditure on books.* My estimate is $40,000. The average cost of a book must have well been under $10.

Dale Nelson

*This calculation was helped along by some records I kept. In 1978 I inventoried my books, coming up with 1,008 books whose estimated value was $2,039. I made a couple of further inventories in 1980 and 1982, but soon ceased to do so. However, beginning 1 May 1986, I recorded each book I bought and its cost, and I recently added that all up, as I may have mentioned. I won't rehearse all the bits of information I took into account to arrive at the estimated $40,000, but my guess is that that's a pretty good hunch. I've sold, traded, given away, or (rarely) discarded a lot of books, so at present I reckon I have 4,156. (A few years ago I counted all my books, and I've kept that figure up to date. I'm sure it's not 100% accurate, but it's a good enough figure.) A great many of them would be of little or no value to someone else. The most expensive book is the J. R. R. Tolkien Encyclopedia at $175 (it costs less than that now), and Aids to Reflection in the Complete Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge would be the second-most expensive, at $135.

I might nominate Grant Uden's Dictionary of Chivalry, illustrated by Pauline Baynes, as my most beautiful book.

Most peculiar book is Coleridge's Constitution of the Church and State, not for the content but because it reeks of some fragrance (patchouli? -- it's the scent I associate with hippie girls in peasant blouses). I have to keep it in a padded envelope so that it doesn't contaminate its neighbors. If I ever read it, I'll have to stuff cotton into my nostrils. I believe I had some discussion with the mail-order bookseller about it (over 20 years ago), but whatever happened, I still have the book.

Oldest book I've ever bought is a Hand-Book of London from 1850. This was a book relished by Arthur Machen. I paid under $40 for it. Second oldest book was a book of selected table-talk of Coleridge, for about $25.

Best bargain? The elephant folios of the superlative Times Mid-Century Atlas of the World, five volumes at 25c each, bought as library discards. These are also my largest books. Smallest book? A 2 x 2" Book of Common Prayer from around 1900.

Book I still have that I bought the longest time ago? Probably the Whitman Classic edition of The War of the Worlds, bought on Feb. 4, 1967.

Most overpriced book? It's too bad, but I might say Zettersten's book on Tolkien. I'll paste my review of it.


Tolkien by a Colleague and Friend

by Dale Nelson

Arne Zettersten worked with Tolkien on the Oxford Early English Text Society’s multi-volume edition of all seventeen manuscripts of Ancrene Wisse. The first volume appeared in 1962; it was the final major scholarly work released in his lifetime by Tolkien. Zettersten saw the project through to completion in 2000. He has written J. R. R. Tolkien’s Double Worlds and Creative Process: Language and Life, published 2011 by Palgrave Macmillan (xi + 243 pp; ISBN 978-0-230-62314-9; $85).

The book is priced for the scholarly market but is poorly edited. It states that 9 August 1973 was “two weeks before Tolkien’s death,” but Tolkien died 2 Sept. 1973. It refers twice to Biographia Literaria as being written by C. T. Coleridge (pp. 27, 233). Tolkien’s secretary Joy Hill becomes Joe Hill (p. 35). An uncorrected misprint refers to the 1980s when the 1890s must be meant (p. 52). Tolkien’s essay “English and Welsh” is “English and Wales” on p. 161, “England and Wales” on p. 200, and “About the English and the Welsh” on p.232. We read of “Niemor” (for Nienor, a character in Tolkien’s Túrin cycle, p. 35), “buriel-mounds” (p. 13), and the bookstore chain Barnes and Nobles (p. 39), and that “today’s individual… have [sic] lost a lot of historical knowledge” (p. 221). The style bogs down: “the new digital picture archive from the [Peter Jackson] film production [was used] for all kinds of digital manipulation. If we take into account the whole reception of Tolkien’s ideas, we may adopt a different, and maybe unexpected, comprehensive view of his project, particularly if we take into account the effects of his ideas” (p. 217). Few readers will assume with Zettersten that “a radio or TV interview would have created a more relaxed setting [for Tolkien to speak in] than … a social gathering at a pub, or a lively meeting with colleagues after dinner in his own college” (p. 6). One frequently thinks that Zettersten is about to focus on one particular issue, but he draws off to something else. The book is repetitive. It was, apparently, first written in Swedish and the translation is not polished. Och, rather than English and, appears on pp. 174 and 231. The book needed a good editor.

Readers may shrug off such defects if the book brings Tolkien the man close to them and if what it says about Tolkien’s creativity is insightful. The book may be guardedly affirmed on both counts.

Having corresponded with him since May 1959, Zettersten first visited Tolkien in June 1961. He tells his first impressions of Tolkien’s appearance (“surprisingly robust physique,” “natural heartiness” of manner, hair parted on the left and thick in the back, bushy eyebrows, warm handshake, distinctive voice) and recounts his walk from the noisy center of Oxford to Tolkien’s Sandfield Road residence in Headington. These early paragraphs are enjoyable, and it is pleasant in the middle of the book to glimpse Tolkien’s conversational topics ranging from philology to his own subcreation to “various whiskies and their merits” (p. 113). So far as I know Zettersten is the only source in print for the list of eleven books from Tolkien’s schooldays (p. 78). Almost everything that Zettersten says about Tolkien the man, however, is already known from Tolkien’s published letters and books by members of the Tolkien family, John Garth, Peter Gilliver, Christina Scull and Wayne Hammond, Humphrey Carpenter, and others. Zettersten’s book is a useful condensation of their many pages. Zettersten’s affection for Tolkien pervades the book, but perhaps he waited too long to write it; his book mostly lacks the unique anecdotes that readers will have hoped for.

While many readers will welcome a book on Tolkien, a philologist, written by another outstanding philologist, some may fear that it will be too esoteric. It’s not. For example, a nice explanation of “philology” appears on p. 79. (It could have appeared earlier in the book.) One might, again, fear that Zettersten would naturally emphasize philology at the expense of other elements contributing to Tolkien’s creativity, but the book is reasonably balanced. We read of Tolkien being captivated by the Gothic, Finnish, and Welsh languages, but also of his prewar friendships, Tolkien’s love for Edith and the importance of their son Christopher Tolkien as reader of LOTR as it was being written, Tolkien’s Great War experiences, the stimulus of the Inklings, and the role of pictorial art and calligraphy. Zettersten doesn’t let the philological perspective run away with him but uses it. Given his qualifications, one wishes he had commented on Tolkien’s philological essays such as “Sigelwara Land,” “The Devil’s Coach-Horses,” and “Chaucer as Philologist.” Since the “AB Language” in which Ancrene Wisse is written is a specialty of Zettersten’s, he is able to evoke the two scholars’ shared enthusiasm for it. He records too their interest in the fragmentary poem Waldere. He conveys the “code-switching” quality of Tolkien’s mind, adapting a linguistic term for a rapid alternation “between two languages, or between two dialects or between two registers.” Thus, “Tolkien could suddenly flit between the primary and the secondary world without the slightest difficulty or doubt” (p. 113). Yes: Zettersten really does seem to understand how Tolkien’s mind worked -- although I’m still mulling his notion that Tolkien would have published a finished text of The Silmarillion in his lifetime if he had been able to work on the book with a word processor (p. 36). During his last visits with Tolkien, Zettersten perceived that Tolkien realized that he would not see The Silmarillion through to publication.

Other than institutions with special Tolkien collections, libraries do not need to purchase this book.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 1 Feb 21 | 11:18AM by Dale Nelson.

Knygatin wrote, "The most I ever payed for an antique book was around $300; I would never go higher than that amount for a book, and don't like paying that much, but on the other hand, this was only a single occurrence. I don't mind buying print-on-demand books."

I was favorably impressed by the work of the Indian print-on-demand publisher Gyan. One can buy facsimiles of old books from them. I have a special interest in the 17th century, and wanted to get Isaac Ambrose's War with Devils: [and] Ministration of, and Communion with Angels. It took a while, but the result was to my satisfaction. I think they work from microfilm. This was a 1769 edition with the S's that look like f's. At one point they emailed me with specimen pages to show that they were working with a copy that could be hard to read in places. Should they go ahead? Yes. It took a while before the book arrived, but I was quite pleased. The book is a well-made paperback, with pages in sewn signatures. I forget what it cost, but I think it was under $30 including postage from India.

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Most peculiar book is Coleridge's Constitution of
> the Church and State, not for the content but
> because it reeks of some fragrance (patchouli? --
> it's the scent I associate with hippie girls in
> peasant blouses). I have to keep it in a padded
> envelope so that it doesn't contaminate its
> neighbors. If I ever read it, I'll have to stuff
> cotton into my nostrils.
>

That is very funny. I smell a long past trauma here.

My 1922 edition of Algernon Blackwood's The Bright Messenger has a slight reek of old pipe tobacco. At first it annoyed me, but then I grew to accept it as part of the book's personality.
I was unlucky at first with a beautiful copy of Jack Vance's Eight Fantasms and Magics (1960s psychedelic pop art cover at its best), for it unexpectedly smelled very musty. But I put it in a plastic bag together with baking soda; and after that fanned it. Now the mustiness is gone. Same with the 1975 edition of David Lindsay's The Haunted Woman, except it had a vile cigarette smell I removed.

just started this book:

from victory to defeat by pao-yu ching

Knygatin wrote, "I was unlucky at first with a beautiful copy of Jack Vance's Eight Fantasms and Magics (1960s psychedelic pop art cover at its best), for it unexpectedly smelled very musty. But I put it in a plastic bag together with baking soda; and after that fanned it. Now the mustiness is gone. Same with the 1975 edition of David Lindsay's The Haunted Woman, except it had a vile cigarette smell I removed."

Ten years or so ago, our little town had very large covered recycle bins downtown, and one day I noticed, in the one for paper, that some books had been dumped. The sides of the bin had hatches through which one dumped one's contributions, and which were large enough for me to get through so that I could fish out the books, which included some old sf and Tolkien and even S. R. Crockett's The Red Axe in a clothbound copy with an 1898 copyright. The books did have a bit of a pong so I didn't bring them into the house but stored them in a former machine shop on our property. With time the odor went away and now the Crockett shares shelf space with some other antiquarian books in our living room.

I remembered another book story. I have a Penguin Classics edition of major writings by Sir Thomas Browne, including his treatise on funerary vases, Hydriotaphia or Urn-Buriall. This copy was chewed by our pet rabbit. Before we rescued the apparently abandoned rabbit, it had been living in a cemetery.

I'm reading Susanna Clarke's short novel Piranesi. It has reminded me -- only a little in each case -- of Lovecraft's "Shadow Out of Time," MacDonald's Lilith, Lewis's Magician's Nephew (the Wood Between the Worlds), Peake's Gormenghast, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Borges, even very slightly Robinson Crusoe, &c. It isn't a horror novel, at least not so far, more like some kind of dream-dimension thing. My sense is that there are people here at ED who would like it and people who wouldn't, but I wouldn't be able to say who belongs to which category.

Splendid book -- very different from Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell and The Ladies of Grace Adieu and Other Stories, but a splendid read nevertheless.

I remember reading Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell while on holiday in Italy. A bunch of us had rented a tall, narrow old villa that had originally served as a hunting lodge - the surrounding countryside was teeming with boar. I read JSMN sitting at the top of a very steep flight of steps with just a funny-looking lizard for company (like a lot of European buildings, the main entrance was on the second floor; needless to say, everybody used the ground floor entrance, which led directly into the kitchen). To say the book was an immersive experience is putting it mildly; it was very long and beautifully written.

My experience of Piranesi was a bit more ambivalent. I enjoyed it but found it a bit thin overall - in terms of characterisation and plot-development - so I’d be curious to know what you make of it.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I remember reading Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell
> while on holiday in Italy. A bunch of us had
> rented a tall, narrow old villa that had
> originally served as a hunting lodge - the
> surrounding countryside was teeming with boar. I
> read JSMN sitting at the top of a very steep
> flight of steps with just a funny-looking lizard
> for company (like a lot of European buildings, the
> main entrance was on the second floor; needless to
> say, everybody used the ground floor entrance,
> which led directly into the kitchen). To say the
> book was an immersive experience is putting it
> mildly; it was very long and beautifully written.
>

Never heard of Susanna Clarke before. Not likely the kind of book I would wear out my eyes on. But your post inspired me to get the audio book, which appears to be exceptionally well narrated. What caught my curiosity about this book is the subtle approach to magic. Also called "magic realism" I understand? Another modern term I am not very familiar with. Perhaps some of Algernon Blackwood's spiritual nature work could be termed "magic realism"?

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also called "Magic Realism" I
> understand? Another modern term I am not very
> familiar with.


Or, to quote Nemonymous:

"Magic Realism: A settled term: Fiction that creates fiction from reality, e.g. Shalimar the Clown by Salman Rushdie.

Magic Fiction: I define this as Fiction that creates reality from fiction e.g. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 9 Feb 21 | 07:35AM by Knygatin.

Link: Nemonymous' discussion about Magic Realism.

I've encounteered the term "magical realism", which is most frequently associated with Marquez's 100 Years of Solitude.

Is this the same, or is there a subtle difference?

Would Tin Drum fit into either category, or is it simply unreliable POV?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My impression is that magic realism is a sub-genre of literary fiction; so you have a story very much rooted in reality, but with occasional, surreal touches. Even when there is a central, supernatural element it’s largely a literary conceit intended to reflect the book’s themes, nothing (ie, not ‘magic’ per se). That said, I don’t know if I’ve ever actually read any - unless Borges and Bolano count - South American Magic Realism was big around thirty years ago. So I’d classify The Tin Drum as magic realism (based on what I know about that novel).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 9 Feb 21 | 11:31AM by Cathbad.

Thinking on it more, A Winter's Tale is probably also magical realism.

An odd sub-genre. I think slipstream gets close to it, too, maybe enough to be considered a sub-sub-genre.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’d classify A Winter’s Tale as fantasy because it’s set in an imaginary, parallel New York. The world building is an end in itself, a defining principle of SF (in my humble opinion). I’d classify The Tin Drum as a work of literary fiction, because the mc’s refusal to age is really just a vehicle for Grass to examine Germany’s history through the lens of one character - ie, the goal is to scrutinise the real world rather than to create an imaginary one.

That said, I wouldn’t be prescriptive about it. Plus a lot of fiction doesn’t really fall into either category, but is an amalgam of both - e.g. I’d classify Aegypt as a work of speculative fiction, but it could just as easily be a work of literary fiction.

Cathbad and anyone else -- thoughts on Crowley? I have only read, I guess, a novella called something like "The Slow Work of Time" (I think)< which didn't make that much of an impression on my hard shell. But I've thought he might be worth looking into.

This is really interesting.

Tin Drum, being first person, can be attributed to unreliable POV--the refusal to age, the ability to break glass, the drumming, his "putative father", all of this is what the POV sees and tells us, and we can infer that almost none of this exists in actuality, and we're being given a Kashubian history lesson by an insane dwarf.

I mean, that's how I see it, usually.

So I've convinced myself: it's not magical realism.

Winter's Tale, I was unsure it's a parallel NYC, but I could be forgetting. Besides, I read it only once (was good for one go-around,only). I took it to be a fabulous NYC, what with watermen, Short Tails, magic horses, etc. All of these existed (except the horse, I assume) in some form in actuality. Gangs of New York was all about the sorts of gangs very much like the Short Tails. But not from a comic perspective.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I never read Little, Big but re-read Aegypt again last year and enjoyed it just as much as I did the first time I read it. There were three more books in the series, but opinions seem to be pretty mixed as to their merits. The Slow Work of Time is the one in which Cecil Rhodes is part of a secret society that keeps rejigging history to ensure the empire never falls, right? I read it in a collecton of Crowley's short stories a few years ago. I found it a bit underwhelming (like most of the stories in the collection) but would reckon Aegypt is worth checking out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 9 Feb 21 | 01:19PM by Cathbad.

I guess intention is a big factor, Sawfish? Literary Fiction seems to be as much about the seriousness of the author’s intentions as it is about literary pyrotechnics. So The Tin Drum is a work of literary fiction because of its themes.

I should add that I think the critics sometimes get this wrong. The Secret History is basically a Stephen King storyline with a highly 'literary' delivery - ie, for all its pyrotechnics, the author’s intention is basically to entertain you rather than to make you think.

The Secret History -- you mean the Donna Tartt novel?

I like The Little Friend best of her three novels, but found some enjoyment in them all.

Btw FWIW I once wrote a story, "Ladt Stanhope's Manuscript," that drew on the real Secret History -- Procopius's. There was a passage that allowed me to invent the akephaloi, the Headless Ones, in contrast to the asomatai, the Fleshless Ones, i.e. the holy angels. It was at least a fun story to read, with some nice "bits" more or less falling into a hand I happened to have open.

i started male fantasies by klaus theweleit

I actually have The Little Friend around somewhere, Dale - my sister gave it to me for Xmas years ago, but it was so different from The Secret History (which I found in a bookshelf at home and read over the course of a week-end) that I never got into it. Maybe I should give it another chance? I did enjoy The Secret History.

It certainly is different from Secret History. I've read both twice. Among other things there's a great highway overpass sequence and a great watertower sequence in The Little Friend.

I have got to proofread before sending.

I once wrote a story, "Lady Stanhope's Manuscript," that drew on the real Secret History -- Procopius's. There was a passage that allowed me to invent the akephaloi, the Headless Ones, in contrast to the asomatai, the Fleshless Ones, i.e. the holy angels. It was at least a fun story to write, with some nice "bits" more or less falling into a hand I happened to have open.

the publisher foreign languages press drew a cat to go with my book order!

catto
note

The old Residents singer performing live at the Wonder of Weird tour.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The old Residents singer performing live at the
> Wonder of Weird tour.


i love the residents!

DrWho42 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The old Residents singer performing live at the
> > Wonder of Weird tour.
>
>
> i love the residents!


This is an open question to all Residents fans out there on CAS.

How might you best sum up the Residents' artistic vision? What were they attempting to accomplish or state?

I come not as a well-formed, overt critic of their attempts, but one who has listened a bit--about as much as I could--and was unable to draw any definitive positive conclusions.

I honestly *did* feel that they may have been attempting an overall message, but that I was not able to clearly tune in on it. Too, the disquieting notion that they were simply trying to weird out an audience by their unstructured presentation, and reputation/mystique, also has undermined my appreciation. That they were simply attempting to shock, or perhaps were attempting to see, for their own amusement, how many would say that they could see the emperor's new clothes.

Too, there's the underlying suggestion that if they are serious, they are an iteration of the Dadaists.

So what can we say about them? From whence does their musical style evolve? Who/what influenced them, and who/what did they influence subsequently? Are their recordings thematically organized, or is it just random material that they have on-hand?

I'm open-minded enough to recognize that some very effect art works in near subliminal ways, and this is especially true in music. Was this a part of that they were attempting.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18 Feb 21 | 10:03AM by Sawfish.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I found a list of SF stories, that, when
> sorted by publishing date, the 1950s read like a
> compendium of the stuff I had liked.
>
> [en.wikipedia.org]
> ion_short_stories
>
> I read lots of this stuff in my formative youth,
> and now, reflecting back, those readings, and R.
> Crumb in the 60s, could explain a lot...
>

Lots of good stuff on that list. Much variation, I have only read a small part of it.

Robert Crumb, Hah!, yes I can see a possible similarity of mentality there! Crumb 1. Crumb 2. I was never a collector, but I have a few old undergrounds and fanzines. I enjoy his Silly Pigeons, like when they go to the swimming hall. Silly Pigeon 1.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I found a list of SF stories, that, when
> > sorted by publishing date, the 1950s read like
> a
> > compendium of the stuff I had liked.
> >
> >
> [en.wikipedia.org]
>
> > ion_short_stories
> >
> > I read lots of this stuff in my formative
> youth,
> > and now, reflecting back, those readings, and
> R.
> > Crumb in the 60s, could explain a lot...
> >
>
> Lots of good stuff on that list. Much variation, I
> have only read a small part of it.

Same here.

Thinking on this list, what I know of it--the stories I'm familiar with--it seems as you remarked about van Vogt; *ideas* seemed paramount at that time. Plot is a vehicle to express a new idea or a new wrinkle on an old idea.

One of the things about van Vogt that I initially liked as a kid, then later eschewed and for the most part still do, is that to advance the story, he gave no (or little) explanation of how stuff worked, just that it did, and its effect was needed at that time. Like in "War Against the Rull", there were these various kinds of ray guns that had somewhat different properties, and this was just presented as a given. I noted the same when reading "The Monster", but it seems to be appropriate for his kind of storytelling.

For Crumb, he's the guy who postulated a bright, shiny, Tommowland-like future, with everything made of rubber so that car wrecks were viewed as something like slapstick comedy, and "everyone will have *all* of *everything*"--patently impossible, but a lot like what leadership promises the electorate.

In the same strip, the only limitation was that on turning 65, a person would be hunted down and have a cyanide pie thrown in his/her face. While I sorta laughed at this at the time, I now wryly note that by this criterion I'd have been dead 8 years ago.

He ends the strip, where the pie is thrown, with a cheerful Warner Bros-like: "That's All, Folks!"

>
> Robert Crumb, Hah!, yes I can see a possible
> similarity of mentality there! Crumb 1. Crumb 2. I
> was never a collector, but I have a few old
> undergrounds and fanzines. I enjoy his Silly
> Pigeons, like when they go to the swimming hall.
> Silly Pigeon 1.

I don't recall that one. I only really read his stuff in Zap and Bijou, I think.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i just got the penguin classics edition of anti-oedipus: capitalism and schizophrenia today

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Knygatin Wrote:
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > Not sure what your exact struggle is here, but I
> > have noticed that you don't seem to like set
> > directions in any manner, definite assured
> > statements, or things that are precise, not
> > impressed by invented tools or perfection in
> > robotic engineering.
>
> The answer is simple, K!
>
> I'm a foul materialist.

(Lifted the above from the Topographic horror thread.)

I beg to differ. A foul materialist would hardly appreciate fine literature, or be so generously social as you are here. There is a difference between being a philosophical materialist/mechanist (or agnostic for that matter) and being materialistic. For a foul materialistic person is a complete egoist, doesn't give a damn about others. On the other hand, one doesn't even have to believe in God to be spiritual, it is rather a way of being, an approach to life and others. You don't even seem to care much for books as collectible objects, but only for their contents. I am obsessed with my book collection, I am a bibliophile, and I am also a perfectionist about certain other material belongings (such as electronics), and I am not particularly social, ... so that would make me more of a materialist than you (and me, I do believe in God!). Lovecraft was also a philosophical materialist/mechanist, but I still regard him as a spiritual person. He was also very generous with his knowledge, and endlessly helpful to others in this regard, which makes a spiritual side to his person. CAS was perhaps an agnostic, as far as I can tell, but also a very spiritual person in his imagination.

Very interesting discussion, Knygatin, if you are willing to continue...

Below:

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Knygatin Wrote:
> > >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > > Not sure what your exact struggle is here, but
> I
> > > have noticed that you don't seem to like set
> > > directions in any manner, definite assured
> > > statements, or things that are precise, not
> > > impressed by invented tools or perfection in
> > > robotic engineering.
> >
> > The answer is simple, K!
> >
> > I'm a foul materialist.
>
> (Lifted the above from the Topographic horror
> thread.)
>
> I beg to differ. A foul materialist would hardly
> appreciate fine literature, or be so generously
> social as you are here. There is a difference
> between being a philosophical
> materialist/mechanist (or agnostic for that
> matter) and being materialistic. For a foul
> materialistic person is a complete egoist, doesn't
> give a damn about others. On the other hand, one
> doesn't even have to believe in God to be
> spiritual, it is rather a way of being, an
> approach to life and others. You don't even seem
> to care much for books as collectible objects, but
> only for their contents. I am obsessed with my
> book collection, I am a bibliophile, and I am also
> a perfectionist about certain other material
> belongings (such as electronics), and I am not
> particularly social, ... so that would make me
> more of a materialist than you (and me, I do
> believe in God!). Lovecraft was also a
> philosophical materialist/mechanist, but I still
> regard him as a spiritual person. He was also very
> generous with his knowledge, and endlessly helpful
> to others in this regard, which makes a spiritual
> side to his person. CAS was perhaps an agnostic,
> as far as I can tell, but also a very spiritual
> person in his imagination.

I mean, all of this makes sense to me, but I think that I see ideas of what we can call spirituality, which to me, I call it "humanity", but that they are limited in scope.

To me, two VERY major influences in my worldview are a moderately deep understanding of Darwin's ideas of the development of species--which can be extended to the *ideas* and thoughts and social behaviors a species tends to entertain--and the scope to which any given attribute applies.

E.g., scope governs at what point collectivism breaks down, as I had postulated earlier. Similarly, it seems that on this forum there are people who consider themselves moral and spiritual, and I feel that if this was real life, face-to-face, I'd like and get along well with many who post here.

And that I basically share many/most--perhaps all--the same social values you do. But where I differ with many here is that I recognize that within our hypothetical group it is perfectly fine and satisfying for me to act in this fashion, experience has shown me that it's really a fool's errand to assume that it's fine to act this way in the general populace.

This is simply because many individuals out there--maybe even most--do not share these values to the point that you can trust them to adhere to these values without fear of some form of sanction to "encourage" them to either restrain themselves, or to take responsibility for their actions.

I'm saying that they won't do either of these without fear driving them to it.

Simply put, it's fine, and I *like* to act in what you'd term a moral manner, but only within a pre-proven group. Definitely making no assumptions that the undifferentiated populace shares them to the degree that it's safe to include them.

I've had fairly wide dealings, in personal business dealings, in being a landlord, in being a teacher, to have found out the hard way that what we here may consider to be common moral behavior does not extend broadly or deeply. By many it is viewed as a set of suggestions, to be followed, or not, at whim.

Now given this, it's not possible for me to believe that there's an external source of authority that dictates in an absolute sense *which* behaviors are moral: ours or theirs. If there is one, I've seen no compelling evidence; however, I can state that I *believe* that my way is better--but that's because it's better for *me*.

And given equal access to power, the lowest common denominator wins. Bluntly, the group that has the power to inflict genocide, but refrains from exercising that power for moral reasons, can survive for only so long as they have sufficient power to deter the other group--the one that has no qualms about using such power to eliminate opposing groups completely.

If true, this sounds a lot like "might makes right", doesn't it?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh well, I can see the compromise. I agree with much, and that it's risky to be too generous with unknown people. One should not to pass over into stupidity, obviously. Integrity is also important. I also agree that "humanity" and being "spiritual" may just be different words for the same thing, in terms of generous behavior, and whether it actually has a spiritual dimension, or is just a biological social behavior, doesn't matter a whole lot in practicality. Except, when believing in the spiritual extension, one may go a little further perhaps in bettering "inner" relationships to people one has stopped seeing, or to someone who has passed away.

Thanks for this little exchange. I feel content.

Next I will shortly comment on you question about The Residents.

The Residents are both visual and musical artists. I don't think they have a particular vision or message they want to convey. But they have worked from the Theory of Obscurity, believing that the artist can do his best and most honest work when he is free from pressure and expectations from the audience. Without the pressure from people and society to behave and be normal, the artist can be more daring, and shocking, not needing to repress his neurotic fears, his ugly, shameful, or primal sides, but can let it all out in uncensored emotional catharsis. That is why they have chosen to be anonymous.

I think they even have some similarities to Robert Crumb, in not censuring themselves, not hiding neurotic or unpleasant emotions. And coming out of the same bohemian hippie era.

Good exchange.

WRT to the other story that I said was similar in thematic flavor to van Vogt's "The Monster", I found it in an anthology that I got when I was about 12. It is "Pandora's Planet" by Christopher Anvil.

It's got that same sort of smug "human exceptionalism" as "The Monster" (very appealing and ironically humorous to my 12-year old self), where humanity is superior to the invaders.

It looks to me like the author either first wrote the story and later expanded it into a book, or wrote the book first and the story in my anthology is an excerpt from the novel.

[uploads.strikinglycdn.com]

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I can see this as a legitimate approach to creating art, although it may have its shortcomings so far as the consumer of art is concerned.

As 8 out of 10 people who have read S. Clay Wilson's stuff in Zap, etc., would tell you.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24 Feb 21 | 05:05PM by Sawfish.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good exchange.
>
> WRT to the other story that I said was similar in
> thematic flavor to van Vogt's "The Monster", I
> found it in an anthology that I got when I was
> about 12. It is "Pandora's Planet" by Christopher
> Anvil.
>
> It's got that same sort of smug "human
> exceptionalism" as "The Monster" (very appealing
> and ironically humorous to my 12-year old self),
> where humanity is superior to the invaders.
>

It seems interesting. And its written at just the right time of the golden age of science fiction, 1956. Many sci-fi movies from this time also have that preposterous self-confidence and optimism. But I wonder if not the stuff written in the 1930s-1940s actually offered even more feverishly prophetic and ecstatic ideas.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Good exchange.
> >
> > WRT to the other story that I said was similar
> in
> > thematic flavor to van Vogt's "The Monster", I
> > found it in an anthology that I got when I was
> > about 12. It is "Pandora's Planet" by
> Christopher
> > Anvil.
> >
> > It's got that same sort of smug "human
> > exceptionalism" as "The Monster" (very
> appealing
> > and ironically humorous to my 12-year old
> self),
> > where humanity is superior to the invaders.
> >
>
> It seems interesting. And its written at just the
> right time of the golden age of science fiction,
> 1956. Many sci-fi movies from this time also have
> that preposterous self-confidence and optimism.
> But I wonder if not the stuff written in the
> 1930s-1940s actually offered even more feverishly
> prophetic and ecstatic ideas.

There's a streaming channel called Kanopy. It offers free film of a more recondite variety--foreign films such as Battle of Algiers, independent films, some older but good Hollywood stuff. Jean-Pierre Melville stuff, etc.

They have Solaris (1972), for example, and they have an odd film, "Things to Come" (1936) that offers an odd "what if" look from before the advent of WWII.

I believe it postulates something like WWII but set sometime around 1975. I haven't seen it in a long time.

Anyway, all it takes is a library card to gain access to it.

[www.kanopy.com]

We watch it all the time.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Songs of Distant Earth is a record composed by Mike Oldfield, wonderful ear candy, and officially approved by Arthur C. Clarke. It opens up soaring perspectives of Man travelling through space (except for the ending, when it suddenly turns into world music). It was directly inspired by Clarke's 1986 novel of the same title, loved by some, but which I did not find as memorable as his masterpieces Childhood's End (1953), The City and the Stars (1956), and Rendezvous With Rama (1973); I have not read 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) or The Fountains of Paradise (1979) yet! And, besides his very good short stories, he has also written a novelette called A Meeting with Medusa (1971) which I am most eager to read! I wish Lovecraft and CAS could have experienced those books.

Here's a fun little article about Gene Wolfe's unwritten novella The Feast of Saint Catherine, which served as the basis for the masterpiece that is The Book of the New Sun. Wolfe was a massive CAS fan.

[ultan.org.uk]

In case you've never read The Book of the New Sun, make sure you do. There's nothing quite like it.

The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... Gene Wolfe's ... masterpiece that is The Book of the New Sun. Wolfe was a massive CAS fan.
>
> In case you've never read The Book of the New Sun,
> make sure you do. There's nothing quite like it.


I eagerly shall get around to Gene Wolfe, Michael Moorcock, and Leigh Brackett.

GENE WOLFE: I read the first volume of THE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN, and disliked it enough to stop reading, seeing no hope I would change my mind. What exactly is good about them?

MICHAEL MOORCOCK: Long ago, I was able to partially enjoy Moorcock's early ELRIC stories under certain misunderstandings as to the author's intent. After his success with ELRIC, he set out to prove he was a sophisticated adult author, mainly by poking down his nose at his betters. If he wrote anything worthwhile since, I don't know what it could be. And ELRIC too was ultimately a failure, IMHO.

LEIGH BRACKETT: I remember enjoying some of Leigh Brackett's Eric John Stark stories.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> MICHAEL MOORCOCK: Long ago, I was able to
> partially enjoy Moorcock's early ELRIC stories ... If
> he wrote anything worthwhile since, I don't know
> what it could be. ...
>

From my research, and from general opinion, The History of the Runestaff books and The Swords of Corum trilogy seem the most interesting. But I wouldn't know, since I have not read them. From these and from the Elric saga, I expect a literary light, yet richly imaginative, science fantasy.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GENE WOLFE: I read the first volume of THE BOOK
> OF THE NEW SUN, and disliked it enough to stop
> reading, seeing no hope I would change my mind.

Platypus, what are some of the things you disliked? I tend to be a fairly critical reader, myself, sense that you are similar, and would like to hear specifics.

E.g., one of my complaints about most series is that beyond a point, the author works far too hard to preserve a character or characters so as to be able to continue to use them as an on-going income stream. To a degree, first person series seem to avoid this by starting with the unspoken understanding that the narrative voice must have survived the ordeals revealed in the novel in order to relate then at a later date, which seems to set reader expectancies to support a certain degree of implausibility.

Another work-around seems to be to have the narrative POV be a summoned spirit, which hedges all bets. This can work fairly well.

Therefore, the Marlowe novels of Chandler, and the Flashman series by Fraser both work for me pretty well, while Kull and Conan do not.

Then you have series which are setting-centric, like Zothique, rather than character-centric, like Fahfred & the Grey Mouser.



> What exactly is good about them?
>
> MICHAEL MOORCOCK: Long ago, I was able to
> partially enjoy Moorcock's early ELRIC stories
> under certain misunderstandings as to the author's
> intent. After his success with ELRIC, he set out
> to prove he was a sophisticated adult author,
> mainly by poking down his nose at his betters. If
> he wrote anything worthwhile since, I don't know
> what it could be. And ELRIC too was ultimately a
> failure, IMHO.
>
> LEIGH BRACKETT: I remember enjoying some of Leigh
> Brackett's Eric John Stark stories.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My memory is that the first part of The Shadow of the Torturer was easily the strongest - the section leading up to Severian’s eviction from the guild - but that this was followed by a peculiar, picaresque sequence of events that (aside from completely undermining the tone established in the opening section) left me wondering what exactly I was reading - and not in a good way.

I read pretty much everything Mike Moorcock wrote up until about 1980. I actually think subsequent incarnations of the Eternal Champion were an improvement on the original - ie, Elric - as Moorcock’s attitude towards the concept evolved as he wrote. The two Corum trilogies would be personal favourites - maybe because they incorporate Irish mythology - but a lot of his stuff has dated pretty badly, something which struck me when I was re-reading the second Corum trilogy a few weeks ago.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From my research, and from general opinion, The
> History of the Runestaff books and The Swords of
> Corum trilogy seem the most interesting.

And The Chronicles of Castle Brass, which is the continuation after Runestaff.

The New Sun is not something you read once. The narrator is extremely unreliable, the castles and towers are not castles and towers, the Ascians are not Asians but North Americans, the warrior of a dead world is an astronaut, etc.

The book is full of seemingly strange and awkward sentences that make all the sense in the world at the second, third or fourth reading and you can easily find yourself constantly discovering new things. And even before that I still remember it took me a bunch of pages to realise the moonlight, and hence the night itself, is actually green, despite the fact it's clearly described as green at the very beginning. I guess I took it as a figure of speech or something, haha.

Oh yeah, whenever he reminds you of his perfect memory it means he's about to tell a lie. Either that or he died and another Severian took over.

Thanks for the tip, Sojourner.

Sawfish Wrote:
---------------------------------------------------
> Platypus Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> > GENE WOLFE: I read the first volume of THE
> > BOOK
> > OF THE NEW SUN, and disliked it enough to stop
> > reading, seeing no hope I would change my mind.
>
> Platypus, what are some of the things you
> disliked?

I don't remember it well enough to be analytical. I just did not enjoy it, and saw no reason to proceed to the next volume. I did not care for Severian. I did not love him or hate him. I did not care whether he lived or died. I did not care who he slept with. I did not care who he tortured. I did not want to follow his adventures.

One thought did occur to me, that I hesitate to mention, for fear that those who liked the volume will be offended. But I just have to mention the elephant in the room. The series has a undertone (admittedly vague) of sado-eroticism. I'm just not into that sort of thing (this is not moral posturing; it just happens to be true). Why then, should I expect to enjoy a series about a sexy torturer protagonist? This is not a series that, by the cover art and blurbs, I would ever have been tempted to pick up on my own. I started reading it only because it was recommended as some kind of classic. Someone even said that the author was a Catholic and worked Catholic themes into his work. Well, I happen to be Catholic, so I was curious. But ... the only "Catholic" themes that I could detect were ... uh ... those connected with torture (if you want to count that somehow).

Someone mentioned above the picaresque quality of the second half of the first volume, which I do vaguely recall. This is the sort of thing that I have enjoyed in other contexts. In particular, I very much enjoyed both of the picaresque novels about Cugel the Clever by Jack Vance. Note that Cugel is a complete scumbag, much worse (as far as I can tell) than Severian. So, again, my ability to enjoy Cugel's adventures has nothing to do Cugel being a morally upstanding person.

I have often heard that Severian is an unreliable narrator. However, I could detect, in the first volume, no sense of irony or sense of humor, such as I was able to detect in the Cugel novels. It all seemed so deadly serious and humorless. I saw no reason to take what I was reading at anything other than face value, Telling me that I will have to read the entire series 3 times in order to fully appreciate its nuances is not particularly encouraging, when, as things stand, I can see no particular reason to read it through even once.

Quote:

Platypus:
One thought did occur to me, that I hesitate to mention, for fear that those who liked the volume will be offended. But I just have to mention the elephant in the room. The series has a undertone (admittedly vague) of sado-eroticism.

I'd like to diverge here; I think that this is an important observation and it has a general application, so far as I'm concerned.

Much has been said in praise of the TV series "Game of Thrones". While I liked and enjoyed it for quite a while, it came to me that one of the subtle, but significant, reasons I liked watching it was that it was very close to soft-core porn.

Yep. That's what set the hook, in my opinion.

I now suspect that these sub-textual appeals are more common than I had first realized, simple rube that I am.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I believe Wolfe converted to Catholicism only once he got married so his perspective is not one of a born Catholic but of a converted one. I don't know how much that means to you but even if it doesn't I'm sure you can draw a parallel to an abandoned child trained to torture people who eventually and slowly tries his very flawed best to find a place by the Increate's side.

Always liked this quote.

Quote:

“It has been remarked thousands of times that Christ died under torture. Many of us have read so often that he was a “humble carpenter” that we feel a little surge of nausea on seeing the words yet again. But no one ever seems to notice that the instruments of torture were wood, nails, and a hammer; that the man who built the cross was undoubtedly a carpenter too; that the man who hammered in the nails was as much a carpenter as a soldier, as much a carpenter as a torturer. Very few seem even to have noticed that although Christ was a “humble carpenter,” the only object we are specifically told he made was not a table or a chair, but a whip.”

― Gene Wolfe, Castle of Days

I would suggest trying out The Book of the Long Sun since the protagonist might be more to your liking, but the New Sun, the Long Sun and the Short Sun are all considered parts of the Solar Cycle and I suspect the experience might be significantly hampered by skipping one or two.

Quote:

A young priest Patera Silk tries to save his manteion (neighborhood church and school) from destruction by a ruthless crime lord. As he learns more about his world, a vast generation ship called the Whorl, he learns to distrust the gods he has worshiped and to revere the supposedly minor god known as The Outsider who has enlightened him.

Anyway, if you don't like it, you don't like it. It is what it is. But I do believe you're missing a lot. There are layers upon layers here that can hardly be found in any other work of speculative fiction.

Re Wolfe. I actually much preferred the Starbridge Chronicles by Paul Park (the first two books, anyhow) which are very similar tonally to Wolfe (ie, vivid, literary, opaque) but which I found much more engaging.

Re Christ. I do remember some work of literary fiction (not The Last Temptation) which covered Christ's early years and had him working as a carpenter, his primary source of income being the manufacture of crucifixes, largely because - in the book's re-working of the gospels - he was as bad a carpenter as he was a good preacher, and incapable of making anything else. I always found this pretty improbable; it's far more likely crucifixes were made by ordinary Roman soldiers, who would have had the necessary skills to do so.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2 Mar 21 | 05:22PM by Cathbad.

I mean, how hard can it be to make a crucifix?

I always thought that they were ready-made and in stock, like kitchen cabinets.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More than likely. They probably came in different sizes, too (ie, small, medium and large).

;)

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More than likely. They probably came in different
> sizes, too (ie, small, medium and large).


Exactly how I see it, too.

;^)

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe Wolfe converted to Catholicism only once
> he got married so his perspective is not one of a
> born Catholic but of a converted one. I don't know
> how much that means to you but even if it doesn't
> I'm sure you can draw a parallel to an abandoned
> child trained to torture people who eventually and
> slowly tries his very flawed best to find a place
> by the Increate's side.

I was merely mentioning that what originally piqued my interest was not the cover art or blurbs but another equally-unreliable indicator. But of course, I am way past that now. I have read the first volume, and I did not like it.

Reading the first book as a teenager, I didn’t attribute Severian’s profession to some Catholic hang-up. I wasn’t aware that Wolfe was a devout Catholic, only that he had served in Korea, and I assumed that this was the key influence - ie, I thought the book had been written by a vet who hadn’t really processed his issues, with the themes of torture and interrogation and the element of emotional detachment supporting this theory.

And who knows? It could be true. I don’t think it’s any more or less credible than assuming Wolfe’s catholicism was a factor.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reading the first book as a teenager, I didn’t
> attribute Severian’s profession to some Catholic
> hang-up. I wasn’t aware that Wolfe was a devout
> Catholic, only that he had served in Korea, and I
> assumed that this was the key influence - ie, I
> thought the book had been written by a vet who
> hadn’t really processed his issues, with the
> themes of torture and interrogation and the
> element of emotional detachment supporting this
> theory.
>
> And who knows? It could be true. I don’t think
> it’s any more or less credible than assuming
> Wolfe’s catholicism was a factor.

A disquieting thought, now...

Perhaps no one has noticed, but it certainly seems that some gut level of interest, or attraction to, torture, or physical disadvantage to other humans, has broad cross-cultural appeal, and perhaps always has.

Why is that?

I mean, I suspect that every culture has its niche of torture porn/snuff porn. If true, what is the basic, underlying commonality?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My memory of the book is that Wolfe doesn’t go into much detail - it’s all the more effective for being implicit. It’s also a skill-set that Severian doesn’t seem to put to much use outside the guild. He’s like a gunslinger who does very little gun-slinging. So in fairness to Wolfe, I don’t think the book is about exploiting a prurient interest in torture. It’s more about establishing a character with a very disquieting profession.

Some things make for compulsive watching and torture scenes are a case in point (e.g. ‘Marathon Man’). There’s also that sense of catharsis when the hero is tortured, then turns the table on his tormentors.

"There’s also that sense of catharsis when the hero is tortured, then turns the table on his tormentors."

This doesn't account for attendance at public executions, etc.

Just to be clear, don't think that the author's background as a Catholic or a vet of Korea accounts for his apparent choice of a torturer as a protagonist.

It's just another weirdo thing about humans, I'm afraid.

There are still some very brutal and direct drives hard-wired into the species, in my opinion, and art kinda deals with it by brushing around the edges sometimes, like the Russian roulette scene in Deer Hunter.

I think that Ligotti flirts with stuff like this somewhat.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I mean, how hard can it be to make a crucifix?


Well, the easy part is making the cross. The hard part is getting or making a Jesus to affix to it.

I'm a bit slow. When I first read this thread, I could not figure why Jesus the carpenter would be manufacturing crucifixes, even in a silly work of fiction. It belatedly occurred to me that "crucifix" was intended to mean "cross for crucifixion".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 6 Mar 21 | 02:15PM by Platypus.

My bad! I guess selling mementos of an event before it actually happened would have shown a lot of foresight on J.C.’s part? But then he is the Son of God.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 6 Mar 21 | 02:35PM by Cathbad.

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My bad! I guess selling mementos of an event
> before it actually happened would have shown a lot
> of foresight on J.C.’s part? But then he is the
> Son of God.


Maybe you're right! Another miracle!

If there's one thing I can recall on my trips to Tijuana back in the 60s, when I was in college, is that there sure were a lot of street vendors trying to sell crucifixes, even to my Jewish room-mate, who often accompanied me.

That, and multicolored bullwhips.

So anyway, these crucifixes (and bullwhips) had to come from somewhere, right?

A sort of cottage industry...

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 6 Mar 21 | 04:14PM by Sawfish.

Like Platypus says, carving a cross out of wood is pretty straightforward. Carving the figure nailed to it is a bit trickier. My dad was always struck by how Christianity - a religion promoting brotherly love - relied on such a gruesome image as its calling card.

Whatever about a crucifix, why did the street vendors think anybody might be interested in buying a bullwhip?

Cathbad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like Platypus says, carving a cross out of wood is
> pretty straightforward. Carving the figure nailed
> to it is a bit trickier. My dad was always struck
> by how Christianity - a religion promoting
> brotherly love - relied on such a gruesome image
> as its calling card.
>
> Whatever about a crucifix, why did the street
> vendors think anybody might be interested in
> buying a bullwhip?


Not sure, my best guess is that Mexicans primarily (or mostly) of native indigenous descent ("los indios", according to those of european descent) may be confused about the significance of the crucifixion--they may actually think that the religion is centered on the *acts* of scourging and crucifixion, rather than on the specific person being scourged and crucified, and so these are sort of fetish items.

You know, like the little souvenir bats you can buy at Dodger Stadium.

Or, it could be simply that they are cheap and easy to make.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hardcore catholicism was already dying out in Ireland when I was a kid, but you still had the annual pilgrimage up Croagh Patrick - a large, stone-covered mountain in the west of Ireland. The more devout did it barefoot while flagellating themselves.

A lot of that sort of religious paraphinalia (ie, scourges etc) could be bought from the church itself and were either made by orphans working in the church’s ‘industrial schools’ or perhaps further afield - ie, countries like the Philippines, where the church had a presence. Nice!

"...A lot of that sort of religious paraphinalia (ie, scourges etc) could be bought from the church itself and were either made by orphans working in the church’s ‘industrial schools’ "

Gosh, this sounds a lot like the SS selling non-functional gas masks, made by the inmates of a forced labor camp, to those entering the gas chambers.

Except that the SS never did that--maybe they weren't comfortable going that far...

;^)

Time for me to reign it in, huh? :^)

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~