HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kat@lagrange.WPI.EDU (Flame's Passion)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Fictitious Fiction
Keywords: Morgenstern, Garp, Trout
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:24:58 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: lagrange.wpi.edu

In article <1992Oct05.233655.8162@sco.com> evanh@sco.COM (Evan Hunt) writes:
>
>nickles@sage.cc.purdue.edu (john a nickles) writes:
>>As the subject line says, I am looking for books (or movies or plays) in
>>which reference is made to a book, movie or play that does not really exist.
>
A.S. Byatt's book _Possession_ (I think) makes reference to poets and poems
that never existed.  I'm not sure, though.  The story centers around a study
of Randolph Ash and his affair with Christabel LaMotte.  This study was done
by the two main characters.  Anyway, I'm not sure if Ash and Lamotte are
fake or not... Byatt makes them quite believable.

Anyone else read this? I found this to be a fascinating book.  It combines
a good story with some wonderful poetry.

kat
 ***************************************************************************
      Christina Freeman                                 kat@wpi.wpi.edu
		"Was there not, from the first, more poison in
 			  your nature than in mine?" 
                           - _Rappaccini's Daughter_ 
			      Nathaniel Hawthorne
                  ********************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: myboy@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Lewis Murtaugh)
Subject: Re: Philately (will get you nowhere)
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 01:13:10 GMT

In article <CB.92Oct9143010@tamarack13.timbuk> cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:
>
>From an old Firesign Theater album (from memory):
>
>Mudhead: "After school, I'm going to the Philatalists' Club!"
>
>Porgey:  "I didn't know you masturbated!"
>
You got it backwards... it's Porgey Tirebiter that is the straight man, going
to the philatalists' club, and Mudhead that makes the masturbation joke. 
Ensued by...

 Mudhead:  I didn't know you masturbated!

 Porgey: Aww, creepies, Mudhead -- where's your school spirit?

 Mudhead: In the rumble seat -- want a snort?

[hilarity follows]


>Chris Brewster
>cb@cray.com

Charles Murtaugh
(Another Firesign Theatre addict)
From: twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Fictitious Fiction
Keywords: Margaret Atwood
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:05:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct14.210512.15584
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct14.144505.1348@netwise.com> hilary@netwise.com 
(Hilary Lane) writes:
>
>I also participated in a book discussion group about Byatt (whose sister is
>Margaret Atwood??? I think). A lot of people think that she actually hates
>women because she makes them into unpleasant characters. I didn't catch
>that when I read it, but on reflection, that could be true. 

Margaret Drabble is Byatt's sister. 

And I realize that the subject of your comment is Byatt and not Atwood, 
but it reminds me:  the University of Washington is very big on self- 
improvement for the members of its little community, so I am from time to 
time afflicted with personality assessments (disguised as "workstyle," ugh, 
assessments), seminars and workshops and classes in which some hyperactive 
instructor who has clearly taken enthusiasm lessons from The Original 
Kindergarten Teacher is inevitably into Role-Playing (double ugh).  A few 
months ago I was submitting to one of these pseudo-classes in which we 
used a text called _Wishcraft: How to Get What You Really Want_ (Barbara 
Sher, and though I'm not a fan of this book genre can say that if you 
like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing you will like -- as 
Abraham Lincoln once said). 

One of the exercises involved picking a handful of people to be your 
True Family and then writing down a comment about yourself made by each
one of them.  My own dear little family included Margaret Atwood as 
an older cousin, as I felt I could count on her to be refreshingly 
candid about my shortcomings.  (This was actually sabotage as the 
purpose of the exercise was to make sure that everyone you chose said 
only Positive Things about you, triple ugh.) 

No, I shan't tell you what she said (but it was embarrassing, funny, 
and *amazingly* accurate) 

I mean, we'd hardly *met*... 

--Barbara 
(who discovered there was *no way* she could get what she really wanted)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: BL.JYC@forsythe.stanford.edu (Jon Corelis)
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up again.
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:43:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.074337.43677@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>,
miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:

>In article <Bvs8Jy.9Kz@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, nickles@sage.cc.purdue.edu (john a nickles) writes:
>>
>>  My choice for great yet unreadable book is (hands down) Thomas Hardy's
>> Jude The Obscure.
>
>Has *anyone* ever said _Jude the Obscure_ was great?  I thought it was
>considered one of his duds.
>

   I believe the definitive judgement on this work was: "Jude the
Obscure!  Jude the Obscene!  June the Obscude!  Obs the June Moon!"

   A prize, consisting of hearty congratulations, will be awarded to the
first person who posts the source of that judgement.
From: bsmith@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Brian Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: argument from buoyancy (was ...from gravity)
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:21:21 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO

In rec.arts.books, wismith@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (William R. Smith) writes:

    Excellent.  Now could someone post one for cricket.  I've never been
    able to figure that out.

You have two sides; one out in the field and one in.

Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out, he
comes in and the next man goes in until he's out.

When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side
that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.

Sometimes you get men still in and not out.

When both sides have been in and out, including the not outs, that's
the end of the game.

Howzat!

B.S! (it's not original, I copied it from a tea-towel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: RE: WANTED: ""The Profit"" by Kehlog Albran
Organization: Clark University
Date: 15 OCT 92 21:37:16 GMT

>>twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Oct15.111959.4719@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> >>harish@theory.lcs.mit.ed
>>>(Harish Devarajan) writes:
>>>Hi all.  I'm looking for the book mentioned above ("The Profit" by
>>>Kehlog "Arguments with furniture are rarely productive" Albran).
>>
>>The book you're looking for is called THE PROPHET.  It was written
>>by Kahlil Gibran.  (Kehlog Albran sounds like the name of a popular
>>breakfast cereal.)
>>
>>--Barbara
>
>I think he got it right, actually; _The Profit_ is a parody of _The Prophet_.
>                                                        --Samuel Bates
>                                                          samuel@cs.wisc.edu

He *did* get it right.  It's a pretty hilarious parody, right down to the
sepia drawing of the "author" on the cream-colored cover.  I have no idea
if it's still in print.  In Boston, you should try the Charlesbank
Bookshop for information.

Heather
HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Philately (will get you nowhere)
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:30:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: tamarack.CB.92Oct9143010
Organization: pubs
In-reply-to: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com's message of Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:17:30 GMT


From an old Firesign Theater album (from memory):

Mudhead: "After school, I'm going to the Philatalists' Club!"

Porgey:  "I didn't know you masturbated!"

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: wismith@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (William R. Smith)
Subject: Re: basketball books? (was Re: Baseball Books?)
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 23:10:37 GMT

Fiona Webster writes:

	People are always talking about baseball books.  Are there such
	things as *basketball* books?  

			<<< deletes >>>

	I'm really more interested in *college*
	basketball than pro, although I suppose I wouldn't be picky if the
	book were well-written.  Also: non-fiction would be better than fiction,
	but either would do.




I think I saw a review of a new book about Pete Maravitch (sp?).  Since
I only follow basketball when the Blazers are in the playoffs, I didn't
read the review.  You might want to ask your friendly neighborhood
book seller.



William Sburgfort Smith
Intel, SSD
From: nikolay@husc10.harvard.edu (Philip Nikolayev)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Reinforced Burns (was Re: Enforced Shakespeare?)
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:04:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc10.NIKOLAY.92Oct7110416
Distribution: na
Organization: Poets for Physics
In-reply-to: lnh@soliton.physics.arizona.edu's message of 1 Oct 92 21:13:17 GMT

On 1 Oct 92 21:13:17 GMT, lnh@soliton.physics.arizona.edu 
(sometimes a Wombat) said:

> Francis Muir writes:
>>
>>In Soviet Russia Burns was certainly more widely distributed than 
>>any other foreign poet -- maybe any other poet. 

Not!!!!!!

[SaW]
> Now, I did know that Burns was well known in Commonwealth, and
> Near-'wealth countries.  But this does surprise me.  On reflection, I
> can see how in *Soviet* Russia, Burns would be popular; and I can see
> that he would be easier for a non-native speaker of English to 
> comprehend.

Yes, especially in shitty translation. Few in Russia can read
the prince o' poets an' o' ploughmen in the original.

>>Read Burns and find out why. 

> I have.  I don't like him, much.  I prefer Tom Moore, actually, and
> mideival minstralry.

Incidentally, an important aspect of Burns' poetry is often
overlooked. He was the most important Masonic poet in England
at his time (along with Christopher Smart, possibly), and poet
laureate of the lodges. For example, see 'The Master's Apron',
which begins:

      Ther's mony a badge that's unco braw;
             Wi ribbon, lace and tape on;
      Let kings an' princes wear them a'
             Gie me the Master's apron!

Quaint, ain't it, tho'?

> 	Larry "Divertion" Hammer

Philip Nikolayev at nikolay@husc.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU (James Alexander Chokey)
Subject: Re: She's baaaaack.....Camille Paglia
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 20:00:21 GMT

In article <1b0q1gINNr98@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (John Wojdylo) writes:
>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>
>
>>I'm interested in criticism of the "social-constructionist" methodology that
>>Paglia has brought to my attention.  If this isn't the correct forum for
>>this, what is?
>
>The shit house. You can wank yourself there without disturbing the
>peace.
>

	What intellectual caliber!  What brilliance!  What insight!  I 
never cease to be astounded by the high level of of discussion on this 
newsgroup!  

	*sarcasm off*

	With people like John Wojdylo in the country, it's no wonder that 
Australians are so often stereotyped as being rude, uncultured, boors.  A pity,
really.

	*flame off*

	Anyway, in answer to Tim's question, there probably is no place on 
the net that's possible to have an intelligent discussion of any sort of
critical theory.  The most appropriate place is probably alt.postmodern--
especially since they so rarely talk about postmodernism there--  but that
group also has its share of cranks and caitiffs.  You'd probably find a
more receptive audience for such issues nonetheless.

	--  Jim C. <jchokey@leland.stanford.edu>
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: 1992 Nobel Prize
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:25:54 GMT



I wrote:
 
> spg@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Stephen P. Guthrie) writes:
 
>> Just announced: winner of 1992 Nobel Prize for Literature is
 
>>       Derek Walcott, from the Caribbean island nation of St.Lucia
 
>> My question: who the heck is this? I've never heard of him before?
>> Is he a poet? novelist? Are his books in print? I don't recall ever
>> seeing any?
 
 
> A quick stop at the Rizzoli's downstairs reveals that he is a poet and
> playwright.
 
> They had one of his books -- an 8000 line poem called OMEROS.  There
> was no "About the author" page -- but it looks like he has put out
> several collections of poetry, and has written six or seven plays.
 
> It also appears that he writes in English.
 
This just in:
 
        He was given the prize for "A poetic oevre of great luminosity,
        sustained by a historical vision, the outcome of a multicultural
        commitment."
 
He was born in St. Lucia -- but was referred to as being from Trinidad.
He moved to Trinidad in 1953.
 
He teaches English Literature and Writing at Boston University.
 
 
 
Mark
From: ian@spider.co.uk (Ian Heavens)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Seeking: incisive essayists, any race, creed, or gender
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:11:44 GMT
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.

Octavio Paz, "Alternating Currents"
Oscar Wilde, "The Soul of Man Under Socialism"
Voltaire, Miguel Unamuno, etc.

ian
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull)
Subject: Re: Ted Williams (was Re: Baseball etc. etc.)
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:23:31 GMT


Speaking of Ted Williams and _Ball Four_ (weren't we?), I treasure the
mantra Bouton describes hearing during Williams' batting practice:

(Muttered under his breath): "I'm Ted fucking WILLIAMS" --smash--
"of the major fucking LEAGUES"--smash-- etc.

I use it myself when in serious need.

Kate


-- 
- - - - - - - -
kate@cactus.org
Be the voice of night and Florida in my ear.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Limpopo?
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 8 Oct 92 22:57:12

"All set about with fever trees".  What's a fever tree, Fido?
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mcrosby@nyx.cs.du.edu (Matthew Crosby)
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up again.
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 01:53:33 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.074337.43677@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>In article <Bvs8Jy.9Kz@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, nickles@sage.cc.purdue.edu (john a nickles) writes:
>> 
>>  My choice for great yet unreadable book is (hands down) Thomas Hardy's
>> Jude The Obscure. 
>
>Has *anyone* ever said _Jude the Obscure_ was great?  I thought it was
>considered one of his duds.
>
>> I refer specifically to the Little Father Time incident.
>> When I read "Becus we are too meny", I had to throw the book across the room.
>> I eventually finished the book, but it didn't get any better.
>> 
>> There are other writers I have read and hated (Theodore Drieser) others
>> I was bored by (Dorothy Richardson PILGRAMAGE (4 volumes of pure nothing))
>> but Hardy remains the one writer I admire greatly but will not read.
>
>Hardy's *poetry* is really worth reading (IMO of course; no doubt
>eventually there'll be a thread on
>great-but-yet-somehow-not-great-or-could-the-problem-possibly-be-in-ourselves
>poetry... (boy did that bedazzle my editor...)
>-- 

I agree totally.  At school, we did Hardy right after the romantics, and believe
me--I much prefer his nice "realism" to all that romantic twiddle about skylarks
and daffodils.  As to Jude the Obscure, I agree, but you have to put it in 
context.  I personally find *most* Victorian authors put me to sleep.  Hardy
is relatively exciting compared to say...Pride and Prejudice (another "good
but I hate reading it type thing) or Dickens.

On the other hand, I didn't mind Tess of the D'Urbervilles too much.
Also, I know someone who is actually from the area where Hardy lived, and she
says that she gets a lot out of the books, because she has been to many of the
places he mentions, and even knows a family by the name of Doberfield!!!
From: turkel@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Turkel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Clarification, Release 2.0
Date: 16 Oct 1992 18:34:32 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca
Originator: turkel@unixg.ubc.ca


>Bill Turkel writes:

>	In a recent post I requested book recommendations for studies of
>	or by Rationalists, especially re modern thinkers.  I meant 
>	'contemporary' not 'modern', since, of course, philosophers from 
>	Descartes onward are 'modern'.  

>You don't mean "contemporary" either. You mean "present-day". Plato & 
>Aristotle were contemporaries.

>						Philolog

Thanks, Philolog.  By "contemporary" I mean *my* contemporaries.

Bill (you may be that old, but I'm a spring chicken)
turkel@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: lgs57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: John Gardner (both)
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:23:38 GMT

I think Ian Fleming is definitely a better writer than John Gardner.  I've
read about five of John Gardner's James Bond and about three of Ian Fleming's.
John Gardner is only good if one is desperate to read a 'James Bond story'.  I
do think his books would make fine movies however.  The problem with all such
authors who write about another author's character is that the character
doesn't change or grow.  It's the same with the Star Trek: The Next Generation
books.  At the end of the book, you (the reader) know that all the crew
members with recurring roles on the series will survive and that no
substantial changes will have occurred.  I have stopped buying any more books of this
type (except Robert Goldsborough's Nero Wolfe series) because I think it's
better to read a completely new work by an author.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: harper@oracorp.com (Douglas Harper)
Subject: Re: More Notes from the Decline
Organization: ORA Corporation, Ithaca, New York
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:11:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.173625.6908@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>In article <12677@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>>Consider yourself fortunate that's all that being done.  A friend of
>>mine was driving back from San Francisco.  A man drove up next to
>>him, and, apparently expressing his feelings about the Bush/Quayle
>>bumper sticker on my friend's car, proceeded to mouth various 
>>obscenities.  My friend smiled back, and said, "Have a nice day!"
>>The raving lunatic then picked up and waved a handgun at my friend.
>>Fortunately, the nice Highway Patrolman two cars back saw all this,
>>and pulled the raving Democrat over.
>
>I take this story as a disproof of the commonly asserted proposition that
>Democrats are opposed to the Second Amendment's guarantee of the right of
>the people to keep and bear arms.

But it's not a disproof---people can be hypocrites, after all.
Remember Carl Rowan?

For those of you who missed it, Carl Rowan is a Democrat who has often
written in opposition to the private ownership of guns in his
syndicated column, but who owned a gun and pulled it on an intruder.

-- 
Douglas Harper | harper@oracorp.com | +1 (607) 277-2020
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jane@bohra.cpg.oz.au (Jane Lean)
Subject: Re: Literature Students/Small World
Organization: Computer Power Software
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 01:20:51 GMT

In article <1aslk5INNfht@agate.berkeley.edu> maverick@fir.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Vance Maverick) writes:
>
> People do say things like "I didn't enjoy it, but I know it was
> good"; I regard this as an example of the willing submission to
> authority which made Fascism possible.

Sorry, I have to take issue with this one.  Something can be movingly, 
soul-wrenchingly, beautifully written ("Good" in most people's estimation),
and yet not _enjoyable_.  I can't think of an example off the top of my
head, but do people know what I mean?

You could be glad as glad as glad you read something, but not have 
_enjoyed_ it.

Jane (am I being pedantic here?)
-- 
Jane Lean                                                 jane@bohra.cpg.oz.au
CP Software Export Pty Ltd                               Phone:  +61-3-8230213
ACN 006 640 133  (A Division         "They're gonna hang some new stars in the 
of the Computer Power Group)          heavens tonight."     -- Laurie Anderson
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up again.
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:58:30 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Oct9.202118.15847@cas.org> lgs57@cas.org writes:
>With every page of the Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, I found myself
>slowing down and down.  I did finally finish the book but it took me about 3
>hours.  (Typically I would have read a book that length in about an hour.)

Which leads me to yet another spinoff of this thread:  What books would
you rather hear discussed than have to read yourself?  This one tops my
list.  I've really enjoyed the discussions I've both listened to and
participated in about it, but the book itself is mighty slow going.  


-- 
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:12:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: The White Man's Burden of Proof - New words!!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books

In rec.arts.books, wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:

> Dug Cunt-storm writes:

Hehe.  This reminds me so much of high school.
> 
> 
> >In rec.arts.books, wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:
> 
> >> 
> >> >                                             -- jf
> >> 
> >> My dear James-filler, 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 	There once was a fucking liar called Quarnstorm
> >> 	Who could not resist the occassional barnstorm
> >> 	But Dougie's dick having been bit
> >> 	Re-emerged as a dark shit
> >> 	On VDU screens all over the U.S.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Ain't that sweet ?
> 
> >You, know, I think I like it.  It has a certain charm.  And since
> >it is about me, I find it inherently fascinating.
> 
> I'm so glad you like it. Here's another one:
> 
> 
> 	Quarnstorm, a cunt of a liar is he
> 	Drinks menstrual blood 'n pee
> 	Fucks over them blacks with glee
> 	Votes for Quayle, singing "Yippee! Yippee!"

Yes, this is good too.  Soon you will have an entire volume
composed of nothing but poetic attacks on me.  It will
be very impressive.   I am forced to wonder why you invest
the time, however.  Nevertheless, I am flattered.       
> 
> 
> >Quite lovely.  I hope it finds its way into your collected works.
> >I would be honored and humbled at the very same time.
> 
> 
> 	You certainly will be when Mike Morris ties you over a chair and
> 	butt fucks you with a stubby of SteinLager.

Do you think this is possible?  Wow, it is beyond my wildest dreams.

Hey, infidel.  Nice talking to you.  These little exchanges
brighten my day.  Your poetry is quite numinous, and I hope to
see more.

doug