HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Q about _Gravity's_Rainbow_
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:25:21
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
	<1992Mar29.194133.21609@Cadence.COM> <1992Mar30.045813.25844@eff.org>
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: mnemonic@eff.org's message of 30 Mar 92 04:58:13 GMT

In article <1992Mar30.045813.25844@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:

> Normally I wouldn't recommend literary critics where Pynchon is concerned,
> since he has made no secret of his own dislike of literary criticism, but
> these books amply demonstrate what any good reader may find in Pynchon's
> works, so they deserve citation here.

I'm curious where Pynchon's opinion about literary criticism can be
found.  As far as I know, his only published discussion of fiction is
in the introductions to Slow Learner, and I cannot recall any such
sentiment in that book.  Have I missed something?

By the way, Mike, good to have you back.  There's nothing quite like
one of those hundred-articles-in-rec.arts.books days. 

And, of course, I agree with this:

> So does Pynchon, actually. What seems to give you problems, though, is
> the fact that he assumes that the novel-reading public has learned a bit
> in the 100 years since Dostoyevsky wrote. GRAVITY'S RAINBOW is a
> quintessentially 20th-century novel--to complain because it doesn't follow
> the novelistic conventions of Dostoyevsky or (say) Dickens is like
> criticising these authors for failing to rely on the epsitolary form.

I can't really think of a less likely comparison than Pynchon and
Dostoyevsky.  About the only good thing I can say about that
comparison, in fact, is that it isn't quite as boring as those endless
essays linking Dostoyevsky and Tolstoi.
--
Matthew Austern              I dreamt I was being followed by a roving band of
(510) 644-2618               of young Republicans, all wearing the same suit,
matt@physics.berkeley.edu    taunting me and shouting, "Politically correct
austern@theorm.lbl.gov       multiculturist scum!"... They were going to make
austern@lbl.bitnet	     me kiss Jesse Helms's picture when I woke up.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Surveying readers of the Advocate (Was: Re: Wanted: Readers)
From: erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith)
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:22:45 GMT
Reply-To: erics@infoserv.com
Organization: Reigning Cats and Dogs
X-Mailer: uAccess - Mac Release: 1.5


In article <10388@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

> In California, it means a person that doesn't believe that there is
> anything right or wrong -- just what the government can force
> people to do.  Such people argue that right and wrong are
> absurd concepts, that human rights do not exist (except when
> their own ox is being gored), and that private property is not
> a right, but merely a privilege that can be taken away when
> the majority decides to.

This is an insult to liberals and Californians. But of course, consider
the source. I've never seen Clayton Cramer deal with particulars when
sweeping generalizations can be made.

> -- 
> Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
> "The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a
> favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace
> of God." -- Thomas Jefferson

Interesting quote, from a slaveholder.

How about this one:

"Our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country
against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government,
to support those invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other.
They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent
against the majority."          - James Madison


-----
Eric Smith
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.sex
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Subject: Re: Homosexualism
Organization: Lehman Brothers
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 16:08:54 GMT

asg@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:

>mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:

>>jfh@greenber.austin.ibm.com (John F Haugh II) writes:

>>Actually, you are right.  There is not one gene.  "Likes Women" is one
>>gene.  "Likes Fat sexual partner" is another.  "Likes White sexual partner"
>>is a third.  "Prefers Protestant sexual partner" is yet another gene.
>>And "prefers conservative sexual partner" is an oxymoron.

>       Oh good grief. You CAN'T BE SERIOUS!

Especially when taken in context with the rest of the article, I thought my
sarcasm was obvious.  Readers of rec.arts.books may well have known this, but
since I responded to an article which was crossposted to the other two groups,
I should have realized that my meaning might not be clear.  It is also one of
the few (somewhat) nasty responses I have posted.  Being out of character
might have added to this confusion.

I was responding to an article by someone who made a "logical" inference
that had no foundation.

So -- no, Bruce, I was not serious about the genes.  I was serious about
pointing out the lack of logic in Mr. Haugh's article.


Mark

My apologies to rec.arts.books for yet another non-book related article
on this subject.  Perhaps I can make up for it by recomending Mates'
book on Logic, for those who wish to learn something about logic before
posting an article.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: orourke@sophia.smith.edu (Joseph O'Rourke)
Subject: Re: Q about _Gravity's_Rainbow_
Organization: Smith College, Northampton, MA, US
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 13:48:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.174800.19856@infonode.ingr.com> 
	palmerc@palmerc@abulafia.b21.ingr.com (Christopher M. Palmer) writes:

>I don't have a lot of respect for non-representational art *if* I
>don't know that the artist is capable of representational art.

	Frank Stella may not be "capable" of representational art.
Does anyone know if his career includes a traditional representational
period?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker)
Subject: Re: Business Novels
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 10:26:58 GMT

In article <92104.132630FJM1@psuvm.psu.edu> FJM1@psuvm.psu.edu (Frank Mulhern) writes:
>I teach undergraduate senior business majors.  Right now I require them to
>read BABBITT by Sinclair Lewis.  Some students have asked me to recommend
>other novels for them to read.  Remarkably, many of these students have
>made it to the last semester or their senior year without reading any novels.
>I am looking for other business novels to recommend.  I'd prefer to avoid
>the businessman as tycoon types novels (e.g., THE JUNGLE, Upton Sinclair).
>I would like the students to get a feel for the nature of working is
>business.  If you have any ideas, pease send them to me.  Thanks.
>
>        Frank Mulhern   Department of Marketing
>                        Penn State 814-865-0232    FJM1 @ PSUVM

I liked THE RISE OF DAVID LEVINSKY by Abraham Cahan, 1917.  It is
a rags-to-riches story of a Russian Jewish immigrant who makes
his fortune in the clothing industry.  The book does place a good
deal of emphasis on the functioning of the business itself; the other
theme is Levinsky's ideals shifting from religious orthodoxy to
a liberal education to success in the business world.
From: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: booker prizewinner?
Date: 13 Apr 92 08:05:58 EST
Reply-To: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

Who won the Booker Prize for fiction this year (I heard it on Nat
Pub Radio several weeks ago but didn't note it down)? Has anyone
read the book that won the award? Opinions, reviews?

                                         eliot 
Internet: eliot.gelwan@channel1.com
    RIME: ->CHANNEL [R/O okay]
---
 EZ 1.37B #178  [in Brookline MA 10:22 pm, Sunday 04/12/92]
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA
From: dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Surveying readers of the Advocate (Was: Re: Wanted: Readers)
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:52:00 GMT
Reply-To: dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran)
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.; Campbell, CA

In article <10388@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink (Clayton Cramer) writes:
[to Mike Godwin]
>Maybe where you live "liberal" means something different.  In
>California, it means a person that doesn't believe that there is
>anything right or wrong -- just what the government can force
>people to do.  Such people argue that right and wrong are
>absurd concepts, that human rights do not exist (except when
>their own ox is being gored), and that private property is not
>a right, but merely a privilege that can be taken away when
>the majority decides to.
>
>Examples: Assemblyman Willie Brown, State Senator David Roberti.

Or maybe your definition is incorrect.  None of the people *I* know
define "liberal" the way you do, Clayton, and I live in California.  In
fact, I live in one of the most heavily populated sections of
California -- the San Francisco Bay Area.

Why don't you post about books for a change?  Here, I'll help: do you
know any good books about the American Revolution, ones that don't
isolate colonial culture, but put it in the context of the times?
Something of the order of BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM, but for the Revolution.
I get heartily sick of history books that are just facts, figures, and
battle reports.
-- 
     Doug Moran     | "Just because I wear this dress doesn't mean I don't put
{...}!hal.com!dougm | my panties on one leg at a time, if you know what I mean."
   dougm@hal.com    | "Not really."
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Business Novels
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:15:08 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <92104.132630FJM1@psuvm.psu.edu> FJM1@psuvm.psu.edu (Frank Mulhern) writes:
>I teach undergraduate senior business majors.  Right now I require them to
>read BABBITT by Sinclair Lewis.  Some students have asked me to recommend
>other novels for them to read.  Remarkably, many of these students have
>made it to the last semester or their senior year without reading any novels.
>I am looking for other business novels to recommend.  I'd prefer to avoid
>the businessman as tycoon types novels (e.g., THE JUNGLE, Upton Sinclair).
>I would like the students to get a feel for the nature of working is
>business.  If you have any ideas, pease send them to me.  Thanks.
>
>        Frank Mulhern   Department of Marketing
>                        Penn State 814-865-0232    FJM1 @ PSUVM

I recommend "The Mezzanine" by Nicholson Baker. Marvelous book, I thought.
True, it doesn't get beyond a single lunchhour in a corporate setting, but
it certainly has plenty to say about contemporary life in US business.

Paul
Xref: sparky alt.sex:13648 rec.arts.books:7603
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Homosexualism
Date: 24 Mar 92 20:58:05 GMT
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org

In article <1992Mar18.061447.11959@polari.com> nickn@polari.com writes:

>A first clue; anyone making such a sweeping generalization is obviously
>wrong wrong wrong. 

Including, I take it, the author of the sweeping generalization I quote here.


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,     |"Les vrais paradis sont les paradis
mnemonic@eff.org | qu'on a perdus."
(617) 864-0665   | 
EFF, Cambridge   |          --Marcel Proust
From: ryans@yang.earlham.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: read any good books lately?
Date: 14 Apr 92 06:16:58 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <sph0301.2@utsph.sph.uth.tmc.edu>, sph0301@utsph.sph.uth.tmc.edu (Kate Wilson) writes:
> In article <1992Apr6.225452.29417@cs.yale.edu> loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore) writes:
> 
>>This newsgroup has seemed kind of slow lately.  Is everybody too busy
>>reading books to post here any more?  :-)  What have you all been
>>reading?  
> 
> Time's Arrow (Martin Amis)
> Cold Sassy Tree (Olive Ann Burns)
> Molly Ivins Can't Say That, Can She? (Molly Ivins)
> Father Melancholy's Daughter (Gail Godwin)
> 
> kate
From: os360051@wvnvms.wvnet.edu (T. Kurt Bond)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: The Tolkien way..
Date: 11 Apr 92 20:56:54 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <morteng.34@loke.dhhalden.no>, 
morteng@loke.dhhalden.no (MORTEN GRAESBY) writes:
> Second: The other day I read a book by Lloyd Alexander titled The Book of 
> Three, a real Tolkien- style story with heros, dwarfs and evil men.
> The book has it's own "versions" of Frodo, Gandalf and Sauron. Hereby 
> recommended! (Well, Tolkien is still the superior, of course).
> Have any of you net- people read anything by this author? How's the other 
> books in the saga of Taran the Assistant Pig- Keeper? (Does he become a 
> hero?).

No, better yet: he becomes a person.

How odd; I'd never compared Alexander to Tolkien before.  Hmm.  I don't think
Alexander took his ideas directly from Tolkien (which the above seems to
imply), but rather from the same places that Tolkien took his.  If you read
the other books I think you'll find this mapping onto Tolkien doesn't really
apply.  And the Taran books have more of a Celtic flavor than Tolkien,
certainly.  

Gandalf and Sauron are easy (good wizard/bad guy), but who's Alexander's version
of Frodo?

All of his books seem to be aimed at the young adult market, but most of them
are enjoyable for adults too.  Some of my favorites are _The Marvellous
Misadventures of Sebastian_ (I hope I got the title correct) about a fiddle
player and _Westmark_, _Kestral_, and _The Begger Queen_, a short trilogy about
a printer's devil who gets involved in a politcal uprising.

--
T. Kurt Bond, tkb@mtnet2.wvnet.edu  or  os360051@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL)
Subject: Re: Unbearable Lightness of Being (was Re: Q about _Gravity's_Rainbow_)
Organization: University of Western Australia
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 12:47:37 GMT

wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu (David Wald) writes:

>In article <1992Apr10.055132.19393@uniwa.uwa.edu.au>
>wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:
>>[Ulysses] belongs to a class of art which remains aloof from the
>>reader/audience. It's like Kundera's "Unbearable Lightness .." (only
>>in this sense, of course - Ulysses is far more complex)

>I must have missed something when I read _Unbearable Lightness..._,

I meant that Kundera concerns himself with explicit meanings of words. This
is automatically a kind of aloofness, since with any explicit definition, the
meaning moves further away. Hence Kundera's "pencil sketch with no outline"
motif.



>then, since I felt none of the aloofness you mention.  In fact, the
>reason that I enjoyed the book was primarily my identification with
>the characters and the situations. 

This is odd, since Josef was meant to be an aloof character.


> My feelings for the structure and
>reasoning were secondary, and came later.

The structure conveys feeling. It is a peaceful novel.


>Perhaps if I read it again, I'll feel more distant from it.

You are mocking me. Cunt.


>-David
>--
>============================================================================
>David Wald                                           wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu
>   "Blessed are the peacocks, for they shall be called sonship of God"
>             -- Matt 5:9, from a faulty QuickVerse 2.0
>============================================================================


jw


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,soc.culture.british
From: aristea@sco.COM (Aristea Rizakos)
Subject: Re: Parkerbird
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 17:27:59 GMT

In article <1992Apr2.013111.11445@julian.uwo.ca> gardiner@lib.uwo.ca (Margaret Martin Gardiner) writes:
>In article <1992Apr2.011807.9418@julian.uwo.ca> gardiner@lib.uwo.ca (Margaret Martin Gardiner) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr1.135822.20609@leland.Stanford.EDU> francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
>>>Who was Nosey Parker? Was Dorothy Sayers' Inspector Parker named for him?
>>>And why Parkerbird?
>>>
>>>					Francis Muir
>>>
>>>francis@sep.stanford.edu
>>
>>This is my first post, so please have patience if I have difficulty.
>>Nosey Parker, I think, refers to Matthew Parker, Archbishop of
>>Canterbury, the first "Anglican" archbishop, during the reign of
>>Elizabeth I.  I recently read browsed some histories about this man
>>and remember seeing a reference.  Parkerbird eludes me.  Perhaps
>>someone else knows that one.
>>
>>Margaret MG
>>
>Sorry, I posted and then my husband decided he wanted to say why
>Matthew Parker was called Nosey Parker.  He was a conservative
>"Anglican" archbishop, hated as much by the Puritans, who wanted to
>see no Papist trappings, such as candles and special robes, in
>religious ceremonies, as by the Catholic party who had held sway under
>Queen Mary, who wanted all the old traditional forms.  Parker was the
>middle-of-the-roader and he held endless inquests and commissions
>around England to check on whether the new clergy were using some of
>the rituals of the Anglican Church (i.e. not being as bare and bleak
>as the Puritans wanted), but at the same time checking to make sure
>that the old clergy were not making use of the full Catholic
>trappings.
>
>Roger Gardiner
>
>
>
>


Why do you place quotation marks around the word Anglican, but not
Puritan or Catholic?  Just wondering......
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: gara@cs.toronto.edu (Gara Pruesse)
Subject: Re: suggestions for good fantasy/sf, mystery, for travel reading?
Summary: Sherri S. Tepper
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:55:21 GMT

According to jespah@milton.u.washington.edu (Kathleen Hunt):
>Hi -- I have a friend who is about to leave on a 3-month field season
>in Panama.  (She's an ecologist)  She's just mentioned that she wants to
>take a bunch of books along, and I'm touring the local used bookstores to
>put together a collection for her.  She particularly mentioned fantasy/sf
>novels -- books that don't require *too* much in-depth concentration, but
>that are well-written w/decent characterization.  Books to be read by 
>exhausted, muddy scientists during breaks in their work. We both recently read

I recommend Sherri S. Tepper's "Mavis Manyshaped" series as
entertaining light reading with a strong female main character.
Some of her other books, like _The Gate to Women's Country_, 
are also good reads, with more emphasis on feminist issues.
Her books are frequently found in used bookstores around here.

Cheers,
Gara
From: spb0457@zeus.tamu.edu (SubGenius)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Another tangent:  Good book I just read.
Date: 15 Apr 92 02:20:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


I'm sure most of you are familiar with Anthony Burgess' essay "99 Novels,"
in which he gives his (well informed) opinion on what the 99 best novels
written in the English language between 1939 and 1984 are.  I've been using 
it (or at least the parts I was unfamiliar with) as sort of a required
reading list.

Just finished reading Kingsley Amis' _The Anti-Death League_ and can't
state too strongly what an amazing book it is.  Damn the publishing 
establishment for letting it go out of print in the States, anyway (as far as
I know, Penguin UK is the only publisher with it currently in print).

If you'd like to see how bitter a novel can be, try finding a copy and giving
it a read (if you'd like to make a friend for life, try finding a copy and
sending it to me.  Along with a copy of Robert Nye's _Falstaff_.  Oh, how the 
imagination doth l*v* the frolicke).




-SubGenius

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: kemnitz@netcom.com (Greg Kemnitz)
Subject: Re: Homosexualism
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 18:58:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <44533@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> asg@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:
>In <1992Apr7.221338.18438@shearson.com> mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:
>
>>jfh@greenber.austin.ibm.com (John F Haugh II) writes:
>
>>Actually, you are right.  There is not one gene.  "Likes Women" is one
>>gene.  "Likes Fat sexual partner" is another.  "Likes White sexual partner"
>>is a third.  "Prefers Protestant sexual partner" is yet another gene.
>>And "prefers conservative sexual partner" is an oxymoron.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	Oh good grief. You CAN'T BE SERIOUS!
>
>
>			Bruce


Lighten up, Bruce--this is pretty darn funny.   







			Jon
			jon@postgres.berkeley.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.sex
From: mason@dante.uucp (Mason Jones)
Subject: Re: Homosexualism
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 16:31:35 GMT
Organization: Charnel House Prod.

zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:
: 
: MZ: 
: >:If that were what I was trying to say, I would have been a democrat; I am
: >:not, so I wasn't.  There is absolutely no reason why individual moral
: >:judgment must in any way depend on social consensus.
: 
: MJ:
: >You're dodging the point.  Let's narrow it down here.  Are you saying
: >that someone whose desires are what you personally consider to be
: >immoral should sublimate those desires?  That is indeed what is to
: >be inferred from your post.
: 
: Your rules of inference appear spurious; I challenge you to explicitly
: elaborate your reasoning.

Your post intimated that society's morals were the ones you considered to
be of importance; then above you narrowed it down to individual morals.

: In fact, what I'm saying is that someone whose
: desires are what he personally considers to be immoral should sublimate
: those desires.

And now you specify that the person's own morals are those which count,
which I can naturally agree with.  However, given desires that conflict
with one's morals, there are actually two choices open: adjusting those
morals, or attempting to sublimate the desires.  Which choice is the
best one is going to depend greatly on the individual and the circumstances.

If we're talking explicitly about sexual desires, then I would say that
morals are irrelevent, but that's purely my own opinion.

: Of course, if I am right in my moral speculations, their
: moral judgment should also coincide with my own; however this obligation is
: wholly different in nature, and in any case, altogether independent from
: the former.

I'm unsure what you're trying to say with regard to your moral speculations
and why you should expect anyone's moral judgment to coincide with yours.
Morals are an inherently personal thing, which should be expected to
vary from person to person.  Expecting someone's morals to be the same
as your own seems to be no more than a hope for a homogenous society.
And a boring one. ;-)

  VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
             Mason Jones           Charnel House Productions
             P.O. Box 170277, San Francisco 94117-0277 U.S.A.
   ...{uunet,sun}!hoptoad!dante!mason   or   dante!mason@hop.toad.com
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^