HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney)
Subject: Re: Paglia (was: Cross-Writing)
Keywords: Paglia (again!), rape
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 00:04:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.190842.27453@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>In article <1993Jan11.124919.16849@cheshire.oxy.edu> rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney) writes:
>
>>	But if Paglia's not in some way justifying rape, then her
>>remarks are banal.
>
>Well, she's not justifying rape, which she explicitly says is a deplorable
>crime that should be punished. Is she therefore making banal comments?
>That's for you to judge, I suppose, but it would help if you quit
>approaching her writing by deciding in advance what she "must be" saying.
>
>

	Alas, I don't have your convenient ability to short-circuit
interpretation and discussion by dodging the issue.  It would help if you
quit casting straw men and address the points I made.  If all Paglia's
saying is for women to exercise caution in light of empirical circumstance,
then why is she styling herself as such a heterodox feminist?  Why call
the woman who goes upstairs with the frat boy an idiot unless it's to
suggest in some way that her suggestiveness is somehow irreducibly less
justified than a mirror-situation male?

Cordially,

Michael S. Rooney
From: nichael@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Shouting at robots
Date: 7 Jan 93 09:13:21
Organization: BBN, Interzone Office
Reply-To: ncramer@bbn.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: kariba.bbn.com
In-reply-to: gersh@aplpy.jhuapl.edu's message of Wed, 6 Jan 93 14:26:18 GMT

gersh@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (John R. Gersh) writes:

   <JMC.93Jan2141039@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> John McCarthy writes:
	   [Asks us to try viewing with alarm the revoltin' development
	   of children shouting at toy robots, which turn out to be not
	   all that obedient when shouted at.]
   But this is what people always do! This situation just adds a
   different sensory modality. Consider "shouting" to be simply emphatic
   use of the appropriate communication medium - LIKE THIS, WHICH WE SEE
   ALL THE TIME.

   Where do people commonly shout (vainly) at robots? While waiting for 
   elevators, of course. If the elevator doesn't come quickly enough, push 
   the button again and again, harder and harder! What is this behavior if 
   not shouting at a robot - one which is, indeed, not very obedient when 
   shouted at?

Or to bring it a little closer to home: Why is it any different from
typing *harder* on a keyboard because the stupid computer either
wouldn't respond quickly enough or else doesn't didn't what we wanted
it to in the first place?

...and is there anyone here who _hasn't_ done this?

N
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:38:28 GMT
Subject: Re: Doctrines of Maybe: 7 truth values
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books

In rec.arts.books, jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:

> 
> >The Jains are still around.  Do they still use that 7-valued system?
> 
> Yes and no.

You know, I am sure this was not intended to be funny, but I still
laughed for about a  minute when I read it.  I am not precisely sure
why.

doug
From: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Laurie Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Rasputin and Cajun References.
Date: 7 Jan 1993 13:54:00 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ansible.pubs.stratus.com

Steve McGowan (RA) writes
>The title says it all. Anyone know any good books/references/etc on i) the  
life and
>times of Rasputin, that great Russian character, and ii) the origins, history  
and 
>culture of the Louisianna Cajuns?

Robert Massie's book Nicholas and Alexandra (1968?) had a wealth of
information on Rasputin.

If you're interested in Cajun cooking, read any book by Paul Proudhomme.

*  In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak *
*  because I wasn't a Communist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I *
*  didn't speak because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade *
* unionists, and I didn't speak because I wasn't a trade unionist... *
*Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up.*
*  Rev. Martin Niemoeller     [Why to March on Washington in April]  *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Paglia
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 00:54:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.014307.15934@cheshire.oxy.edu> rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney) writes:

>	What sabotage?  We're talking about an obscure art academic
>who taught at an equally obscure Pennsylvania college who was elevated
>to national notoriety because of an editorial imbroglio at the classics
>journal ARION.

Your dates are wrong. Paglia gained fame (or notoriety, if you insist) 
for SEXUAL PERSONAE and her op-ed pieces before the ARION article
appeared.


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: echristo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Elena A Christofides)
Subject: Re: Mangled song lyrics (was: Cultural Appropriation and the New Age)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:59:23 GMT

In article <C0Ct0w.Ipt@icon.rose.hp.com> bobdev@hprpcd.rose.hp.com (Bob Deverea
ux) writes:
>A great thread!  Now will someone PLEASE email me the true lyrics (these
>CAN'T be right) to:
>
>   Blinded by the light,
>   Wrapped up like a douche
>   an' like a runner in the night...
>
>--
>Bob Devereaux
>bobdev@hprpcd.rose.hp.com


Ditto.

Elena  echristo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon)
Subject: Re: Books I Got For Xmas
Summary:  oh, dear
Organization: Panix Public Access Internet & Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 01:40:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.164445.15659@ncar.ucar.edu> chucks@uars2.acd.ucar.edu (Chuck Smythe) writes:
>In article <C0D0s3.G4w@panix.com> mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon) writes:
...

>Whenever one of the RABble recommends something interesting, I paste the
>posting to a file.

uh-oh.  I *do* hope you haven't added _Indiana Jones Explores Ancient
Egypt_ to your list!  It is a) amusing and b) adequate as an interested
but clueless adolescent's first book on archaeology -- but no more than
that!  If you would like a REAL reference, let me suggest _Egypt Before
the Pharoahs_ by Michael Hoffman, U. of Texas Press, revised edition
(after Hoffman's unfortunate early death) 1991, ISBN 0-292-72073-4. Or
for a more general treatment, _The World of the Pharaohs_, Christine
Hobson, Thames and Hudson, 1987, ISBN 0-500-27560-2.
-- 
Michael L. Siemon	"We honour founders of these starving cities
mls@panix.com		 Whose honour is the image of our sorrow ...
			 They built by rivers and at night the water
			 Running past the windows comforted their sorrow."
From: hoosiers@carson.u.washington.edu (Mary Loveless)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Angela Carter, _Wise Children_, also "Jeeves and Wooster"
Date: 5 Jan 1993 21:19:25 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: carson.u.washington.edu

In article <86182@ut-emx.uucp> jzimm@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Joann Zimmerman) writes:
>
>
>In article <1993Jan5.044630.8421@athena.mit.edu> Keith Morgan,
>kamorgan@athena.mit.edu writes:
>>Tom Maddox writes:
>>
>>	Also, on an almost unrelated note:  the Guthrie/Fry "Jeeves and
>>Wooster" series on PBS is half done (2 out of 4), and I for one love it--
>>also, would be interested to hear how other r.a.b.ble Wodehouse fanciers
>>respond.
>>
>>	I am also loving every looney minute of it. The second
>>episode was absolutely priceless with Bertie and Gussie Fink-Nottle
>>changing places. The scene where Bertie tries to tell a joke to the
>>assembled aunts was hilarious. Fry and Laurie have brought Jeeves and
>>Wooster to life. As I'm watching I can remember what is going to
>>happen next but then when it does it never fails to crack me up. Fans
>>might want to try to imitate the Bertie ga-ga look. 
>
>last year. I actually prefer the earlier ones as being even funnier, and
>a bit more free-form. Jeeves seems a little graver in them, and Bertie
>which were collections.
>--
>
>"They like sitting around reading all the books there are. And then they 
>love arguing about them. Some of those arguments go on for millenium 
>after millenium. It just seems to keep them young, for some reason, 
>arguing about books." -- Julian Barnes          
>
>Joann Zimmerman (jzimm@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu)

That does it.  I have been dithering (in Spinsterish fashion) for two
years about whether to introduce the Dreaded Bugeyed Monster into my
maiden bower (I *am* talking about a TV, yaknow).  Dithering is done, and
I may well buy one this weekend.  A teeny one that I can put in the closet
when there is nothing worth watching.  (As soon as I get one installed, my
friends will start a pool to see how long it is before I am glued to the
re-run channel for 6 hours/day.  With book in lap.)

Mary Loveless  hoosiers@carson.u.washington.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of my opinions are self-righteously my own and **certainly** have
nothing to do with the University of Washington.
*"Too much of a good thing can be *wonderful*."  Mae West
*"I wonder how I'd look in *Madonna's* underwear."  Zippy the Pinhead
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Paglia on Feminism
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:11:32 GMT

In article <8JAN93.21355764@vax.clarku.edu> hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>I finally got _Sex, Art and American Culture_ back, and found the
>section in which Paglia is most direct about her views on feminism.
>In the lecture she gave at MIT (which has more of the feel of an
>extemporaneous talk), she goes into detail about precisely what she
>objects to in modern feminism.  I suggest that it's required reading
>for anyone who wants to pass judgment on Paglia's views of the role
>of women in society.

I agree. I actually saw Paglia at the MIT lecture, and her performance was
quite enjoyable. I still have one of the posters from the lecture adorning
my office door. I have embellished it with NRA stickers.

>     What I identify with is the pre-war feminism of
>     Amelia Earhart, of Katharine Hepburn -- who had an
>     enormous impact on me -- that period of women where you had
>     independence, self-reliance, personal responsibility, and not
>     blaming other people for your problems.

Paglia at her best.



--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Child molestation & celibacy
Date: 11 Jan 1993 14:25:02 GMT
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
NNTP-Posting-Host: oas.stanford.edu

Jeff Davis writes:

	Francis Muir writes:

	[on the question of whether the Church's all male, celibate 
	clergy encourages child molestation...]

		I thought I had worded this with some care. I am saying 
		that enforced celibacy and and all-male clergy encoureges 
		child molestation. I am not saying that the Church 
		directly encourages the practise.

	However you word it, it's still boloney.

Yes, Father.

						RABworm
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Homophobia (really not about  Homeschooling)
Date: 7 Jan 1993 20:28:28 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
NNTP-Posting-Host: zion.berkeley.edu

johne@or.credence.com (John Ewing) writes:

>I correct this misunderstanding every time I see it.

I hate it when the totally ignorant try to lecture you.

>The intent of these measures was not to take away "equal protection" from
>some "minority" groups.
>
>The intent is to prevent certain people, that exhibit "certain behaviors"
>(read: "any unique behavior at all that one choses to engage in -- e.g.
>reading mystery novels"), from gaining an unfair advantage under the law
>that the rest of the population does not enjoy (the behavior being focused
>on here is sexual activity with another of the same sex).  In fact, I
>would go so far as to say that the reason these measures were put on the
>ballet is to insure equal protection under the law to all citizens.

Wrong.  The intent of these measures is to allow
discrimination against homosexuals to proceed unimpeded.

It is my understanding that employers in Colorado are
now free to fire gays and lesbians for no other reason than
that their sexuality is considered undesirable.  If you view 
holding a job as an "unfair advantage" you are one sick puppie.

Steve
From: ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Subject: Re: Homophobia (really not about  Homeschooling)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:34:15 GMT

In article <C0G10r.IuI@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> msmorris@watsci.UWaterloo.ca (Mike Morris) writes:
> Well, Laurie, being snowed in up here half the time, I'm afraid I
> have been abysmally underinformed about both of the measures, but
> I'd say that my support or my disagreement with either measure
> would depend *crucially* on the exact legal wording of that
> measure.

See a separate message in which I posted these.

Evelyn C. Leeper  |  +1 908 957 2070  |  att!mtgzy!ecl or  ecl@mtgzy.att.com
--
"To make the point [that homosexuals hamper military effectiveness] I'd
say that you would have to sift through your military history till you
find an instance in which failure has been attributed to the presence
of homosexuals on the losing side.  I'm not aware of any such case in
the past 2500 years, but I'd be interested to hear what you find."
-Nathan Engle
From: norbeck@sirius.cs.bucknell.edu (Naughty Nukes NY in her 1999 Nissan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: "Jeeves and Wooster"
Date: 5 Jan 1993 14:03:02 GMT
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: sirius.cs.bucknell.edu

In article <1993Jan5.044630.8421@athena.mit.edu> kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan) writes:
>Tom Maddox writes:
>
>	Also, on an almost unrelated note:  the Guthrie/Fry "Jeeves and
>Wooster" series on PBS is half done (2 out of 4), and I for one love it--
>also, would be interested to hear how other r.a.b.ble Wodehouse fanciers
>respond.
>

[stuff deleted] 

I missed the series last year for lack of a TV, but I have one this
year, and a VCR, and have been recording them.  I agree with Keith,
who said something like "I've been loving absolutely every looney
minute of it."  I tend to get worried when I hear that someone's going
to make a TV or film version of books or short stories I've read,
especially those tied so closely to the written word as these (I keep
wondering what wonderful bits of narrative play we're missing by
virtue of seeing rather than reading--I've read quite a bit of
Wodehouse but not nearly all of it), but I've been very pleasantly
surprised by what I've seen.

I also agree that Jeeves is quite a bit younger than I expected him to
be--I was ready for some grey hair, at the very least--but I do enjoy
Stephen Fry's performance.  As for Bertie, I don't know what I ever
had a terribly concrete idea of what he looked like, so I haven't any
strong feelings either way.

>Fans
>might want to try to imitate the Bertie ga-ga look. I'm not sure how
>Laurie gets his face all screwed up like that but it is a perfect
>picture of exactly what it is that Bertie represents. 

Absolutely!  It's wonderful!

>Finally, I have
>also enjoyed Stephen Fry's introductions. The concluding remarks to #2
>where he tried to explain why certain English names are pronounced as
>they are was also very funny.

Indeed...does make you kind of wonder, doesn't it?

>	Keith


Nancy




--
|.."I've heard snappier comebacks from a bowl of Rice..|....Nancy Norbeck.....|
|......Krispies."  Charles Emerson Winchester III......|.norbeck@bucknell.edu.|
From: dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Frailty, thy name is reader! (was: Cross-Writing)
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:35:10 GMT
Reply-To: dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran)
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.; Campbell, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gizmo.hal.com
In-reply-to: dsy@psych.toronto.edu (Desiree Sy)

In article <1993Jan8.145142.3414@psych.toronto.edu>, dsy@psych (Desiree Sy) writes:
>Nancy Lebovitz asks:
>
>>Where is human nature so weak as in the bookstore?
>
>And Mike Godwin answers:
>>In the video store, possibly. In the bakery, certainly.
>
>This human's nature is definitely weaker in the bookstore than in
>the bakery (on a good buying day, I will count the last bits of
>change I have to make certain I've got enough for a paperback
>before buying that Mrs. Field's cookie).

Hm, I don't know: if a person put a gun to my head, a good book in one
hand, and a Mrs. Field's semi-sweet without nuts in the other, and said,
"You must now choose -- You can either eat the cookie, or read the book,
and it will be the last cookie you may ever eat, or the last book you
will ever read," I would probably say, "Shoot."

And *that*, kids, is a run-on sentence.  Don't tell my mom.
-- 
    Doug Moran        |  You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch;
   dougm@hal.com      |  you're a nasty, wasty skunk.
 {...}!hal.com!dougm  |  Your heart is full of unwashed socks,
 HaL Computer Systems |  your soul is full of gunk, Mr. Grinch.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Celebrating McGonagall
From: lynx@surrey.amigans.gen.nz (Lynsey Gedye)
Date: 7 Jan 93 19:52:00 GMT-12
Distribution: world
Organization: Prime Line, Wanganui, New Zealand

In article <3JAN93.03252276@vax.clarku.edu> hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:
  {...}
>Barbara Hlavin writes: 
>>Can one of you fans explain to me what's so appealing about this stuff? 

  Well, for those of us whose literary appreciation is limited by choice
  to reading Readers Digest indexs, following each article with either
  "...in the back seat of the car" or "...underneath the bedclothes"
  you just gotta love McGonagall.

  He is to the 19th century what John Cooper Clarke is to the 20th,
  i.e., the only poet worth more attention than the time for a cup
  of coffee to cool.  

>Tip on McGonagall Appreciation:  his work is at its best when read aloud.

  Yes.  I would also recommend consuming a fresh bottle of Stone's Green
  Ginger Wine to really assist giving emphasis to the subtle nuances.
  A cold winters night, roaring fire, friends - what else do you need?
--
           lynx@surrey.amigans.gen.nz    lynx@amigans.gen.nz
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney)
Subject: Re: Paglia (was: Cross-Writing)
Keywords: Paglia (again!), rape
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 05:41:43 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.041621.5838@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>In article <1993Jan12.000454.1129@cheshire.oxy.edu> rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney) writes:
>
>>
>>	Alas, I don't have your convenient ability to short-circuit
>>interpretation and discussion by dodging the issue.
>
>Back when I was in graduate school, we were taught to base our
>interpretations and discussions on the actual text. There is no actual
>text in which Paglia justifies rape.
>

	And there is no actual text in which Charles Kinbote says he's
bonkers.  I'm sure you learned about tacit and implicit meaning back in
your grad days, too.  Maybe even the logical implications of attacking
social construction with "fundamental, unchanging truths about sex".
Strain your aged wisdom, o learned oracle.

>> It would help if you
>>quit casting straw men and address the points I made.
>
>Ah, you have an ironic sense of humor.
>

	Maybe if you were less concerned with shoring up your net.
image by vainly trying to get in the final word, you'd pay more attention
to my points and wouldn't waste our time with witless attempts at
repartee.

Cordially,

Michael S. Rooney

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: John Sayles' Fiction
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:44:26 GMT

In article <10JAN93.18424258@vax.clarku.edu> hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:

>Sayles has an unerring ear for dialogue and dialect: not only
>*what* people say, but how they sound when they say it.

I recently saw his film "Baby It's You" for the third time. It still
amazes me how on-target his dialog is--not just for his protagonists, but
also for every minor character. 


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: "Jeeves and Wooster"
Date: 6 Jan 1993 03:30:25 GMT
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
NNTP-Posting-Host: oas.stanford.edu

Keith Morgan writes:

	The semi-anonymous miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:

		Love the series also.  Note the odd consensus here: 
		I too always thought of Jeeves as an older man.  That's 
		three of us (?) so far.  Why have we made this assumption?  
		Any theories?  Any dissenters?

	I didn't mention this in my response to Tom Maddox but I
	concur that when I was reading Wodehouse my sense was that 
	Jeeves was older. I would put it down to my perception of 
	Jeeves as the adult and Bertie as the child. Still, the series 
	is so good Jeeves' age is but a minor quibble. Anyway, that's 
	four I guess.

Muir diss. I find them both perfectly placed in age.  Jeeves is not a
butler but a gentleman's gentleman. He'd have been recruited from the
ranks of footmen in one of the larger households. There was a pleasantly
sly moment in #2 when Jeeves persuades Bertie to imitate Gussie but
allows as how the Ganymede would frown on any dissimulation on his, 
Jeeves' part. This doesn't prevent him from pretending to be a Scotland 
Yard detective a bit later on tho'. Sly old bigger...

							RABworm

Porterhouse Blue this evening -- on top of the Four Marioka Sisters..
Dammit, will I ever get time to get back to *GREAT NORTHERN?* ?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: s1mbm@isuvax.iastate.edu (michael bruce mcdonald)
Subject: Re: academic settings
Reply-To: s1mbm@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Distribution: rec
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:34:46 GMT

In article <1993Jan9.1479.24625@channel1>, "john lovett" <john.lovett@channel1.com> writes:
>I just finished David Lodge's hilarious book 'Small World', based on a
>recommendation in a recent post, and have started 'Changing Places',
>also by Lodge.
>
>Can anyone recommend other books set in academia? Any genre will do.
>I'll post the list.
>
>The only ones I have read are 'The Groves of Academe' by Mary McCarthy,
>and 'The Masters' by C.P. Snow.
>
>I'm not sure that 'The Masters' is as well known as it should be.  It
>is a witty account of the infighting for the post of Master of an Oxford
>college.
>
>--
>Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA
>


I'm having a wonderful time right now reading Kingsley Amis's *Lucky Jim*,
a book whose protagonist simultaneously exemplifies much of what is good--
and what's silly--in academia.

michael mcdonald
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books