HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:57:36 -0400 
From: Daniel Read <dr3u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: REWARD OF $US100 TO END FATWAH ON RUSHDIE
	<Bw0x2C.51n@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>

Mike Morris complains as follows:

  I think one possible way to achieve an end to the fatwah
  would be for the West to begin by insisting diplomatically
  that the fatwah be recanted. The West could then set a deadline
  after which it would plan to make war on Iran until
  the fatwah were withdrawn. It is not realistic
  that this could happen, since the political will isn't there,
  but I will submit that it realistically could achieve the final goal
  of getting the fatwah officially stopped. The dollar
  cost would no doubt be high, however, (more than, say, $100 per
  capita), and even if western casualties could be minimized, we
  might still end up killing 100,000 Iranians, say.
 
  Let me make sure I understand you, John: are you willing to
  applaud a western leader who would use such means?

I suggest:

John does not have to condone the holy war you propose in order to be
willing to pay $100 to its instigator.  John's offer is a pragmatic one.
 He suspects that anyone willing to undertake the proposed task for such
a small amount will do so by resorting to means that are both legal and
acceptable to him.  Perhaps, for example, the  "un-hit person" will
attempt to use reasoned arguments to sway those able to end the fatwah. 
While it may be the case that distasteful means will be used, that is a
small risk which John is willing to take.

I will match John's reward of US$100 to anyone who brings about the end
of the fatwah.

daniel read
Carnegie Mellon University
 

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: tmaddox@netcom.com (Tom Maddox)
Subject: Re: More Notes from the Decline
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:36:39 GMT

In article <9210072056.AA04972@cfdev1.shearson.com> mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:
>I thought Professor McCarthy was only interested in
>splitting hairs.

	Hares, actually.

	He's a rabbit conservative.


-- 
				Tom Maddox
		    	    tmaddox@netcom.com
		"The Reptoids eat humans like we eat chickens."
				Alex Alexander
From: rachel@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Rachel M. Kadel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Limpopo?
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 20:26:10 EDT
Organization: Princeton High School, Princeton, New Jersey

rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams) writes:

> > mj7633@ireland.medtronic.com (Mark Jacoby) writes:
> 
> >Could someone tell me where this is from?
> >
> >"The great, greasy, grey, green Limpopo"
> 
> I don't have my copy of Rudyard Kipling's "Just So Stories"
> handy, but if I did, that line from "The Elephant's Child"
> would read something more like "the grey, green, greasy
> Limpopo River"...

"the great, grey-green, greasy Limpopo River"
                                              Rachel M. Kadel

There's an infinite number of monkeys at the door wanting to show us the 
script to Hamlet they've worked out...The school won't even LISTEN to me 
, much less let me speak for it...rachel@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan)
Subject: Re: Limpopo?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 17:35:43 GMT

	John McCarthy writes:

	"All set about with fever trees".  What's a fever tree, Fido?

While I am sure that Fido's answer will be more profound (or at least,
specific) I remember a Bay Area rock band of that name, circa 1968. 

Irrelevantly,

Keith
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Morgan		 	|In literature, as in love, we are 
kamorgan@athena.mit.edu  	|astonished at what is chosen by others.
		         	|	        Andre Maurois
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: More Notes from the Decline
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:46:38 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.165438.28710@athena.mit.edu> kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan) writes:
>
>	Very cute Mr. Maddox; however, are you merely extending Mr.
>Morris's comment from Republicans don't read to an assertion that they
>do but they only read piffle and twaddle? Let's see 48,886,097
>Americans identified themselves as Republican enough to vote for Bush
>in 1988. Do you think that among this group no one reads, or that they
>only read piffle and twaddle?

Well, we can say this much: since they voted for Bush, they clearly
have a high piffle-and-twaddle tolerance. We may surmise how they
acquired it.


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"Liberty resides in the rights of that person
mnemonic@eff.org| whose views you find most odious."
(617) 864-0665  | 
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --John Stuart Mill
From: nickles@sage.cc.purdue.edu (john a nickles)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up again.
Date: 8 Oct 92 03:04:44 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


 My choice for great yet unreadable book is (hands down) Thomas Hardy's
Jude The Obscure. 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.



John A. Nickles
Standard Dislaimer: Purdue has their opinions, I have mine
"Let's play Unreadable Books!"-- Edmund Crispin, THE MOVING TOYSHOP


P.S. For those
From: twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Literature Students/Small World
Date: 7 Oct 92 05:21:08 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle



Ron Nadel:
>
>|> Is a work, as a whole, really good in your estimation if you don't like it
>|> at first exposure? 

Vance Maverick:
>
>Let me first give you my definition of "good": a work of
>literature is good if one finds an interesting way of reading it.
>Thus _The Ambassadors_ was not good for me in high school, but
>was good for me in college.  So the simple answer to your
>question is No, because you have thrown in the saving phrase "in
>your estimation".  The longer answer is "Potentially later, or
>for some other person."
>
>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.


Well, I don't enjoy Joyce Carol Oates' writing, but I recognize 
that it's good.  I trust this doesn't make me a National Socialist. 
(Joke, Vance)  I'm not submitting to authority here, but really 
do believe she's a good writer -- accomplished storyteller, complex, 
subtle, masterful use of language -- but I find her boring.  The 
world being as full as it is of other things that I find wholly 
interesting, I don't feel inclined to spend any time trying to 
reconcile my contradictory responses, or to look too hard for an 
"interesting way to read" her work.  Every once in a while I pick up 
one of her books and give it another try, but my experience is always 
the same:  she bores me. 

"For some other person" would work here. 

I like her *ideas*, and I can appreciate her skill as a writer (not 
to mention marvelling over her prolific output), but I do not enjoy 
her work.  Therefore I am unable to care about it.  

But I would stoutly maintain that she is a good writer.  

For someone else. 


--Barbara
From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Piffle
Date: 8 Oct 92 13:26:31
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: djdaneh@pbhyc.PacBell.COM's message of Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:40:25 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.174025.8793@pbhyc.PacBell.COM> djdaneh@pbhyc.PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes) writes:
> In Hugh Lofting's epic tales of Doctor Dolittle, [...]
> If the Pushme-Pullyu ever underwent reproduction during its time in Dolittle's
> entourage, what was the effect of this on Pollyana?

Polynesia, I believe.

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy                               muffy@mica.berkeley.edu
~Little round planet/in a big universe/sometimes it looks blessed/
 sometimes it looks cursed/Depends on what you look at, obviously/
 But even more it depends on the way that you see~ - Bruce Cockburn
From: fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:47:00 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

Ian G Batten writes:

>I could also name some that should never be performed: Henry XIII, for a
>start...

    Never fear, there won't be many performances of _Henry the Thirteenth_
this year.   Unless A. L. Rowse has been digging especially deep recently....

                                                     -- jf
 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: RE: Ted Williams (was Re: Baseball etc. etc.)
Organization: Clark University
Date: 15 OCT 92 21:05:16 GMT

mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:

>>U48073@uicvm.uic.edu (Cole Kendall) writes:
>>
>> Actually, the "original" was my connection between the Ted Williams
>> worshipped by Taranto et. al. and the Ted Williams depicted in Bouton's
>> _Ball Four_.
>>
>I never said that I worshipped Ted Williams.  I only said that I had seen
>him play.  Someone else -- perhaps Heather, said that he was god.

I said he was *one* of my gods.  Chief in the pantheon happens to be
Fred Astaire.

>I also mentioned the book SUMMER OF 49 -- which deals with an
>aging DiMaggio & Ted W, and the great rivalry between the Red Sox & the
>Yankees.  Since I was already familiar with Ted Williams, the book left
>me with a greater respect for Joe DiMaggio.  I knew all about Ted Williams --
>but didn't really know that much about Joe D.

Yeah, yeah, Mr. Coffee, Old Man and the Sea ("But I fear the Indians of
Cleveland"), Marilyn Monroe, etc. etc. gimme a break.  (Sorry, I hate all
Yankees.)

>The book mentions some
>interesting stats.  Reggie Jackson hit 500+ home runs, but struck out
>2500+ times.  Ted Williams was amazing -- at 524 HRs -- and only
>around 750 strikeouts.  But DiMaggio had something like 320 HRs and only
>370 strikeouts.  This ratio is practically unheard of.

Sure, but imagine what Ted's lifetime stats would have been if he hadn't
spent those years in the service at the height of his career.

>Mark
>
>Besides, everyone knows that Eric Clapton is god :-)

Wrong.  B.B. King is God of that particular division  :-)

Heather
HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu
From: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com (Joel Hanes)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: RE: Fictitious Fiction
Keywords: long
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:56:24 GMT
Reply-To: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation  Sunnyvale California

In article <Bvu8zJ.Cq6@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, nickles@sage.cc.purdue.edu (john a nickles) writes:
> Here, FINALLY, is the (nearly) complete list of Fictitious Fiction
> that you kind people posted or sent to me. ...
> 
> Richard Brautigan       Trout Fishing in America (?)  library of
>                                                       unpublished works

No, the library of unpublished books appears in _The_Abortion_,
not in _TFIA_.

Incidentally, I recently read in the San Francisco Chronicle that
someone has actually established such a library in San Francisco.
 
---
Joel Hanes
From: ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Love in the Time of Books
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:44:43 GMT
Reply-To: ncramer@labs-n.bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

jzimm@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Joann Zimmerman) writes:
|But books have caused others to fall in love with me. ...
| ... We had already met, but the effect of this bibliographic
|vision was to cause him to come down and knock on my door--with a
|book in hand! 

For gods' sake Joann, don't leave us hanging; What was the book??
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: tmaddox@netcom.com (Tom Maddox)
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up again.
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 07:03:50 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.173952.16808@u.washington.edu> twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:

[of her troubles with _The Recognitions_ and her liking for _Herzog_]:

	Ah, despite the meeting of souls that occurred with you in your
sailor suit, I find that we are not two minds with but a single thought:

	to wit, I cannot stand Bellow in general and _Herzog_ in
	particular; I always feel that I'm being asked to believe
	with all my heart in a snotty, bitter worldview;

	while I sometimes quite like Gaddis--though I will confess that
	I think it helps to be Somewhat Young when reading _The 
	Recognitions_, as all that *stuff* seems so much more important
	then (refs. to the _Golden Bough_, Faust, umpteen hundred years
	of Christian theology, u.s.w.);

But I can find it in my heart to forget such trivial differences when I
remember the tango (or was it the fandango?) . . .


-- 
				Tom Maddox
		    	    tmaddox@netcom.com
		"The Reptoids eat humans like we eat chickens."
				Alex Alexander
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull)
Subject: Re: Only Connect
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:21:01 GMT

In article <1be962INN25f@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:
>akao@.com (Adam Kao) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Oct8.142743.25874@cactus.org> kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull) writes:
>>>
>>>I am missing John's point here.
>>>
>>>Kate
>
>>That's the greatest thing about John, he doesn't have to make a point
>>in order to get attention.
>
>Now that Adam has discovered my greatest point, I wait with bated breath
>for him to suck my dick.
>
>
>>Adam
>
>jw
>
>

Sigh.

I truly don't want in any metaphorical or god forbid literal sense get
in the middle of you two here, but I just want to say that I think
John often makes excellent points, though not perhpas in traditional
ways. And I don't always _agree_ with him. All I wanted to say was
that I wasn't getting the point _this one time._

Running for cover,


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: argument from buoyancy (was ...from gravity)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Sep30.203307.1735@athena.cs.uga.edu>
	<1992Oct6.203743.28886@athena.mit.edu>
	<1992Oct7.151439.4076@nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 7 Oct 92 11:36:59

News stories are written so that they can be cut after any number of
paragraphs.  Any kind of instruction manual needs a version that
can be read the same way.  If the manual is written properly, someone
who reads only an initial segment can still get use out of it.

Apropos of another post, consider writing a description of baseball
for a foreigner intended to help someone watching the game to
understand what the players are trying to do and tell whether
they are succeeding.  The foreigner should get something no matter
how soon he stops reading.

I think one might start in the following order.

1. The teams take turns at bat.  (Omit what ends a turn).

2. The object is to get the most runs, and a run is scored when
a player goes around all four bases.

(At this point the spectator can see runners trying to advance).

3. Players can advance from one base to another only when the
ball is hit.  (Ignore base on balls for now).

4. The pitcher tries to throw the ball over the home plate
so the batter can't hit it.

5. The teams change places when there are three outs, and there
are nine innings.

6. Balls and strikes and strikeouts and base on balls.

7. Out at first and out by flies, and out by being tagged.  (Ignore
double plays for now.)

That's enough to watch the game.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: djdaneh@pbhyc.PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes)
Subject: Re: Once I put this book down, I could not pick it up.
Reply-To: djdaneh@PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 18:07:59 GMT

In article <12737@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>Many?  Hmmm.  You must have an odd definition of "many."  From the
>1991 edition of Uniform Crime Reports (the FBI's solution to
>insomnia), I find that 14,265 murders were committed in the U.S.
>last year with firearms.  

Oh, Christ.  Someone mentioned "guns" and Clayton heard.  This group has
now become an extension of talk.guns.

Heaven help us.



		Until the philosophy that holds one race superior and another 
								inferior
		Is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned
		Everywhere is war
			-- Haile Selassie via Bob Marley

		FIGHT THE REAL ENEMY
			-- Sinnead O'Connor

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, Net.Roach
My opinions do NOT represent Pacific Bell,
Professional Development, or anyone else.
But I'm willing to share.
From: wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Only Connect
Date: 15 Oct 1992 04:40:55 GMT
Organization: The University of Westrn Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: madvax.maths.uwa.oz.au

kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull) writes:

>In article <1be962INN25f@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:
>>akao@.com (Adam Kao) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1992Oct8.142743.25874@cactus.org> kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull) writes:
>>>>
>>>>I am missing John's point here.
>>>>
>>>>Kate
>>
>>>That's the greatest thing about John, he doesn't have to make a point
>>>in order to get attention.
>>
>>Now that Adam has discovered my greatest point, I wait with bated breath
>>for him to suck my dick.
>>
>>
>>>Adam
>>
>>jw
>>
>>

>Sigh.

>I truly don't want in any metaphorical or god forbid literal sense get
>in the middle of you two here, but I just want to say that I think
>John often makes excellent points, though not perhpas in traditional
>ways. And I don't always _agree_ with him. All I wanted to say was
>that I wasn't getting the point _this one time._

>Running for cover,


>Kate


Kao's comment is typical of game-playing wankers who think of nothing
other than how they look in the mirror; if he'd thought otherwise then
he would have shown more consideration for Kate's concern.


> 

>-- 
>- - - - - - - -
>kate@cactus.org
>Be the voice of night and Florida in my ear.
From: kate@cactus.org (Katherine M. Catmull)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Attractiveness (was: Re: She's baaaaack.....Camille Paglia)
Date: 8 Oct 92 13:55:17 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx

In article <3OCT92.15052290@vax.clarku.edu> hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>This is not just a "male thing".  If I had to choose between two
>equally qualified candidates, each with perfectly pleasant personalities,
>and one of them looked like Mel Gibson and the other like Pete Rose,
>I would choose the Mel lookalike.  Who wants to spend 8 hours a day
>working with (and looking at) someone who looks like Pete Rose?
>
>On the other hand, if the Mel lookalike were less qualified than
>the Pete lookalike, or I had reason to believe that his personality
>were such that I might find it difficult to work with him, and I
>hired him anyway simply because he was cute, then I would be a fool.
>

Are you living in a world of dreams or of . . . uh . . . men? There
are no two "equally qualified candidates" for anything; there are
no clones or doppelgangers running around out there.

To concsiously allow good-looks/non-good looks to be one of the
deciding factors in hiring an employee seems to me shameful in any
real-world situation.

Kate



-- 
- - - - - - - -
kate@cactus.org
Be the voice of night and Florida in my ear.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: cruz@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Nancy Cruz)
Subject: Re: Not exaclty a repentance....
Organization: New York University Ultracomputer Research Lab
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:20:21 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.223331.5101@athena.cs.uga.edu> heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath) writes:
>
>	I just thought I'd post thhis here for the amusement of those
>who remember my rantings during the "Canon" thread. I am currently
>taking yet another class toward my English degree, and this time its
>"18th Century Prose and Poetry" (to fulfill the requirement that I
>take at least three classes on pre-1800 English lit).  We're reading
>Pope, Dryden, Swift, Defoe and a coupla others whose names escape me
>right now.  


Uuuggghhhh!  I am glad your enjoying it.  I found that period the most
pedantic, boring...

Althought I didn't like the professor, I dont think that made much of
a difference.

Nancy

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Nancy Cruz - a.k.a. "Tensha, the Icewoman" |   New York University    |
|      cruz@lab.ultra.nyu.edu                |Ultracomputer Research lab|
+--------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
From: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com (Joel Hanes)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: A pox upon your book (was Re: Dashiell Hammett)
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:05:34 GMT
Reply-To: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation  Sunnyvale California

>> 
>> "TB or not TB--that is the congestion.
>> 
>> "Consumption be done about it?"
>> 
> 
> Of cough it can ! 

   John Keats John Keats John Keats John
   Please put your socks on

---
Joel Hanes
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: harish@theory.lcs.mit.edu (Harish Devarajan)
Subject: Re: WANTED: "The Profit" by Kehlog Albran
Organization: Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 04:32:14 GMT

In article <mumble> twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:
(Responding to my posting)
>>Hi all.  I'm looking for the book mentioned above ("The Profit" by
>>Kehlog  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.) 

A priest asked: What is Fate, Master?
And he answered:
  It is that which gives a beast of burden its reason for existence.
  It is that which men in former times had to bear upon their backs.
  It is that which has caused nations to build byways from City to City
     upon which carts and coaches pass, and alongside which inns have come
     to be built to stave off Hunger, Thirst and Weariness.
And that is Fate?  said the priest.
Fate ... I thought you said Freight, responded the Master.
That's all right, said the priest.  I wanted to know what Freight was too.
		-- Kehlog Albran, "The Profit"

So the book really does exist.  That's all right, Barbara, I'd like to
read "The Prophet" too.

Harish
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From:  sveta@titul.obninsk.su (Shirina Svetlana)
Subject: Looking for children books to reprint in Russia
Reply-To: sveta@titul.obninsk.su
Organization: JSC TITUL
Date: Tue,  6 Oct 92 22:31:32 +0300 

Attention of Publishers

Gentlemen:

The Russian Publishers "TITUL" will purchase polygraphic films of
children's books (fairy tales and comic books) for the
purpose of publishing said books in russian and distributing  them
in Russia and ex-USSR.
We'll prefer books repeatedly and successfully
published in Europe and America.

We'll be thankful for any advise on this subject also, as well as for
transferring this message to the persons and companies possessing the
subject we're interested in.

With best regards,


Sergey Kononenko,
General Director.