Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
 RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
After some research we learned they were the names of each of his troops who were killed on missions. There was a check mark beside each name, maybe put there after he had written a letter to their family.
The hallmark of great commanders is not only their tactical brilliance in defeating the enemy, but the bonding and personal responsibility they display toward the men and women under their command. Over the years since my retirement from the Foreign Service, I have been consulting with Defense Department contractors, contributing foreign policy scenarios to U.S. military command post exercises. It has been my great good fortune to work with several retired, high-ranking officers who have been open about discussing their careers. They served in Vietnam, the first Gulf War, and other actions.
To a man they have said that the hardest thing they had to do in their careers was write to the families of troops under their command who had been killed in action. I remember in particular an exercise we were conducting in Germany in February 2003 with V Corps, the unit that would lead the invasion of Iraq just one month later in March 2003. We were talking about the route of march and the likely obstacles they would face. My colleague and good friend with whom I was working sort of choked up and, no doubt remembering the letters he had written, said, "The hardest thing those commanders will do during the coming hostilities will be writing letters to the families of the fallen troops under their command."
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 11:41:54
 |
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
In 2010 The State Department assigned me as temporary Charge' d'Affaires at the American Embassy in Palau, an archipelagic island-nation in the Western Pacific, 500 miles east of the Philippines. The Palau archipelago includes the island of Peleliu, which looms large in WWII Marine Corps history.
Peleliu was held by 10,000 Japanese, and MacArthur determined that we had to take the island because it had an air field that would pose a threat to his flank as he pushed into the Philippines. There was controversy over the strategic value of taking Peleliu, but MacArthur won the argument. The Battle of Peleliu (September-November 1944) was the costliest, bloodiest amphibious assault in United States history. The Japanese had established themselves in rocky caves connected by interlocking tunnels. As a result, aerial bombardment preceding the amphibious invasion, led by the 1st Marine Division, did little to dislodge the Japanese. The 1st Marine Division landed on "Orange" beach and "White" beach. They faced heavy fire, and continued to face tremendous fire as they moved up Bloody Nose Ridge. The 1st Marine Division took an overall 40 percent casualty rate.
During my assignment as Charge', the commander of Futenma Marine Air Station on Okinawa, a two-star general, wanted to visit Palau for operational reasons, as under the U.S.-Palau Compact of Free Association, the U.S. has certain military rights and responsibilities. The general and his staff flew from Futenma to Palau, with the general flying the plane. I performed the usual rites that go with hosting a high-ranking official, accompanying the general to meetings with Palau's President Toribiong and other Palauan officials.
The general expressed an interest in visiting Peleliu, as I knew he would, since Peleliu is considered sacred ground to Marines. I had arranged for a boat to pick us up and take us to Peleliu, where we toured the landing beaches, the caves, and Bloody Nose Ridge. On Orange and White beaches, the general filled vials with sand to take back with him, and when we climbed up Bloody Nose Ridge to the memorial that the marines had constructed to commemorate the battle, the general spent about five minutes standing in front of the plaque that reads: "To Our Comrades In Arms."
I could see that this two-star general was visibly moved, both as he filled his vials with sand from the landing beaches, and as he stood before the memorial to the battle. And I was greatly moved as well. As I say, to the Marines Peleliu is sacred ground.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 12:14:16
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Miguel de Maria
I can't help but be angry at the old men who sent them there.
Around 60% of the eventually 12-million men in U.S. forces in WW II were drafted. The other 40% volunteered. It didn't take much persuasion to get some of them to go.
I remember the day my Silver Star uncle enlisted in the Navy. It was Saturday, so all of us were at the East End Airport in San Antonio, which my father and his partner owned. Word must have gone around before my uncle showed up, because when he came around the corner of one of the hangars he was immediately mobbed by men slapping him on the back, shaking his hand and congratulating him.
I asked someone what was going on. They told me he had just enlisted. In the office where Mom brought coffee and cake on Saturday morning, the men stood around talking in excited tones. Mom beamed with pride. Of her five brothers, he was the one I was named after.
That evening our house was full of people. There was beer, charcoal grilled steaks, apple pie and home made ice cream. Many of the men had enlisted during the previous week. My uncle was pretty much the guest of honor.
I'm not sure what my uncle's attitude was before Pearl Harbor. One of his brothers was already in the Navy. He was at Pearl Harbor. Dad had been in the Army Air Corps since 1928. But I wouldn't be surprised if the one who enlisted that day had partaken in the almost universal isolationism, the determination of the whole country not to get involved in the wars already going on in Europe and Asia.
But all that changed on December 7, 1941.
Since I can't find the quote, I paraphrase (poorly, and without the dialect) the newspaper columnist Finley Peter Dunne. In the late 19th-early 20th century he wrote in the voice of the fictional Irish immigrant Mr. Dooley:
If a man invites you to have dinner with him, you can make your excuses. If he says he will buy you a drink, you can decline. If he wants to be your friend, you can avoid him. But if he sincerely invites you to fight, you must accommodate his request.
Of course Franklin Roosevelt and men like George Marshall the Army Chief of Staff, Hap Arnold the Chief of the Army Air Corps, and the Navy leadership had been preparing for the likelihood of war. It would have been imprudent not to, given the actions of the Nazis and the Japanese militarists. But the American public was not prepared to go to war before the attack on Pearl Harbor.
They were on the day after.
Winston Churchill wrote, "The terrible thing about war is that it not only brings out the worst in men, it brings out the best as well."
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 17:08:43
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
The American public was not prepared to go to war before the attack on Pearl Harbor.
They were on the day after.
So true, Richard, and with good reason. The attack on Pearl Harbor was what brought the U.S. into the war, but it was just the culmination of Japanese aggression that reached back into the 19th century. As has already been covered in this thread, but which apparently (for some) cannot be emphasized enough, it all started with the Meiji Restoration in 1868 and Japan's drive to modernize, industrialize, develop its military capacity, and seek what it considered its rightful place among the world's powers.
I know you do not need to, but let's review the bidding once again.
The Sino-Japanese War of 1894; the colonization of Formosa (Taiwan) in 1895; the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05; the subjugation and colonization of Korea by 1910; the conquest of Manchuria in 1931 and the creation of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo; the invasion of China proper in 1937; the invasion and occupation of Indochina in 1940; the invasion of Malaya and the bombing of the Philippines in 1941; the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941; the conquest and occupation of Guam and the Marianas in 1941; the complete subjugation and occupation of Malaya and Singapore by 1942; the conquest and occupation of Burma in 1942; the conquest and occupation of the Philippines in 1942; the invasion and occupation of the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) in 1942.
Anyone who tries to draw a false equivalency (moral, legal, or otherwise) between the actions of Japan under its militarist leaders and the United States in going to war after being attacked simply reveals a lack of historical knowledge of events as they unfolded and a total misunderstanding of the motivation of Japan in its attempt to establish hegemony in the Far East. The United States did not place itself in Japan's way because Japan was in a "fighting mood," as some might suggest.
The United States had taken over Hawaii originally because of agricultural interests, and, after the Spanish-American War, it served as a naval presence and way station to the Philippines. This was long before Japan became a potential threat to the U.S. As Japan's belligerency in the Far East increased and the Philippines appeared potentially threatened, It became apparent that Hawaii would also serve as a defense perimeter and forward operating base should Japan exhibit hostile intentions toward the U.S and its territories. But it was not originally designed as such.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 18:48:54
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
I suppose one could compare Japan's rapid colonial expansion in some ways to the ascent of Britain from a third rank country (behind France and Spain at the time of Henry VIII) to a colonial power upon which the sun never set. I've been told that the Japanese (at least the pre-WW II militarists) greatly admired the English.
Or the Dutch annexation of the East Indies.
Or Spain's dominance of the Americas until Napoleon's invasion laid them low, and the more southern British colonies rebelled, and rapidly embarked upon a course of Manifest Destiny that quickly added the Louisiana Purchase, our home states of Texas and Arizona, Miguel's home state of New Mexico, and Stephen's California, depriving Mexico of half of its arable land, having transferred American hegemony to ourselves with the Monroe Doctrine.
Or the French empire that began in North Africa with Napoleon's conquest of Egypt.
Or even the Johnny-come-lately efforts of Belgium, Germany and Italy to join the colonial powers by annexing patches of sub-Saharan Africa.
Japan's savage and racist treatment of its colonies even had its parallel in the Belgian treatment of the Congo. But Japan moved too fast, trying to catch up. It was judged too harsh and racist in its treatment of its colonized people, even by countries as racist as the USA and Britain in the 1930s. And it threatened U.S., British, French and Dutch interests in Asia.
These economic and political forces, further fueled by Japanese militarist arrogance and an almost inconceivably vast cultural chasm that blinded each side to the other's outlook, all led to war.
At least that's a slightly different slant on things.
I wouldn't say I knew for sure. At least not in the same way that I know that Euclid's parallel postulate is independent from his other axioms, or with the faith I place in physics after decades of practical experience applying it.
I was a few days short of four years old when the war started. All I know about it is the fair amount I have read, and what I heard about the Japanese from my father's Occupation experience, a number of his Air Force friends, and a close relationship with a Japanese family over a period of almost ten years--a family that had a bird's eye view of some of the factors.
Knowing the Japanese family, even after they had been enthusiastic American citizens for years before I met them, opened my eyes to a different perspective. My girlfriend said the year after they came to America she came home crying from middle school in the San Francicso Bay area. Her mother asked her what was the trouble. She said they were studying WW II. Her mother said they had talked it over at length, what was the trouble?
"I can't figure out who 'we' are."
In her early twenties she admired America for its freedom, openness and opportunity. Her English was note perfect before they came to America. Her general acculturation was note perfect by the time I met her--at least to any acute observer over a reasonable period. But she still felt strongly attached to Japan and at times missed it poignantly--the post-war Japan she had left at age 14--in many ways still the same Japan her ancestor had led in wrenching it into the modern world, eliminating many of the old feudal abuses, and setting it upon its collision course with the West.
They thought the modernization was right, the militarism was wrong. Once my girlfriend said something about the Japanese respecting America.
"I thought you said the Japanese didn't particularly like Americans?"
"I didn't say 'like'. I said 'respect'."
"Okay, why should the Japanese respect America?"
"You won the war."
I feel like I have to keep a bit of an open mind about it, and look at things from a variety of viewpoints--but I wouldn't say I have a monopoly on viewpoints, or can single out a correct one.
One virtue of a scientific career is that it accustoms you to uncertainty and fairly comprehensive ignorance. So often you have to say, "Well, it looks to me like this, but it could well be something else, and we don't have the time or money to experiment and find out. We can't bet on my conclusion." You get used to it.
But more often in life you just have to give it your best shot, and take the consequences.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 20:52:53
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to guitarbuddha)
|
|
|
Richard,
I agree with much of what you write. It tracks with my assertion that Japan was attempting to secure what it considered its rightful place among the world's powers (even though it committed horrible atrocities in its drive, particularly against the Chinese). Nevertheless, that does not contradict my other, primary point that anyone who tries to draw a false equivalency (moral, legal, or otherwise) between the actions of Japan under its militarist leaders and the United States in going to war after being attacked simply reveals a lack of historical knowledge of events as they unfolded and a total misunderstanding of the motivation of Japan in its attempt to establish hegemony in the Far East.
David,
It seems that you and I have similar literary tastes, although I think we have discussed this before. I, too, am a big fan of Kazuo Ishiguro, just as I am a fan of Cormac McCarthy, particularly his "Blood Meridian." What do you think of Jorge Luis Borges?
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 23:02:35
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to guitarbuddha)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: guitarbuddha
I really like the novels of Kazuo Ishiguro. His most famous work 'The Remains of the Day ' very consciously compares western and oriental views of class and power.
D.
I'm a great fan of Ishiguro myself. I really enjoyed "The Remains of the Day," both as book and movie. "The Unconsoled" is great as well.
On the wall behind me as I write, a bit above my head in the high ceilinged room, hangs a full size reproduction of Goya's "Don Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga" from one of the better printers. It is in a suitably ornate frame.
Manuel, who died young, was the son of the Duke of Altamira.
The painting is of a handsome boy about four years old. He is dressed very expensively in a brilliant red suit, silks and lace, the height of fashion of the day. He stands in a self-couscious pose. At his feet, held loosely by a string, is a magpie, toying with a piece of paper. Upon closer inspection it turns out to be Goya's calling card.
Also on the floor, to the viewer's right is a cage of finches.
To the viewer's left, crouched on the floor just behind the boy are three cats, fading progressively into the background. The eyes of all three, even those of the most obscure, are fixed glowingly upon the magpie. The cats are prepared to spring at the slightest opportunity, but for the moment they are biding their time.
The painting has alway been one of my favorites. It resonated with me the first time I saw it when I was about eight years old, at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.
I have read various interpretations of the piece. From first sight of it, for me it has been a commentary on class.
Few subcultures calibrate class so finely, or display it so overtly as the military.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 23:25:37
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill-
Any mathematician who reads is bound to be a fan of Borges. Sometime in the 1950s or '60s he came to the University of Texas for a while. Texas was then a center of the study of Old English and Old Norse, subjects of great interest to Borges.
Borges had an English grandmother, and read a good deal of English in his father's library. He gave a course of lectures at the University, which attracted a standing-room-only audience. By then he was in effect completely blind. He entered the room and sat at a desk.
Each hour long lecture was as elegantly composed as his stories. His English diction was that heard from Romance language speakers trained in classical rhetoric. The paragraphs, sentences, dependent clauses, were all delineated by vocal inflection more clearly than the punctuation of a text gone over by an expert copy editor. He was the talk of the campus for weeks.
McCarthy's "All the Pretty Horses" appealed greatly to me. I thought the movie was good too. His young hero travelled to Mexico in the late 1940s. I went alone at age 17 the summer of 1955. Mexico had changed some, but not by much. McCarthy's hero has a star crossed romance with a Mexican girl. My own, six years after my first of many trips was a bit more tragic. But I have said a fair amount here about my love for Mexico.
McCarthy's "No Country for Old Men" also struck a chord. The bleak southwest Texas landscape, the Mexican border town were accurately portrayed in the Coen Brothers' film. The performance of the psychopathic hit man employed by the drug smugglers and Tommy Lee Jones's progressively exhausted and eventually defeated sheriff were memorable.
So not only are McCarthy's books great, but for my money they have resulted in at least two good movies.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 27 2015 23:54:02
|
|
Miguel de Maria
Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill, one really can belabor this "false equivalency" too much. What you are doing is setting up a position where the US cannot possibly be criticized in any way. It is getting less subtle as time goes on. The first clue is that there is no nuance to your statements. You also ignore any sort of counterarguments and fail to acknowledge any mitigating circumstances. If you are trying to even appear fair, this is necessary--I learned that in sixth grade essay writing. One includes his opponent's possible rebuttals and use evidence to build your case. But I do not see any of that. History simply is not that simple. To me, at least, it becomes more and more evident that you are biased and need for the US to be 100% right in every way. Unfortunately, history is not a hard science, and you are not operating with scientific rigor here. This rigid, bullying form of argumentation really does your point no good. I will admit that I have slipped in a few sucker punches in the past, so I am just going to bring this one out in the open.
_____________________________
Connect with me on Facebook, all the cool kids are doing it.
https://www.facebook.com/migueldemariaZ
Arizona Wedding Music Guitar
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 0:07:47
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
Miguel, you certainly have attempted to establish a false equivalency between Japan's aggression against its Asian neighbors and the United States, and the United States going to war against Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor. And I have never suggested that "the U.S. cannot possibly be criticized in any way" or that I "need for the U.S. to be 100 percent right in every way." That is simply a facile attempt to launch an ad hominem attack on me in lieu of offering evidence and arguments against my position on the subject under discussion.
I have spent the greater part of my career studying and engaged in Asian affairs. I offered an explanation of Japan's actions and aggression from the beginning of the Meiji Restoration up to and including World War II. I detailed Japan's drive for modernization, industrialization, and military preparedness in order to take what it considered to be its rightful place among the world powers. I detailed Japan's aggression and occupation of its Asian neighbors from the 19th century to World War II. And I offered an explanation for why Asian countries have not fully accepted Japan in the way that European countries have fully accepted Germany. That, by the way, is a position gained in large measure through talks with Asian officials with whom I have discussed the issue.
The problem, Miguel, is not that I have not offered evidence or explanations for Japan's actions. The problem is that your ideological predisposition prevents you from considering any points of view that do not comport with your own. It is you who have offered no evidence to counter my position. You simply make statements that lack supporting evidence, which, I gather, you consider justified as long as they appear to advance your ideological agenda. And you apparently have decided that a personal attack substitutes for an evidence-based challenge. That you have resorted to an ad hominem attack does not become you, and it simply serves to confirm that you have no arrows left in your intellectual quiver.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 2:13:20
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
Stephen--
According to what I have read, what we would consider the enlightened policies of the Cordoba Caliphate were overturned by the Almohads, whose capital was in Marrakesh. The Almohads conquered Cordoba in the mid-12th century, and ended the policy of toleration.
The Almohads were soon succeeded by another intolerant Moroccan regime, the Almoravids, who fairly soon lost most of the Moorish territories in Al-Andalus to a coalition of Christian kings.
The steady decline of Islamic power in Iberia ended in 1492 with the fall of Granada. This was celebrated by the scourge of ethnic cleansing in Spain initiated by Los Reyes Católicos, Fernando and Isabela of Aragon y Castilla--the more or less predictable blowback.
Some even say that flamenco originated among the Moors and Jews driven into the hinterlands by the Holy Office and the monarchy. But of course people say quite a variety of things about the origin of flamenco.
Both of the intolerant Islamic regimes in the Maghreb and Al-Andalus, and for that matter the Moorish invasion that resulted in the Umayyad dynasty of Cordoba, had their origins among militant sects in Morocco that sound to me suspiciously like ISIS.
I know nothing of Islamic theology, and little enough about the medieval history of the Near East, except for the Crusades. My ancestors played a role in some of those spasms of supposedly "Christian" religious enthusiasm.
Back when I was a boy and the USA produced enough oil to satisfy its own demand (with Texas in the lead) the crusaders were still heroes. I have lived long enough to see them demoted to religious fanatics, and to see the success of the campaign begun by the Tudors to make my nickname an obscenity. O tempora! O mores!
But as usual, I digress.
Walking around the town square in Lockhart after a good barbecue lunch with visiting friends I knew at Kwajalein, we fell to talking about ISIS. I brought up the overthrow of the enlightened Cordoba Caliphate by a militant and intolerant sect, which soon fell to yet another.
One of my friends said, "I took a course in Islamic history when I was at Rice. This is the fifth time it has happened in the Near East."
Mr. Dooley said, "The fanatic does what God would have done, if He had known the facts of the case."
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 5:46:45
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
In all these discussion I have not heard the actual historical Iberian based khalifate being used as as an example of a real scenario. The Northern expansion of Islamic power into the Iberian area resulted in a policy of will coexistence between the muslim powers and the other races and religions living in the area. The Islamic powers brought and shared knowledge and also employed Jewish teachers and minor administrators.
Stephen,
I would go with Richard's understanding of both the Cordoba Caliphate and the subsequent, much harsher regimes of the Almohads and Almoravids. Under the more enlightened rule of the Cordoba Caliphate, Christians and Jews were protected as "people of the book" and were known as "dhimmi." Nevertheless, they had to pay a special tax and were restricted from engaging in certain activities. They could not ride a horse, carry a sword, hold high office, build their houses higher than Muslim houses, etc. In other words, they were pretty much second class citizens.
Nevertheless, while I think that Islamic tolerance in Al Andalus is sometimes over-rated, it was a pretty good bet, given the standards at the time, especially given how the Jews were treated in Christian Europe.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 11:28:09
|
|
guitarbuddha
Posts: 2970
Joined: Jan. 4 2007
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
Ishiguro may yet catch up with McCarthy, very few would question the quality of 'The Remains of The Day' in cinematic form. Whilst I have been unable to contemplate viewing the film version of 'Never Let Me Go' I was struck when reading it by the casting of a middle class literally cannibalizing a serf class for the greater good as defined by a ruling elite who have absented themselves from mainstream society. I have always been disappointed that, judging by the discussions in response to the movie both in the media and with friends, it is now fashionable to read fantasy/science-fiction as escapist and, to the extent that this is possible, ignore any allegorical intent.
Ishiguro's other novels 'An Artist of the Floating World' and 'A Pale View of Hills' both explore the hinterland of guilt which inspire the jarring evasion of central protagonists upon whose recollections the narrative voice is grounded. In contrast to 'The Unconsoled', where the musician overestimates his influence and responsibilities, the artist in 'Floating World' and the mother in 'A Pale View' both seek to disassociate themselves from the role which their actions played in the run up to and the social reorganisation subsequent to WWII.
'Blood Meridian' although often compared to Moby Dick is pretty clearly more 'Treasure Island' to my mind. It contains the single most shockingly rendered scene of horror I have ever read. Like Treasure Island it deals with a powerful and charismatic figure who succeeds to varying degrees to seduce the adventurous nature of a boy. I admire greatly the frank way in which McCarthy distinguishes his novel from Stevenson's by the stark manner in which he explores the deluded esteem in which the public and the politicians who marshall them hold the second group of mercenaries. Even in the face of their increasingly blatant atrocities their esteem endures.
I know very little of Borges (although I think we discussed 'The Aleph' briefly here) but I do imagine that I feel his influence on McCarthy and even one or two of our esteemed memoirists. I think that I might prefer McCarthy because in Borges I get the feeling that his elegaic and mythic style, when sufficiently well constructed, ennobles his villains in a way that McCarthy's closer observation, with violence centre scene or victims utterly without blame, refuses to.
D.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 13:41:17
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9352
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
Stephen--
But as usual, I digress.
Walking around the town square in Lockhart after a good barbecue lunch with visiting friends I knew at Kwajalein, we fell to talking about ISIS. I brought up the overthrow of the enlightened Cordoba Caliphate by a militant and intolerant sect, which soon fell to yet another.
One of my friends said, "I took a course in Islamic history when I was at Rice. This is the fifth time it has happened in the Near East."
Mr. Dooley said, "The fanatic does what God would have done, if He had known the facts of the case."
RNJ
Lockhart...hmm, is that where they have the jive ass BBQ with no sauce? Jesus H, will you guys ever learn? Sauce is essential.
I digress.
I knew about he warring factions of the successive moors , but I'll look further into it. Did you or Bill happen to take in the article in the Atlantic? The guy who wrote it outlined that some of the beliefs of ISIL are way out there and while did not do comparison with the ideologies of the later of the Marrakesh Moors, it seems like the ISIl thugs are literalist in the extreme and are pulling out ways of interpreting sharia law that are very esoteric. My distress is that the guy who wrote the article still considers them to be Islamic, but at the same time he makes the comparison between them and the Branch Davidian cult that was in Waco Texas. Now myself I would not characterize the Waco cult as Christian because they did not follow the basic altruistic tenets of well done Christianity. Just as the ISIL brutes are not conducting themselves according to the humanist and good universal values to be found in well done Islam. I believe they are not Islamic because they are using a religion to carry out their own willful transgressions.
Anyway, I hope I don't owe you money for these admissions of mental feebleness. But I am prepared to tender money for your listening services, and despite the fact you flaunted that you are eating BBQ in front of me I still consider you a friend, sir.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 14:32:40
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
Did you or Bill happen to take in the article in the Atlantic? The guy who wrote it outlined that some of the beliefs of ISIL are way out there and while did not do comparison with the ideologies of the later of the Marrakesh Moors, it seems like the ISIl thugs are literalist in the extreme and are pulling out ways of interpreting sharia law that are very esoteric.
Stephen, yes, I read the Atlantic article, "What ISIL Really Wants," By Graeme Wood. My takeaway was that the thrust of his article is that we in the West underestimate just how much ISIL incorporates elements of Islam in its ideology, elements that are taken from the Qur'an, the Hadiths (sayings of the Prophet), and Sharia Law. If you recall, Wood is especially concerned that the West, as a result of Political Correctness and an attempt to advance multiculturalism, is afraid to face up to such elements that are very much a part of Islam today. His example is that there is not a day that goes by that some government or religious official does not repeat the mantra that "Islam is a Religion of Peace."
If you have read the writings of the great historian of the Middle East and Islam Bernard Lewis, you will have noted that he suggests that 1400 years of Islam's interactions with the West suggest otherwise. Bernard Lewis is steeped in the history of Islam and its discontents, and is now a Professor Emeritus at Princeton.
For what it is worth, I have served a good share of my career in Islamic majority countries, from Pakistan to Indonesia and Malaysia. Additionally, I have read a fair amount on the subject of Middle Eastern history and Islam. I tend to agree with both Wood and Lewis. One of the primary reasons Islam has difficulty in coming to terms with modernity is it makes no distinction between the sacred and the secular. I would argue that Islam desperately needs the equivalent of the West's 18th century enlightenment, separating the secular world from the religious world and bringing back the spirit of rational inquiry.
I know Runner is very interested in this subject and had some interesting observations on Islam in the thread, "Is Logic Necessary to Win an Argument." I would be interested to hear what he as to say on this topic. Hope he joins in.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 17:35:39
|
|
Miguel de Maria
Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill,
Was my post the first ad-hominem here? I had perceived your jibes at post-modernism and non-historians arguing history to be directed towards me. If they were not, then I do indeed owe you an apology and I am embarrassed.
In any case, I hope you will concede that repeatedly bringing up the Sokal hoax does not qualify as evidence and has no place in a serious debate. If one group of post-modernists had been discredited, what does that have to do with me or this thread? I grew up in a time where post-modernism was a prominent feature of the liberal arts. Art, literature, and architecture. Perhaps because of this--or perhaps because of other reasons--I tend to approach the "party line"--that is, establishment pronouncements about current events and history--with skepticism. It's a starting point, not a fixed position. Is this ideology?
****
>Miguel, you certainly have attempted to establish a false equivalency between Japan's aggression against its Asian neighbors and the United States, and the United >States going to war against Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
There is no false equivalency. The US has been throughout its history expansionistic and militaristic. It occupied all of North America, then claimed South America, and continued to project its power to other parts of the world. Even now, it spends as much on its military as what, the next seven countries? Japan's neighbors may have bad feelings about its actions, but do you think the Native Americans felt fairly treated?
In sum:
Aggressive? Japan, check. The US, check.
If you perceived that my argument was that the US's retaliation to Pearl Harbor was unjustified, then you have grossly misunderstood me. Perhaps the fault is mine for lack of organization in presenting my thoughts. But then again, these were for the most part random comments in response to your remarks.
****
>And I have never suggested that "the U.S. cannot possibly be criticized in any way" or that I "need for the U.S. to be 100 percent right in every way." That is >imply a facile attempt to launch an ad hominem attack on me in lieu of offering evidence and arguments against my position on the subject under discussion.
Where have you ever admitted otherwise? In any of our several discussions on geopolitical affairs, you have never once conceded any wrongdoing or responsibility on the part of the US. Perhaps you have and I missed it.
>I offered an explanation of Japan's actions and aggression from the beginning of the Meiji Restoration up to and including World War II.
This is what you wrote:
>>Japan began "aping" (as you put it) Western technology and structure during the Meiji Restoration beginning in 1868. It was an internally-driven dynamic >>designed to turn Japan into a power. At the time, and as it continued its industrial and military buildup during the first half of the 20th century, there was no "far >>more aggressive civilization" attempting to "swallow up" Japan.
In response to what I wrote:
>They were an aggressive, dominant, militaristic culture that aped Western technology and structure in order to avoid being swallowed up by a far more aggressive >civilization--and lost.
I see no evidence, simply a narrative. You wrote that Japan wanted to emulate the West for its own purposes.
I wrote that Japan wanted to emulate the West to avoid being subjugated. To expand on that, the "far more aggressive civilization" of which I speak was, of course, the West, which had recently colonized other parts of Asia and China. The US sent warships to Japan in order to force it to trade (that is, Japan had natural resources the US wanted), a warlike action. Japan wished to avoid being dominated in the way that China had been. This desire played a large part in its modernization/militarization effort. I did not cite these facts because I considered them common knowledge. I am bewildered that you have ignored them.
****
>I detailed Japan's aggression and occupation of its Asian neighbors from the 19th century to World War II.
Which was noted. Please refer to the earlier part of my post which describes the US as similarly aggressive.
****
>And I offered an explanation for why Asian countries have not fully accepted Japan in the way that European countries have fully accepted Germany. That, by the way, is a position gained in large measure through talks with Asian officials with whom I have discussed the issue.
Your line of reasoning is that: Japan was aggressive and did not fully apologize, and so the rest of Asia does not embrace it. The evidence you offered was a contention that the apologies were weak. Now you add that Asian officials privately told you this was the case.
I am not really sure how one systematically compares apologies. I linked to a page of dozens of Japanese apologies that seemed to be adequate. Many of these are from Prime Ministers, the equivalent of our President, as I understand it, and other highly-placed officials. Other officials have, in several (?) cases, made statements that were much less sincere. Is it really surprising that different people, that different factions, within a country have different positions? How could such a situation make a material effect on geopolitical reality? Perhaps it is the case that what you say is so, but I will forbear from conceding to such a sweeping statement without far more evidence.
Do you accept that the Asian officials' dissatisfaction with Japanese apologies is more important than the national interests involved? I am truly curious.
****
>The problem is that your ideological predisposition prevents you from considering any points of view that do not comport with your own.
Incorrect, I have considered every point of view offered in this thread. Japan has been a nasty, warlike country, as you have pointed out. Also like Stephen said, a trait of its culture as a whole is its ability to mimic. If you say Japan is not accepted by its neighbors because it apologizes poorly, then I have to accept that as possibly true. Yet that is a difficult contention to prove, and you have not done so.
****
To turn to your own ideology, how am to interpret a post where castigate Japan (correctly in my view) for its colonization of surrounding areas but then, apparently unreflectively, write:
>The United States had taken over Hawaii originally because of agricultural interests, and, after the Spanish-American War, it served as a naval presence and way >station to the Philippines.
Did you not notice that you refer to the US seizing former Spanish territories (ie, the Spanish-American War) in addition to seizing Hawaii (previously owned by natives who were subsequently dominated by US settlers) in the same post as you attempt to deny equivalency between the US and Japan as aggressive countries? Surely you are exhibiting ideological bias if you do not notice both countries have been imperialistic?
*****
>It is you who have offered no evidence to counter my position. You simply make statements that lack supporting evidence, which, I gather, you consider justified >as long as they appear to advance your ideological agenda.
As I pointed out earlier, I have not cited historical data I considered commonly known. Bill, if you forgive me, I do not see that you have appended much historical data here, either. If you look back closely at what you have written, you have stated narratives, but not evidence. Evidence is data that supports your broad statements--the statements themselves do not qualify.
For example:
>Admiral Perry opened up Japan in 1854, and after the Japanese went through the Meiji Restoration in 1868 and beyond, they clearly were enamored of the >industrial and military capacity of the West and wanted to emulate it.
This is a narrative, but the evidence that supports it is missing.
In your following paragraph, you _do_, by contrast give evidence (third sentence):
>One of the main reasons for those unresolved consequences of WWII in Asia is the inability or unwillingness of the Japanese to formally apologize for their aggression and the atrocities they committed in the Asian theatre of operations, not to mention Pearl Harbor.
Their "apologies" are always couched in indirect terms such as "caused suffering," "past relations are regrettable," and "remorse." The closest thing to an absolute apology was when Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama declared in 1995 that Japan’s “colonial rule and aggression caused tremendous damage and suffering,” while expressing his “remorse.”
However, your evidence was completely rebutted by _my_ citation of Japanese war apologies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
Which, although apparently the point of this thread, you completely ignored.
*****
>And you apparently have decided that a personal attack substitutes for an evidence-based challenge. That you have resorted to an ad hominem attack does not become you, and it simply serves to confirm that you have no arrows left in your intellectual quiver.
Again, I perceived you to be inserting jibes against me (the post-modern, non-historian remarks). I apologize for stepping across the boundaries of polite conversation if these were not meant as indirect attacks.
I do wonder, in the midst of your charges of ideology to me, if you consider yourself free of such bias? I know that you consider yourself to have a rational and scientific outlook. Indeed I have complete confidence in your grasp of historical facts. However, confirmation bias--focusing on facts that support predetermined positions and ignoring those which contradict it--is such a hard thing to perceive in oneself. I feel learning about my own biases and blind spots is a worthy goal, if damned uncomfortable. It appears to me that you are only interested in those facts which show the US in the most pacifistic, moral, and innocuous light, in other words, you have a nationalistic or conservative bias. For what it's worth, I am a "fan" of the US as well--but perhaps not enough of one for many people's tastes.
We are not going to change the course of history or how it is viewed here in the Off-topic section. What is most interesting to me is the interaction of our various personalities, the filters of differing perspectives and life experiences, and somehow finding some small bit of common ground, that bit of the Venn diagram where things overlap. It really is fascinating to me that you and I can read the same sentences and focus on completely different things, that I what I consider important facts you completely ignore, that what I consider an obvious similarity you can vehemently deny. Perhaps it really is as simple as the fact that your knowledge of this subject is so much greater than mine that no two-sided discussion can possibly occur.
It also may be the case that you are misinterpreting some of my arguments. I have to tried to organize things as well as I am able in this post.
_____________________________
Connect with me on Facebook, all the cool kids are doing it.
https://www.facebook.com/migueldemariaZ
Arizona Wedding Music Guitar
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 17:56:38
|
|
runner
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill, FWIW, my interest in religion is strictly in its historical, political, psychological, and sociological aspects, as I found it by the age of 12 to be unrelated to physical reality. As an outsider, looking especially at the Abrahamic religions, I find recurrent episodes of fanaticism and savagery throughout their histories. Perhaps Judaism has the least dirty hands, but conversation with the West Bank settler zealots have given many pause. So I have no problem with calling the several religiously invoked or sanctioned pogroms, exterminations, whatnot, as end-of-spectrum manifestations of the several religions. But that is not the point we should be focused upon. Instead, the lesson to be learned is to understand the benefits that arise when religion is allowed/encouraged to fade away as a central axis about which private lives and public policy should revolve. This happened in the West, gaining tempo during the Enlightenment, and has been at least partially responsible for the freedoms and the standard of living that we enjoy today. The train has gone off the tracks in the West as non-religious fanaticisms of various sorts have worked upon the imaginations of those prone to intense, unquestioning belief. But there is no easy path to Utopia. As we have discussed, the problem with Islam is its conflating of the sacred and the secular, the groupthink, group do nature of mass public prayer, and the treatment of women as a species of domestic animal, though this seems endemic to almost all societies. I am not at all sanguine about how this will all turn out, and again stress the need for solidarity among the nations of the West in order to ensure the survival of our freedoms.
Dealing with ISIL is going to be very, very difficult. I envision some sort of perhaps unacknowledged but real alliance, strictly single-focus, among Iran, the Kurds, Shia Iraq, the Assad regime, the Druse, Maronite Lebanon, and Turkey, to contain ISIL in the north, as each has much to lose if ISIL strengthens. This alliance would be cynical in the extreme, and would probably quickly disintegrate as soon as the threat was seen to weaken. So be it. This same alliance would also keep an eye on Pakistan, a nuclear state with a serious Sunni terror problem. India would watch Pakistan on the east. Why are we surprised that Iran wants the means to build a bomb?
To the south, things are problematic. Unless a strong alliance is forged to protect Jordan, things could go sour quickly. The overall problem is that the entire Middle East has been so badly mismanaged by all concerned for so long (oil, religion) that everything could come apart at the seams. But were it not for oil and for the danger of exporting Islamic fanaticism into the West, we could just sit back and let things work themselves out. I mentioned before that the West should embark on a serious program to wean itself from fossil fuels from outside its borders.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 20:20:41
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: estebanana
Lockhart...hmm, is that where they have the jive ass BBQ with no sauce? Jesus H, will you guys ever learn? Sauce is essential.
I digress.
At this point digression may be the better part of valor.
Yes, we had eaten at Kreuz. As you might conclude from the name, Lockhart was a primarily German settlement. German butchers would smoke the meat that didn't sell right away, and sell it to the local farmers and their families when they came to the butcher shop. The barbecue would be served on butcher paper without sauce or utensils. You used you pocket knife to cut it up. Kreuz makes a point of continuing this tradition, so no sauce. No forks either. Bring your own or eat it with your fingers.
When I came back to Austin I decided to survey the four main barbecue joints in Lockhart, a 25-mile drive over a lightly traveled toll road with speed limits as high as 85 miles/hour (135 km/hr). But first I ran into an old friend who grew up in Lockhart, and asked him which place I should try first.
"Black's," he replied.
"So they have the best barbecue?"
"No, because they have my picture on the wall."
"??"
"They've got the high school football teams' pictures up on the wall, going way back."
My friend is still in quite good shape, but he has a rather slender build. "I never knew you played football."
"In a town as small as Lockhart you can play just about anything you want to."
Black's is pretty much in the standard mode of present day Texas barbecue joints. An intentionally ramshackle and not exactly spotless decor, long communal tables and benches, slow smoked brisket served with sauce on the side, and the standard side dishes of cold potato salad, pinto beans, sour pickles and white bread. The meat is really good, and the sauce is to my taste.
But I had to try Kreuz next. It is the biggest place of the four, by a considerable margin. This added to my doubt. It looks almost like the standard roadside tourist trap. But the meat is wonderful. No sauce, but moist, flavorful and every time I have been there, done to a turn. The sides are more old-timey Texas German: hot potato salad, sour kraut, green bean casserole, whole wheat or pumpernickel bread. You buy the potato salad etc. by the half-pint, pint, quart and so on. I eat at Kreuz more often than any of the others. Despite the Texas German flavor, the pit master is a Mexican American who has worked for Kreuz for years, starting when they were still in the old meat market downtown. The whole pit crew who slice the meat and serve it on butcher paper are his sons and nephews.
The newest and least traditional place (but still pretty damned traditional) is Chisholm Trail, at the opposite end of town from Kreuz and Black's. It started just the day before yesterday, in 1978, while Kreuz, Black's and Smitty's go back to the 19th century. Chisholm Trail has the best beans and cold potato salad, but I tend to go back and forth between Black's for ambience and sauce, and Kreuz for the meat and Texas German sides.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 21:27:47
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
But there is no easy path to Utopia. As we have discussed, the problem with Islam is its conflating of the sacred and the secular, the groupthink, group do nature of mass public prayer, and the treatment of women as a species of domestic animal,
I never say that something is impossible or that something will never come about. Surprising things do occasionally happen. For example, throughout the Cold War I did not think I would ever see the collapse of Communism and the Soviet Union in my lifetime. And yet it happened, and it happened fairly quickly once certain dynamics were set in motion.
Thus, I would never say that Ialam cannot change and evolve. Yet, I think any change or evolution will indeed take a long, long time. More than either Christianity or Judaism, Islam is a "literal" religion. The words of the Qur'an, considered to have been given by the Angel Gabriel and written down by Muhammad, are considered by all Muslims to be sacred, unquestioned, and eternal. Ordinary, moderate Muslims have a hard time comprehending the distinction between the secular and the sacred because such a distinction does not exist in their world view.
Any change or evolution in Islam toward a more secular form that values rational inquiry and comes to terms with modernity, without questioning whether it will still be "Islam," must come from within the Umma itself, the worldwide community of Muslims. The West cannot guide them in this direction. Yet it is hard for me to see that happening without the Islamic equivalent of the West's 18th century Enlightenment, as I have mentioned previously.
Yet, any attempt to secularize Islam and forge an Islamic Enlightenment, either by individuals or by groups, would be considered apostasy, and the punishment for apostasy in Islam is death. Thus, I see the maintenance of the status quo and the avoidance of any move toward an Enlightenment as self-reinforcing by an enclosed system that is nearly impossible to effect from within and clearly impossible to effect from without.
Again, I would never say "never" to anything, and I may be proved wrong here, just as I was proved wrong in thinking I would never see the collapse of Communism. But I would not place money on any movement toward a rational Islamic Enlightenment any time soon.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 28 2015 21:46:23
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Late night shop drawings (in reply to guitarbuddha)
|
|
|
Just returned from a weekend visit with my 96 year-old uncle (formerly a career Army officer who fought in MacArthur's Southwest Pacific Campaign, along with my father) who is in an assisted living facility in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, a two and one-half hour drive from Washington, DC. During the drive back this afternoon I was thinking of the authors we have discussed--Ishiguro, McCarthy, Borges--and others whose works have brought great enjoyment and insight into my life--Nikos Kazantzakis, V.S. Naipaul, and Italo Calvino (who, by the way, is considered a "Post-Modernist" writer) to name three (each for different reasons), and the many others too numerous to name.
One who had a profound effect on me at a young age, and since, was Lawrence Durrell, with his Alexandria Quartet, a tetralogy of interconnected novels that Durrell wrote in which he claimed to have used the principle of relativity as the basis for recounting the same events from different perspectives. Between 1957 and 1960, Durrell published "Justine," "Balthazar," "Mountolive," and "Clea." He lays them out in an interesting way, using pre-war and war-time Alexandria, Egypt as the backdrop for events.
Durrell's Alexandria is populated with a cosmopolitan set of characters that includes Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, and Jews, as well as the British protagonists. Although it is as much a product of Durrell's imagination as it is of actual pre-war Alexandria, I think it fairly describes Alexandria before Nasser's takeover of Egypt and expulsion of pretty much all of the non-Arab population. The writing is gorgeous. Durrell is a painter with words. And as the sequence of novels unfolds, it is interesting to find that what one thought occurred during an incident in "Justine," to use an example, was not what happened at all, and one finds in "Balthazar" that a completely different incident occurred than originally appeared to be the case. The story lines involving the various protagonists are interesting, covering everything from the nature of love to some of the darker aspects of Gnosticism.
Lawrence Durrell's brother was Gerald Durrell, the well-known naturalist and conservationist who wrote the best-selling "My Family and other Animals." Interesting family. A literary bent must run in the genes.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 1 2015 18:10:16
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.15625 secs.
|
Printable Version
