UK readers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
WantonWitch said:
Due to a lack of someone to get it on with......... I don't.

awwww, *hugs* you have my sympathy. And probably my flu now that I've hugged you :D
 
Plasmacaster said:
awwww, *hugs* you have my sympathy. And probably my flu now that I've hugged you :D


Thanks Plas.... for the *hugs* anyway..... if I start sneezing I'll be expecting you to supply the lemsip and tissues. :D
 
WantonWitch said:
Thanks Plas.... for the *hugs* anyway..... if I start sneezing I'll be expecting you to supply the lemsip and tissues. :D

You'll be more likely to cough your lungs up I'm afraid.

Oh and while I'm here I want to pimp my best friend's website. www.isthisthetruth.com

Its essentially about comics and philosophy and why George W. Bush is the idiot that everyone thinks he is.
 
Tristram Shandy!

Uncle-Toby-wannabe seeks Widow-Wadman-type for mutual digressions. Object: 600 pages of double entendres and sly references.
 
zukethecuke said:
Uncle-Toby-wannabe seeks Widow-Wadman-type for mutual digressions. Object: 600 pages of double entendres and sly references.


Hi Zuke.... come to give me my daily dose of confusion I see :D
 
Ooh are we confusing people today?

Well what about the orange lemur? Apparently the blue shoots wing monkeys flu blasts at the electric monkey blasts with grangle blobs. Cream? :nana: :cathappy:
 
Plasmacaster said:
Ooh are we confusing people today?

Well what about the orange lemur? Apparently the blue shoots wing monkeys flu blasts at the electric monkey blasts with grangle blobs. Cream? :nana: :cathappy:


That's it.... I'm not listening to either of you lunatics anymore :p
 
WantonWitch said:
That's it.... I'm not listening to either of you lunatics anymore :p

Hey, ain't no-one more disturbed in the head than me. Let's just hope that I can push the madness back into the depths of my mind before it leaps out to atack people
 
WantonWitch said:
Hi Zuke.... come to give me my daily dose of confusion I see :D


Hee hee! Sowing seeds of confusion! Some fall upon rock soil, and some among thorns, but some fall on WantonWitch and sprout forth bountifully!

Tristram Shandy is a novel by Laurence Sterne, published in installments about 1770 if I recall rightly. Novels were a new genre in English, with few rules or expectations or norms, but Sterne managed to break whatever rules he could find all the same.

The book is absolutely chaotic. The character Tristram Shandy is trying to tell his life's story (beginning at conception...) but he has something like attention deficit disorder. Stories get interrupted by other stories, and may be returned to a hundred pages later or may be left unfinished forever. Many of the situations are bawdy or ridiculous. Tristram's Uncle Toby is a retired military man who is completely oblivious to the Widow Wadman's desparate attempts to seduce him (at one point, in a potting shed, he offers to show her where he was wounded during the war; she's all ready to help him with his buttons, but he pulls out a map and points to a village in France). Sterne makes liberal use of italics , boldface , various fonts, and at one point prints a page of sheet music, at another a page that's solid black (in mourning for some character, I think), and at another a page of 'marble' (like on the flyleaf of some books) to indicate someone's inpenetrable thoughts.

It's a hoot. It's 600 pages -- and unfinished, because Sterne just kept publishing installments until he died. I highly recommend it. It is a major influence on my own prose stylings.
 
Last edited:
Plasmacaster said:
Hey, ain't no-one more disturbed in the head than me. Let's just hope that I can push the madness back into the depths of my mind before it leaps out to atack people


Watches Plas carefully as she edges towards the door.............
 
zukethecuke said:
Hee hee! Sowing seeds of confusion! Some fall upon rock soil, and some among thorns, but some fall on WantonWitch and sprout forth bountifully!



Thank you Zuke.... I don't know what I'd do without you ;) :rolleyes:
 
zukethecuke said:
Hee hee! Sowing seeds of confusion! Some fall upon rock soil, and some among thorns, but some fall on WantonWitch and sprout forth bountifully!

Tristram Shandy is a novel by Laurence Sterne, published in installments about 1770 if I recall rightly. Novels were a new genre in English, with few rules or expectations or norms, but Sterne managed to break whatever rules he could find all the same.

The book is absolutely chaotic. The character Tristram Shandy is trying to tell his life's story (beginning at conception...) but he has something like attention deficit disorder. Stories get interrupted by other stories, and may be returned to a hundred pages later or may be left unfinished forever. Many of the situations are bawdy or ridiculous. Tristram's Uncle Toby is a retired military man who is completely oblivious to the Widow Wadman's desparate attempts to seduce him (at one point, in a potting shed, he offers to show her where he was wounded during the war; she's all ready to help him with his buttons, but he pulls out a map and points to a village in France). Sterne makes liberal use of italics , boldface , and various fonts, and at one point prints a page of sheet music, at another a page that's solid black (in mourning for some character, I think), and at another a page of 'marble' (like on the flyleaf of some books) to indicate someone's inpenetrable thoughts.

It's a hoot. It's 600 pages -- and unfinished, because Sterne just kept publishing installments until he died. I highly recommend it. It is a major influence on my own prose stylings.

Yep, that's tristram shandy. One of my favorite texts that i studied during my degree. I hadn't even heard of it before hand and I'm glad I came across it. Sadly the same cannot be said for Middlemarch or Far from the Madding Crowd.
 
Plasmacaster said:
Yep, that's tristram shandy. One of my favorite texts that i studied during my degree. I hadn't even heard of it before hand and I'm glad I came across it. Sadly the same cannot be said for Middlemarch or Far from the Madding Crowd.

I read almost nothing for my degree -- I just looked at the pictures.

My Dearest, on the other hand, studied literature and history, and she is who gave me Tristram Shandy and said "Read this!" But she also has high praise for Middlemarch, which I've never gotten through. And we've BOTH been stymied by Ulysses.

Oh, and I fear Dubya is not an idiot. I thought so four years ago, but he is far more dangerous than mere stupidity can account for. There's a play we saw last year at the Royal National called "Stuff Happens". Don't know if it's still running, but if it is I strongly encourage you save up for tickets. It's a 21st century Greek tragedy -- Colin Powell is the fatally flawed hero.
 
I think we have high expectations of people in power. George Bush may not be stupid compared to the average joe (maybe he is just an average joe being pulled at by puppeteers) but for the president of the most powerful country in the world, he is lacking.

You know, I always feel guilty about thinking a lot of literature is rather boring, and sometimes quite badly written. I mean, Wuthering Heights. Great storyline, great characters. But where did plot structure go? Even with Tolkien! I mean, he really needed an editor. I think Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is really good though. Its structure, characters and characterisation, humour and wit is all really, really good without losing any style or quality of language. Some literature just bores me to tears though. I was forced to study Dickens (Hard Times) a few years ago. I never got through the book, but I managed to write an essay on it for which I was awarded a few marks short of full marks. Isn't that ridiculous?
 
Marsipanne said:
I think we have high expectations of people in power. George Bush may not be stupid compared to the average joe (maybe he is just an average joe being pulled at by puppeteers) but for the president of the most powerful country in the world, he is lacking.

You know, I always feel guilty about thinking a lot of literature is rather boring, and sometimes quite badly written. I mean, Wuthering Heights. Great storyline, great characters. But where did plot structure go? Even with Tolkien! I mean, he really needed an editor. I think Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is really good though. Its structure, characters and characterisation, humour and wit is all really, really good without losing any style or quality of language. Some literature just bores me to tears though. I was forced to study Dickens (Hard Times) a few years ago. I never got through the book, but I managed to write an essay on it for which I was awarded a few marks short of full marks. Isn't that ridiculous?

Your instructors should be ashamed for not catching you! What venerable institution of learning let you get away with that?

I've not read Hard Times myself. I have read a handful of other Dickens' novels -- including reading Tale of Two Cities out loud to a blind man. The extended metaphores are probably hard to follow when heard rather than read on the page, but the rhythm, almost flight, of Dickens' language was really wonderful.
 
zukethecuke said:
Your instructors should be ashamed for not catching you! What venerable institution of learning let you get away with that?

I've not read Hard Times myself. I have read a handful of other Dickens' novels -- including reading Tale of Two Cities out loud to a blind man. The extended metaphores are probably hard to follow when heard rather than read on the page, but the rhythm, almost flight, of Dickens' language was really wonderful.

Dickens is the spawn of bad taste in literature. Yes he is a good writer as a historian, but historians really shouldn't try to write prose. I can't stand any of the books i've tried to read by him, thankfully I managed to avoid him all through my degree, shame it did not apply during a-levels. He's like tom cruise, a lot of hype without any real talent.

I have a real problem with the 18th century novel though, reading one is like pulling out toenails with a pair of rusty pliars. For example, Jane Austin writes the most beutiful prose but nothing actually happens in the books. And for some reason we're supposed to admire the fact that she could write bollocks really really well. Excuse me for having an opinion but I always thought that a piece of shit was a piece of shit, even if you put it in a box, gift wrap it and tie a bow
around it.

I dont personally believe that George Bush is that dumb, he is pretty dumb and he is basically illiterate and he has a lot of problems in trying to say something. I think he's capable of latching onto an idea and not letting go (e.g. fighting daddie's war) but I would be very surprised if he didn't rely heavily on other people far more educated than him to get the job done. Do you know almost 70% of americans couldn't point out america on a map? Somehow I think he's among that 70%...
 
Stuff does happen in Jane Austen stories! Just over a more extended period of time. The pacing is really good in Pride and Prejudice though--the story's a classic! It's like a Cinderella story. Not-the-prettiest (but with inner beauty--'she has fine eyes'), smart-ass Girl-next-door meets cool, aloof, gorgeous billionaire. Don't get along at first, but then realise their attraction for each other and get married at sumptuous wedding and go off and live in his huge country mansion. Of course, there's more to it at that, but at its base, that's what Pride and Prejudice is. Women like that kind of stuff, it's really timeless. That's why Hana Yori Dango is so popular. Only replace one billionaire with two, and they're fighting over you. Pride and Prejudice even has the jealous, rich biatch who wants your guy, the double-wedding with beloved sister and bad guy who gets his comeuppance. Hollywood steals so much from Pride and Prejudice.

Tom Cruise is a genius though. Maybe not an artistic one, but undoubtedly a shrewd money-worker. I admire a guy who can look after his cash well. Personally, I'm a firm believer in investing and doing things with your money, rather than sitting on it. Tom Cruise is very clever, as is Spielberg. And Tom Cruise isn't that bad an actor at all. He has undoubtedly got screen presence, and he's got bucketloads of charisma.

I find I can admire well-written prose, but well-written prose does not a good story make and I have to admit I read a book for its story than its brilliant literary style. If it has good style, all the better, because it makes reading the book more enjoyable on another level, but if it only has good style, but a crappy story, then I won't enjoy it. Sometimes an overdone style and sumptuous vocabulary and immaculate grammar will actually smother the story. I mean, apparently, Georgette Heyer writes Pride and Prejudice-esque stories, but when you've got page-long paragraphs, and endless inane descriptions you forget about the story. You need to get the balance right. In Pride and Prejudice, I think Austen did, but Persuasion just made me bored (still got through it in the end) and Emma bores me a little (it's all right.... but not as good as P & P) and Sense and Sensibility.. I was a bit meh about the storyline.

I'm always shocked by all these stats about America. I'm actually religiously scientific (my favourite little oxymoron of the day--made it up myself) and America's reputation as being gung-ho Christian 'you will go to hell because you believe in evolution' thing really gets to me. I know all Americans aren't like that, but I read in a newspaper that a survey conducted by the New York Times showed that 55% of americans believe solely in creationism. No evolution at all. I find that quite shocking, being a gung-ho 'science is cool' type. I'm probably not right to be so science-fanatic but hey.. I just love science.

But hey, I also heard that 80% of statistics are made up. That's really ironic. It's hard to know what to believe. But I'm not religious at all, I'm just very scientific.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top