william.scherk

Wow, this is fun! My quotes from French Wikipedia above show numerous examples that contradict your unwarranted claim. You pick one, slough past the clear indication that 'la place Dauphine" is written in French regularly (after having avoided the French article on the place), and you also seem to consider that you have done your homework on this issue. This is inexplicable to me, Phil, honestly ... I do not understand your insistence that you are right when you are wrong ...

I disagree! I think that they were trying to get us to believe that they were Whistler's mother, Isaac Newton, Thomas Paine and a white cat with a black spot. But, thanks to your brilliant detective work, I'm now less trusting and gullible! Thanks so much! J I do not get the joke, I guess. Ninth Doctor I always thought referred to the ninth Doctor from the Doctor Who series (a popular television show from the UK that has been running for some years). Now, I say this because I recall an earlier Avatar by Ninth Doctor in which the picture was of the Ninth Doctor ... I hope someone can please let me know which joke I missed, or if there is more than one joke, can someone please explain them all to me, perhaps in point form with bolded bits and a shonky elaboration? Anyone who is curious can easily check Phil’s claim, the quote from Peikoff comes 3 minutes in. http://www.peikoff.c...iction-to-read/ I don’t think this needs explaining to people of normal intelligence, but let me spell out that Peikoff’s statement “can I read this without difficulty” relates only to his page 1 test, not to the title or the blurb tests. He rambles quite a bit over his title and blurb tests, and mea culpa I didn’t include any detail related to that other material above. Why, you may ask? Perhaps it’s because this thread is supposed to be about the beginnings of books. Now I wonder, did I claim to have summarized all of Peikoff’s comments? Mmm, nope, I don't believe I did. Do I think Peikoff’s comments are worth your time? Alas no, not at all. It may even be dopier crap than Phil typically spews. But do check it out, and share your thoughts. Even the many members of Phil's "Marm-posse" are encouraged to weigh in. I may have had a small cerebral accident and now be suffering anosognosia, but bear with me: -- is it just me, or does Phil not understand relatively uncommon socio-cultural references? Is it just me, or does it seem as if Phil rarely reads or follows links? It is probably just me. Anyway, I listened to the Peikoff podcast that tries to answer how he chooses non-Objectivist fiction. For those who do not (like Phil, perhaps) subject themselves to The Voice, here is how he chooses, stripped of hums, haws, blabber and tics: Peikoff goes to a used book store. He asks for the General Fiction aisle He goes to that aisle and scans titles ... the titles must have some interest to him (eg, "I wonder what that's about?") Gone with the Wind is a great title. Next, Peikoff looks at the 'blurb.' - if the book blurb contains any notice of Prizes, it's out. - if there are any quotes from other authors, it's thrown out of consideration - if the blurb smacks of Political Correctness, "minorities"(?), and any science fiction, which is grotesque. - serial killers, subject: Evul, out. - (but!) it does not have to be philosophically agreeable (?) - "it can be anti-Objectivist as long as there's some aspect I find interesting." - eg, Les Miserables, Dostoevsky ... So, if the blurb is OK, then Peikoff reads Page One only. Regarding the first page, the simple question he asks is, "Can I read this without difficulty." It might be a style where you have to "concentrate" or you don't exactly know why one sentence follows another ... Peikoff summarizes: if it passes the title and blurb and first page test, he will buy it. He doesn't go to bookstores that often. He may buy 20 or 30 books ... and only about half of them survive past page two, five or ten. Some of them you can get right to the end, though. And if he really likes a book, he goes back and reads all of that author. Some are good, some are bad. --- now, I have to go have a soul cleanse.

Phil Coates did answer some of my points on list in an reasonably civil manner. In one point, though, I beg to differ with his opinion. Re FRENCH CAPITALIZATION CONVENTIONS. It is odd that you say "I am correct," when you are incorrect. I am bilingual and this particular 'convention' stumped me at first. As with naming 'The Lawrences' as 'les Lawrence,' French has many pitfalls ... I did actually Google "Place Maubert." In fact, I linked to the French wikipedia entry on "Place Maubert." Indeed, I wrote 'See the French-language history of place Maubert and its present day Metro station.' If you, Phil, had visited the French site, you might have seen sentences like these: La place Maubert est une place située dans les quartiers de la Sorbonne Statue d'Étienne Dolet (1509-1546), à l'emplacement de son supplice, place Maubert en 1899 Réel emplacement de la place Maubert, avec la statue d'Étienne Dolet Le marché de la place Maubert If you had also checked the link to the Metro Station Maubert - Mutualité [http://fr.wikipedia....%A9tro_de_Paris)] you might also have seen this sentence: Son nom provient de la place Maubert et de la Maison de la Mutualité, proches de la station. Phil, the fact is that one does NOT capitalize both words in a sentence. Surely you will find a sign "Place Vendôme" and "Place des Vosges" or whatever, but in a sentence, the word 'place' is NOT capitalized. It may be that the French Academy has it wrong, along with the two books of picky French grammar that I consult, but I do think in this case you are mistaken. Witness these place names, taken from French texts, brother Phil: Elle a été appelée place Vendôme dès le xviie siècle, du nom de l'Hôtel de Vendôme qui se trouvait là. La place Joachim-du-Bellay occupe l'emplacement de l'ancien cimetière des Innocents Située à l'ouest de l'île de la Cité, la place Dauphine constitue la seconde place royale parisienne du xviie siècle, après la place des Vosges. La place du Palais-Royal est une place située dans le 1er arrondissement de Paris. Avec la place Colette et la place du Théâtre, c'est une des trois places qui bordent les jardins du Palais-Royal et la Comédie-Française. La place des Victoires est située à cheval sur les 1er et 2e arrondissements de Paris.

Phil has answered my point about French Capitalization conventions, and also sharpened his criticism of Umberto Eco:

As I mentioned to Phil privately by email, I admit to a great interest in urban planning, Paris ... and I am a fan of Umberto Eco. Full Disclosure. I wonder if George ever gets around to this kind of fiction?

This is most hilarious, Carol. I accept my fair share of the blame. How many washers does Oscar have ...?

I very much enjoyed the opening sentence from the new English edition of Il cimitero di Praga. I note that Wikipedia touts its sales "The book is a worldwide bestseller ... that sold millions of copies as of 2010." **Amazon gives a blurb that perhaps explains its appeal: Nineteenth-century Europe—from Turin to Prague to Paris—abounds with the ghastly and the mysterious. Conspiracies rule history. Jesuits plot against Freemasons. Italian republicans strangle priests with their own intestines. French criminals plan bombings by day and celebrate Black Masses at night. Every nation has its own secret service, perpetrating forgeries, plots, and massacres. From the unification of Italy to the Paris Commune to the Dreyfus Affair to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Europe is in tumult and everyone needs a scapegoat. But what if, behind all of these conspiracies both real and imagined, lay one lone man? What if that evil genius created its most infamous document? Now, Philip Coates does not find the opening sentence agreeable or effective. Chacun a son goût and all that ... -- please speak for yourself, Phil. By the time you got to the verb, you yourself may have been lost. Not me, not Ninth. To my eyes, and speaking only for myself, the sentence does several things at once. It locates me the reader in place. It locates the reader to time. It gives a brief background to the place Maubert, salting the plain information with tidbits of a darker, violent history over the years: Place Maubert is dangerous in 1897 ("risk and peril") Place Maubert is in the 4th arrondisement. Place Maubert has a slang reference: the Maub. Place Maubert was once a Middle Ages centre of university life. During medieval times, students flocked to the place from nearby faculties. The faculty of Arts, for example, was found in the Roman-named Vicus Stramineus (in French Rue du Fouarre) After the Middle Ages, place Maubert was the site of public executions for apostles of free thought such as Etienne Dolet. Place Maubert is/was one of the few places in Paris that were not devastated by the urban schemes of Baron Hausmann under Napoleon III. (more information is implied, of course, if one is familiar with the history of Paris) True enough, if one needs to count such things ... I differ in my analysis, as can be seen above and below. I also disagree in part that the sentence is a longwinded pretentious train wreck. Train wreck, no, pretentious, yes, but -- the but to signal that Eco may be riffing on conventions of 19th century literature (consider only Dickens extremely long introductory paragraphs); longwinded ... again, yes, but. I counted place Maubert, the Faculty of Arts in Vicus Stramineus, a tangle of malodorous alleys, the course of the Bièvre, and the bowels of the metropolis. Just five for me ... 1) a passerby crossing the place; 2) Baron Haussman; 3) Etienne Dolet; 4) Faculty of Arts; 5) criminal circles ... I agree that some of the references might escape first reading, especially if one knows nothing about the history of Paris, or if one is uninterested in the history of Paris. I believe it is indeed a rich (for some, over-rich) confection that pays dividends to the engaged reader (me). I am quite sure, me, though you may not be, Phil. It is clear to me that place Maubert was a place of execution. Rue du Fouarre is French for the latin Vicus Stramineus (vicus stramineus means, roughly, street of straw. In french, fouarre means 'straw' or "paille de toutes sortes de céréale, paille pour empailler les chaises" (chair-stuffing, straw of all kinds of cereal crops). Georges-Eugène Haussmann. His 'devastations' are a result of the rebuilding of Paris in the mid/late 19th century, under Napoleon III. This is a famous reconstruction, or at least famous among those interested in the history of Paris, or more specifically urban planning ... See the Rebuilding of Paris for a brief overview, if interested. Yes, you kind of have to know what Haussman is (in some circles) famous for. Phil, if you become familiar with Haussman and his famous projects, you will understand that for many people, the meaning of the word is quite clear. From a warren of Roman, medieval and other streets and alleys, Paris was transformed into the city we know today -- a city of grand boulevards. You can understand that clearing old warrens and ancient streetscapes required great destruction of the existing urban fabric. Moreover, once you know this, you understand that Eco is pointing to 'the Maub' as a neighbourhood that was not slashed through with boulevards and reconstruction. This ancient sector was unscathed in 1897, with all that this implies. I understand your point of view, Philip, but I was ravished by the opening sentence. I hope you understand that some people (me) can take different things from this excerpt, without denigrating your reaction. Phil, you are incorrect with regard to French capitalization conventions. See the French-language history of place Maubert and its present day Metro station. In French, there is no convention to capitalize place in this context. I suspect that the Bièvre will indeed play a part in the story. You may not be aware, Phil, but the Bièvre springs at Versailles and emptied into the Seine in the area of Gare D'Austerlitz. Over the course of the centuries, and especially after the mid-19th century, the Bièvre was relentlessly confined, roofed-over, buried in conduits, re-routed into Paris sewers, and so on. At the time of the story, however, there was still an flowing route of commerce, disposal, sewage, chemicals, and more ... in the neighbourhood of place Maubert at the time of the story, la Bièvre was very much a vital part of the neighbourhood. Here is a couple of pictures at Bievre.org: These show this urban stream as it was in late 19th century (in 1912 the urban reaches of the stream were put completely underground, though last year plans to resurrect la Bievre reached fruition). Yes, this was the last bit of the flow of the Bievre in central Paris that had not been covered and conduited. The bowels of Paris has a nice, redolent connotation, to my nose! I can understand your perspective, Phil. On first glance, the sentence can appear to be a grotesque overreach of authorial intentions. But for me at least, the sentence is alluring, enticing, promising of deep riches, historical detail, of Paris sewers, criminals, danger, catacombs, hidden rivers, intrique, death, conspiracy, etcetera! I will post this also to my Friends and Foes blog here at OL. Hope you will respond there, Phil! PS -- Ninth, feel free to correct me where I have gone adrift! PPS -- Phil, please answer in the comment section of my blog. I will keep the comments free from vulgarity, insults and other sequelae of long-standing disputes. ________________ ** [this is from my last mention of The Name of the Rose) I was looking at the world's top best-selling books list at Wikipedia today, and was sobered to realize that Eco hit 50 million with Il Nome della Rosa and Rand did not rank at all. Link

I very much enjoyed the opening sentence from the new English edition of Il cimitero di Praga. I note that Wikipedia touts its sales "The book is a worldwide bestseller ... that sold millions of copies as of 2010." **Amazon gives a blurb that perhaps explains its appeal: Nineteenth-century Europe—from Turin to Prague to Paris—abounds with the ghastly and the mysterious. Conspiracies rule history. Jesuits plot against Freemasons. Italian republicans strangle priests with their own intestines. French criminals plan bombings by day and celebrate Black Masses at night. Every nation has its own secret service, perpetrating forgeries, plots, and massacres. From the unification of Italy to the Paris Commune to the Dreyfus Affair to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Europe is in tumult and everyone needs a scapegoat. But what if, behind all of these conspiracies both real and imagined, lay one lone man? What if that evil genius created its most infamous document?Now, Philip Coates does not find the opening sentence agreeable or effective. Chacun a son goût and all that ... -- please speak for yourself, Phil. By the time you got to the verb, you yourself may have been lost. Not me, not Ninth. To my eyes, and speaking only for myself, the sentence does several things at once. It locates me the reader in place. It locates the reader to time. It gives a brief background to the place Maubert, salting the plain information with tidbits of a darker, violent history over the years: Place Maubert is dangerous in 1897 ("risk and peril") Place Maubert is in the 4th arrondisement. Place Maubert has a slang reference: the Maub. Place Maubert was once a Middle Ages centre of university life. During medieval times, students flocked to the place from nearby faculties. The faculty of Arts, for example, was found in the Roman-named Vicus Stramineus (in French Rue du Fouarre) After the Middle Ages, place Maubert was the site of public executions for apostles of free thought such as Etienne Dolet. Place Maubert is/was one of the few places in Paris that were not devastated by the urban schemes of Baron Hausmann under Napoleon III. (more information is implied, of course, if one is familiar with the history of Paris) True enough, if one needs to count such things ... I differ in my analysis, as can be seen above and below. I also disagree in part that the sentence is a longwinded pretentious train wreck. Train wreck, no, pretentious, yes, but -- the but to signal that Eco may be riffing on conventions of 19th century literature (consider only Dickens extremely long introductory paragraphs); longwinded ... again, yes, but. I counted place Maubert, the Faculty of Arts in Vicus Stramineus, a tangle of malodorous alleys, the course of the Bièvre, and the bowels of the metropolis. Just five for me ... 1) a passerby crossing the place; 2) Baron Haussman; 3) Etienne Dolet; 4) Faculty of Arts; 5) criminal circles ... I agree that some of the references might escape first reading, especially if one knows nothing about the history of Paris, or if one is uninterested in the history of Paris. I believe it is indeed a rich (for some, over-rich) confection that pays dividends to the engaged reader (me). I am quite sure, me, though you may not be, Phil. It is clear to me that place Maubert was a place of execution. Rue du Fouarre is French for the latin Vicus Stramineus (vicus stramineus means, roughly, street of straw. In french, fouarre means 'straw' or "paille de toutes sortes de céréale, paille pour empailler les chaises" (chair-stuffing, straw of all kinds of cereal crops). Georges-Eugène Haussmann. His 'devastations' are a result of the rebuilding of Paris in the mid/late 19th century, under Napoleon III. This is a famous reconstruction, or at least famous among those interested in the history of Paris, or more specifically urban planning ... See the Rebuilding of Paris for a brief overview, if interested. Yes, you kind of have to know what Haussman is (in some circles) famous for. Phil, if you become familiar with Haussman and his famous projects, you will understand that for many people, the meaning of the word is quite clear. From a warren of Roman, medieval and other streets and alleys, Paris was transformed into the city we know today -- a city of grand boulevards. You can understand that clearing old warrens and ancient streetscapes required great destruction of the existing urban fabric. Moreover, once you know this, you understand that Eco is pointing to 'the Maub' as a neighbourhood that was not slashed through with boulevards and reconstruction. This ancient sector was unscathed in 1897, with all that this implies. I understand your point of view, Philip, but I was ravished by the opening sentence. I hope you understand that some people (me) can take different things from this excerpt, without denigrating your reaction. Phil, you are incorrect with regard to French capitalization conventions. See the French-language history of place Maubert and its present day Metro station. In French, there is no convention to capitalize place in this context. I suspect that the Bièvre will indeed play a part in the story. You may not be aware, Phil, but the Bièvre springs at Versailles and emptied into the Seine in the area of Gare D'Austerlitz. Over the course of the centuries, and especially after the mid-19th century, the Bièvre was relentlessly confined, roofed-over, buried in conduits, re-routed into Paris sewers, and so on. At the time of the story, however, there was still an flowing route of commerce, disposal, sewage, chemicals, and more ... in the neighbourhood of place Maubert at the time of the story, la Bièvre was very much a vital part of the neighbourhood. Here is a couple of pictures at Bievre.org: These show this urban stream as it was in late 19th century (in 1912 the urban reaches of the stream were put completely underground, though last year plans to resurrect la Bievre reached fruition). Yes, this was the last bit of the flow of the Bievre in central Paris that had not been covered and conduited. The bowels of Paris has a nice, redolent connotation, to my nose! I can understand your perspective, Phil. On first glance, the sentence can appear to be a grotesque overreach of authorial intentions. But for me at least, the sentence is alluring, enticing, promising of deep riches, historical detail, of Paris sewers, criminals, danger, catacombs, hidden rivers, intrique, death, conspiracy, etcetera! I will post this also to my Friends and Foes blog here at OL. Hope you will respond there, Phil! ________________ ** [this is from my last mention of The Name of the Rose) I was looking at the world's top best-selling books list at Wikipedia today, and was sobered to realize that Eco hit 50 million with Il Nome della Rosa and Rand did not rank at all. Link

With five or so pressing projects, engagements and intellectual chores awaiting, how interesting that I cannot stay on task. I jump in to an OL thread with a dorky translation for George H Smith, I pat myself on the back, gain an interesting insight into liberty of minds, and then look back at my trail in dismay ... I blame Carol Jane, not because she caused it, but because she is so nice, she can take it. My last four posts to OL made zero impression anyway, except for a comment on Roger's blog. I started a conversation with him, that went nowhere fast, and my exchange with Michael Marotta on the subject of MENA revolutions being 'spontaneous' slipped off the plate of discussion with no notice. I am either very annoying, very chauvinistic, very demanding, or just no fun to discuss things with. My internal lantern of Watch-Your-Arrogance-Bucko is on full, so I cannot imagine I scare people. The only things that scare OLers are Obama and Collectivism, The Insidious Cancer .... ________________________________ Here is my stab at it, George, with assistance from GoogleTranslate and a touch of OCD. X-ray may be adding just a touch of 'between the lines' -- I think the message is fairly straightforward (if luscious-sounding in Italian!) The word tolerance provides, and at the same time assumes the coexistence of the "tolerant" and "tolerated".The psychological and even moral inequality is obvious. From time to time, the sensitivities of free minds flee from the politically-correct, do-gooder, "progressive' and/or 'progressivist' connotations.Maybe you can post this translation back to the gentleman to verify: I assume, perhaps wrongly, that he is not reading George H Smith in Italian. Source: Anyone here read Italian?

Here is my stab at it, George, with assistance from GoogleTranslate and a touch of OCD. X-ray may be adding just a touch of 'between the lines' -- I think the message is fairly straightforward (if luscious-sounding in Italian!) The word tolerance provides, and at the same time assumes the coexistence of the "tolerant" and "tolerated". The psychological and even moral inequality is obvious. From time to time, the sensitivities of free minds flee from the politically-correct, do-gooder, "progressive' and/or 'progressivist' connotations. Maybe you can post this translation back to the gentleman to verify: I assume, perhaps wrongly, that he is not reading George H Smith in Italian.

Phil's post in response to your plaint is especially instructive, Roger. I am sorry that Phil feels somewhat defeated by a longstanding hostility or indifference to his work and studies in Objectivism, and that he has given up on getting through to or influencing Objectivists. He sounds thwarted, depressed, full of anomie (and not a little bit of resentment). I feel compassion for Phil and I salute him for offering a frank psychologically open rejoinder. As with his much earlier notes on disappointments and setbacks in regard to Peikoff and TAS, it is these kinds of notes that make a deep impression on me. The honesty is remarkable, and the stark centre of his distress is made apparent. There is an Elephant in the room, however. When Phil last retreated from posting on OL, he closed the door to OL with insults and contempt for this place. The impression he have was that he would NEVER be back. Well, he came back. And when he came back, of course folks here were waiting to comment on his Final Departure Notice from several months back. That Elephant, that action, that slamming of the door, and that contemptuous dismissal of the entire community lingers in the minds of those he assailed on his way out. When he came back to posting, he did not in any way comment on the circumstance of his departure. Nor did he respond to the first polite and then increasingly insulting demands that he answer for himself. The contempt he had for the people here, for Michael, for Kat was profound. In my eyes, he has only deepened the sense of disdain and contempt for the community by refusing comment on his earlier departure. In my eyes this was a mistake, and at least part of the present dogpile is directly related to that contempt he showed to everyone. It rankles. It needs explaining. It needs comment -- from Phil and no other.

Michael, I want to check your meaning here -- when you say 'these uprisings,' are you speaking of all of these, or just several: Bahrain, Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria? The second meaning I want to check is 'spontaneous.' What would be the hallmarks of a truly spontaneous uprising? I mean, can you point to an uprising (or rebellion, or revolution) that was indeed spontaneous in the fullest sense of the word, a revolution that was mostly, largely, on balance, unplanned and undirected? Or, put another way, is there such a thing as a spontaneous uprising? Is there a comparison you mean to make? But to answer your question, I do indeed consider the Libyan uprising against Gaddafi as spontaneus -- but only if I had a forced choice between spontaneous and its assumed or unmentioned antonyms. So I would consider the Velvet Revolution to be spontaneous, as I would the Riel Rebellion, and perhaps even the American Revolution -- but again, only if I was forced to choose between spontaneous and its antonyms. (the provocative article in New Scientist noted at the link Michael provided: Revealed, the Capitalist Network that Runs the World. See also the excellent skeptical article and following commentary at the Physics ArXiv blog)

It strikes me odd that the initial analogy was "look at studying Objectivism as if it were Mathematics." This hidden premise is faulty, not applicable, so any conclusion seems a case of petitio principii ...

I will leave the last word on the death of Gaddafi to a Libya exile, Mohammed Mesrati, from his article today in the UK's Telegraph.

From King of Kings to hiding in a storm drain. Thanks for your 42 years of repression, you get slaughtered by your own people, and your body abused and later paraded through the streets of Misurata on truck. Not quite what you planned, but ...

Funny to be back on OL posting, and having had a 140 char limit elsewhere. Let's see how I do. Source: It's meee

Success! Yes, Carol Jane and I are 'safe' and in communication with the Transitional Council. In my stumbles around the outer internets I have discovered Muslim Libertarians, Libertarian Arabs, Arab Randbots, democracy talk, freedom talk. I owe OL a report. If you really wonder what I have been doing with my keyboard, I have become a Twitter maniac (he said without shame). This is what I write now. This is what depths I have sounded: RT #NewsSyriaStyle usually includes attractive presenters, dramatic music, confessions, conspiracies and a tone of bizarre self-delusion.RT Everyone loves #NewsSyriaStyle! Armed Gangs! A valiant President! Unimaginable Conspiracies! Dialogue! Giant Flags! Confessions! #Syria Thanks, MSK, for getting under the dashboard and giving me back my voice.

Some time ago on this labyrinthine thread, I mentioned that I would be selling xerox copies of my original FOR transcript for $40. I printed up 10 copies and have sold 8 so far. Frankly, this was more trouble than it was worth, but since I still have two copies left, I am willing to sell those. After those are gone, I doubt if I will sell any more printed versions, given the hassles involved; instead, I will probably confine myself to selling and emailing the original Wordstar files from 1988. The two FOR transcripts that I have left are copies of the manuscript that I printed in 1998, during the height of my public controversy with Wendy McElroy. The title page reads, in part: For those who may have forgotten, this is the manuscript that Wendy claims to have completely erased from her hard drive in 1994, when she supposedly starting writing TRW "from scratch." Those of you with a copy of TRW will get a big laugh from this outrageous lie when you compare my FOR manuscript to TRW. Huge chunks were copied verbatim by Wendy, and most of the remainder was closely paraphrased. Indeed, I doubt if there is a single section in my FOR manuscript that Wendy did not appropriate in one form or another. As I said, I only have two copies left. The $40 includes the UPS shipping fee, unless you live outside the U.S. The copies are numbered and signed by me. The single-spaced printout runs 98 pages. If you are interested, please contact me offlist at: smikro@comcast.net. Ghs Source: My AmazonReview of "The Reasonable Woman," allegedly by Wendy McElroy

No, it was what you wanted somebody else to do for you. Source: Niall Ferguson: The 6 killer apps of prosperity

I normally agree with you on the Phil file, but it occurs to me that the problem might be a Blind Spot In The Mind. If you have read about or experienced anosognosia, you will see what I mean. On the other hand, who wants to get drawn into an embarrassing discussion of one's gaping inconsistencies?

It is a good place for discussion and ranting and intercommunal understanding. Thanks for the opportunity to blog and for the opportunity to copy out my posts before they fuse. I wonder how much the blog module costs per year, he said nosily, scrabbling for his cheque book.

Yes! I saw something today that I thought would tweak the funny bones of a few OLers, from across the socialist hellholers/Randian hardliners divide. I can't leave that image up due to the dead hand of intellectual property law, but during the short time I tempt the law to come get me, I also add the appealing capitalism of the magazine's no-doubt extremely profitable prints and schwag line: + cups, t-shirts, unframed smaller prints, but sorry no fridge magnets. I am also sorry for not hewing my usual wood and drawing my usual water.

Sad news for many Canadians of all political stripes -- our own Jack Layton has died.

Not all of his 36 Youtube videos are mere audio + photo. Some have the Dour Doctor young and fresh and vibrant, sounding just like (pre voice-training) Preston Manning, wearing an abundance of what we used to call Hockey Hair. Here's fifteen minutes of delight, from the last century, with a stunning 28 views:

Well, here is a treat for you, from the dawn of time, a skimped-out-on-visuals regurge of a radio interview with Mary Ann Sures: "What Is Art?" . . . Jonathan, part one of four! Onward, Objectivism, to the technological advances of the splendid 20th Century!