While We Wait: Writer's Block & Other Lame Excuses

Status
Not open for further replies.
Even more so asian students, which as racist as it seems/is to believe this, tend to have a better at-home climate for success.
 
The point of the story was that she was able to get access to laboratory materials at Stanford. America definitely has the biggest disparity between secondary and post-secondary educational resources.

Is that said with sarcasm or not, as I cannot tell. Speaking as someone who works with children who live in poor neighborhoods and go to poor schools the disparity between my own middle/highschool's resources and that of these low income children is pretty huge.

Another friend of mine works with Teach for America in Cleveland's MLK and, jesus, is it scary/disturbing to know such schools exist.
 
What I don't see is how being a Biblical literalist keeps you from being a good businessman. Or a good... well, a lot of things, other than evolutionary biologist or school biology teacher.

I wonder by whom. :mischief:

I was thinking of Hamlet, but did you want to challenge him for the position? :p
 
I was thinking of Hamlet, but did you want to challenge him for the position? :p
All the good Hamlets were Commonwealth citizens anyway, although the jury's out on whether Mel Gibson Banging Glenn Close was better than Ken Branagh Just Being Ken Branagh.
 
How's the jury out on Ken Branagh? That man's a genius.

branagh.jpg

Also pretty hot in Hamlet
 
It doesn't stop you from being an efficient or profitable businessman, it can even be a boon. I mean, just look at Pat Robertson or Billy Graham.

The problem is that it's an attempt to undermine the authority of the scientific process. That is the starting point that makes it possible to paint scientists as a centrally organized cabal bent on destroying religion and forcing us to drive lame hybrids because that suits their whims.
 
How's the jury out on Ken Branagh? That man's a genius.
Sure. But Branagh never matched the pure comedy of Mel Gibson having incestuous on-camera sex with Glenn Close. Also, first impressions mean a lot, and the first time I saw that was in a twelfth grade literature class with the horrified teacher attempting and failing to figure out a way to skip past the scene on the DVD.

Pretty much the entire rest of the Zeffirelli movie was forgettable, but that?
 
Sure. But Branagh never matched the pure comedy of Mel Gibson having incestuous on-camera sex with Glenn Close. Also, first impressions mean a lot, and the first time I saw that was in a twelfth grade literature class with the horrified teacher attempting and failing to figure out a way to skip past the scene on the DVD.

Pretty much the entire rest of the Zeffirelli movie was forgettable, but that?

Well, the Mel Gibson rendition certainly has its merit as a comedy block-buster, but, come on, Branagh has beautiful hair. Beautiful. Hair.


I have the makings to become a great Shakespearean scholar. Speaking of which, my senior thesis (which is due too soon for my liking) is seeing me compare plautus' slaves to shakespeare's servants in order to pretty much say: "PEOPLE MAKE FUN OF POOR PEOPLE/FOREIGNERS/OTHERS IN ORDER TO MAKE THEMSELVES FEEL BETTER." Profound.
 
nutranurse said:
Masada. Many of these words that they are removing are actually very common words in use in American society/pop-culture. It seems more so that they are removing them to be politically correct towards the Christian Right that do not want to evoke 'Class-Warfare' (that has always existed since the beginning of human history) or be 'un-Godly'.

I've made two arguments, the first being that words which are socioeconomically discriminatory should not be used in standardized testing and the second being that discriminatory and/or non-inclusive words should not be used in standardized testing. Simple as that. The former would include references to something like tennis or lacrosse which people from lower socioeconomic background might be expected to have less exposure to than a control group. (To put that kind of question into context, I wouldn't ask questions that relied on some knowledge of awareness of cricket, rugby or AFL to a group of Americans). The latter would include for instance asking students to deal with pigs in a question. Now most Muslims and/or Jews wouldn't object to that kind of question but some might, which is a problem because we aren't testing for religious sensibilities but for educational attainment.

Lord_Joakim said:
Do you think that literature should be censored if its author wasn't politically correct (or good at all), even if the work in question isn't problematic?

No, that's not what I've suggested. What I am suggesting is that using Lovecraft as an example of the horrors of political correctness is daft because we know he was a bigot and it shows in his writings. Now I don't see a need to ban his works but I do object to downplaying a virulent racist as a 'victim' of political correctness.
 
No, that's not what I've suggested. What I am suggesting is that using Lovecraft as an example of the horrors of political correctness is daft because we know he was a bigot and it shows in his writings. Now I don't see a need to ban his works but I do object to downplaying a virulent racist as a 'victim' of political correctness.

Oh, I do agree with that. I'm not trying to victimize Lovecraft per se, you know. I'm trying to victimize a work of his. While his creation, there's difference between the author and his literature, and the Mad Arab is some of the most evocative wordplay I've stumbled upon, phonetically that is. It's a beautiful phrase.

In Denmark, we have a nationally well-known author named Jørgen Leth who has spent a lot of time writing about the aesthetics in the female gender. He loves women. The problem is that it's well-known that he's probably done some shady activities with what might be minors in a number of exotic countries. Therefore, many people reject him as well as his works. A few think they should be censored. I don't.

I dislike rewriting or censoring literature severely. I've read some strange books that've irked me without knowing anything about their authors, and I prefer my reading like that, independent from the author of the respective work.

I've once read a book about nazi pedophiles which was presenting kinda evocative images of their activities. While it was obviously satire, it had some good points that I've picked up. And I don't wish for it to be censored regardless of how much it might offend some people.

I know that none of these examples are even remotely close to the case in point. I merely attemp to grasp loosely into thin air for reasons I personally have issues censoring old literature.

Anyways, yes, I understand your point and take it upon myself. :)
 
Has this conversation managed to turn around completely from what we were talking about before?
 
How about pokemon? I recently got back into these dwarin-charged cock fights and am wondering if any of you guys here:

1) Play it and will not laugh at me
2) Would give me your friend code

Really, I love monster-battling and farm-type games. I cannot begin to count the hours I have poured into harvest moon/dragon quest v or monsters/pokemon/digimon/shepards crossing.
 
Haven't played Pokemon in a while, but my brother does. Feel free to send him (Kokoriki) a PM and I'm sure he'll oblige you.

I'm hardly in a position to admonish you.
 
How about pokemon? I recently got back into these dwarin-charged cock fights and am wondering if any of you guys here:

1) Play it and will not laugh at me
2) Would give me your friend code

Really, I love monster-battling and farm-type games. I cannot begin to count the hours I have poured into harvest moon/dragon quest v or monsters/pokemon/digimon/shepards crossing.

I love Pokémon, but haven't played it in a long time. I hate the farming myself. :P

I will never laugh at you for playing. <3
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom