Quote

December 15th, 2007

And she not only collected science fiction novels, but she also read them.  She enjoyed them.  She said they made her think, which meant she was dumb in the gravest kind of way.

Harry Crews — Florida Frenzy 

Posted by Benjamin
Filed in Books

38 Responses to “Quote”

  1. Hilda Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 10:42 am

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQPwrokE6fU&feature=related
    //Tek Jansen

  2. Rama Lama Fa-Fa-Fa Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 11:34 am

    Couldn’t have said it better myself, Harry.

  3. Charlie Arthur Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 11:59 am

    Heh.

  4. PT Barnum Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 12:37 pm

    [Deleted.  You’re still banned under any pseudonym, asshole.]

  5. Charlie Arthur Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Heh (again).

  6. Laurie Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 1:38 pm

    If you would take the time to enjoy Heinlein, you might change your opinion. On the other hand, if you do read sci-fi and know enough about it to comment on the intelligence of other sci-fi readers, who is to say your brain isn’t damaged by reading sci-fi and therefore distorting your conclusions? Better not risk it!

    Limit your reading selections to those approved by those who can’t get jobs in their field of study, take marriage oaths numerous times (with different spouses), drink and take drugs until they pass out in gutters and fantasize about violence, especially sexual and involving tools, against young men and women. Don’t risk being branded as “dumb” by these people. I can tell you it’s ruined my life! :-)

  7. Beelzebub Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 5:47 pm

    It says right there, in plain English, that Harry Crews made the comment, dearie. So how on earth did you manage to reach the conclusion that it was Mr. Whitmer’s?

    Could it be that the reason you think you enjoy Heinlein so much is that you’ve no idea what he’s saying either?

    Perhaps if you took another one of those courses in reading comprehension…

  8. Charlie Arthur Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 5:48 pm

    Heh (for the 3rd time).

  9. Rama Lama Fa-Fa-Fa Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 6:13 pm

    I second that one, Mr. Arthur. Or should I say that I fourth it?

  10. Benjamin Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 6:45 pm

    Now, now, Laurie. I’ve only been married once.

  11. Hilda Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 8:22 pm

    Vonnegut is pretty good. Also, there are some nonreaders who are good at doing things.

    BTW, you probably already saw this, but Tancredo dodged the draft by claiming mental illness? clever: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/020

  12. Benjamin Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 9:22 pm

    Well, to be honest, I ain’t opposed all sci-fi, nor even fantasy. The reason I don’t care for Rowling has more to do her writing. A few years back I used travel a lot for my real job and got stuck in Lynchburg VA with a low book supply. I bought the first HP to see what all the fuss was about. I made it through by force of will, but the thing was a mess of cliches and dead metaphors. Harold Bloom has a pretty funny takedown of her prose that I’ll post at some point.

    I read most of Heinlein when I was a kid. I tried to listen to one on CD a couple years back, but didn’t make it very far. I figured I could get the same worldview from Roosevelt or Jack London or any of those other turn-of-the-century red-blooded Amurrican authors and at least they could write.

    I even read a kid’s book from time to time. I like to give kids books, and I try to know what I’ve giving them. The last really good ones I read were Coraline by Neil Gaiman, and Kidnapped by RL Stevenson. For what it’s worth.

  13. Laurie Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    Beelz,
    Don’t you think Ben quoted Crews because it was Ben’s opinion too? Sure he did!

    Ben,
    You probably thought I was attributing all of those features to you. Naw, you might resemble only one or two. So you did marry the mother of your child? Nice! I was afraid you might not have had the respect for her to make her anything but “common law” and maybe even “ex common law”.

  14. Laurie Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Oh, boy! I’m sorry, Ben. I had no reason to think that about your marriage. I apologize.

    I read all the Heinlein I could find when I was between 13-20. I enjoyed them. I read all the HP books that were out at the time in 2000. Never said it was great literature but I thought they were a lot more fun than say “Naked Lunch”. I guess there is another one out now, which I haven’t read.

    I downloaded Trimbaugh’s book today and it’s pretty interesting in parts. Again, not great writing but a different perspective from the FBI SAC at Pine Ridge. I think you might agree that hearing all sides of the story is important. Yes?

  15. Hilda Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 11:32 pm

    some people were even there and wouldn’t need to hear about it for the first time.

  16. Hilda Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 8:56 am

    Actually, I wonder if the Trimbach pdf was peer reviewed at all. Of the few pdf quotations printed so far by the anti-churchill webring, there already might be more fabrication than they were able to find in scouring Churchill’s 1000s pages for two years (assuming they could even find his journal articles when they don’t come up on google). Of two items of fabrication, one was dueling sources with Churchill’s saying the army distributed smallpox blankets to the mandan, when there was a primary source diary where a guy on the steamboat wrote that the savages jumped on board and stole their stash of smallpox blankets while they told them not to. jgp’s Trimbach quote says aim and particularly Churchill (who isn’t an indian) don’t contribute to daily charity at Pine Rdige. That’s demonstrably false, and right there is more of a deliberate fabrication than the mandan smallpox intention thing.

  17. Benjamin Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 9:15 am

    It was meant to be a joke, Laurie. Something like, well, hell I’ve only been married once, but as to the rest of it . . . aw, fuck it.

    As to Trimbach’s book, from the three paragraphs over at Mr. Martin’s, you’re right: it’s impressively shoddy stuff. I wonder if he didn’t have to use a crowbar to force that many half-hearted cliches into each paragraph. (It takes a special kind of hack writer to use the expression “full of beans” with a straight face; it takes a drooling moron to fuck it up.) I can certainly see why the likes of Snapple and Mr. Martin find it so compelling.

    That said, I’ll throw it on my list when one of the Prospector libraries gets a copy. I read quick, but there’s about fifty books in front of this one in order of interest.

    And, no, Hilda, I can guarantee you this one ain’t been peer-reviewed. Nor reviewed by much of anyone at all. Laurie, it sounds like you have a copy? Does it even have citations/references/bibliography? Or is it mainly Trimbach spinning yarns about the good old days?

  18. Benjamin Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 9:32 am

    The reason I’m asking, is that I’m curious as to whether to bother with at all. For all the bluster about it eviscerating Churchill and Matthiesson, it seems telling that Mr. Martin’s only posted a couple of paragraphs of unsupported allegations that could’ve been ripped right out of PB’s comments.

    Are there sections dealing with specific claims that include supporting documentation? Or is Mr. Martin just choosing to post the least compelling portions of the book for some reason?

  19. Hilda Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 9:46 am

    Can J Martin please put up the pdf, at his leisure. To buy it, we are supposed to enter our name, address and credit card information on an FBI agents’ website?
    _____________
    If this Indian wannabe was genuinely interested in the plight of Pine Ridge residents, one would think he would be out in front on the issues of the day, putting his taxpayer-subsidized wampum where his mouth is.
    –J. Trimbach Sr. + J. Trimbach Jr.
    (Note, there are either no references supporting this fact, or aren’t in the quote JGM gives)

    Trimbach gets it. –JG.Martin

  20. Laurie Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 10:20 am

    Ben,
    Yes, I bought it via download. There are extensive footnotes. I’m sure we’ll all be reviewing them.

    I’m generally withholding an opinion until I’m through, check some things and think about it, although I can say the detail makes sense on some issues. I find it to be very interesting so far but had I not read other versions of the subject matter, it might not have been so interesting.

    Hilda,
    Unlike Churchill’s books, the sale is through the publisher and not out of the FBI agent’s car trunk. For a mere $5 you can have 650+ pages but you agree not to print it or send the file to someone else. Why would Trimbaugh be peer reviewed? You want FBI agents reviewing his writing? How about Joan Rivers reviews Erma Bombeck? No, Trimbaugh gets the consumer review and I doubt many will buy this book.

  21. Laurie Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 10:26 am

    Ben,
    I didn’t say it was shoddy. It’s not bad but also not a work of art. He probably has better writing skills than you’re surgical skills. I’m just guessing…

  22. Laurie Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 10:32 am

    Hilda,
    “and particularly Churchill (who isn’t an indian) don’t contribute to daily charity at Pine Rdige. That’s demonstrably false, and right there is more of a deliberate fabrication than the mandan smallpox intention thing.”

    Please demonstrate. Cancelled checks, receipts for good donated, time spent on projects to benefit the reservation…what you got?

  23. Hilda Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 10:55 am

    many have recognized that Russell Means and Churchill are like best friends, and Means has spent a lot of time setting up a private school on his property on that reservation. He was impressed by the demonstrated success of ’survival’ schools on some Pacific islands (refer to the movie Whale Rider for one example). So he has that going plus has gotten in the news for his anti-alcohol and other local activism, and running for political office in republican and libertarian party. this is described somewhere in the 2nd half of this http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/DENVER-CO/KHOW-AM/100507HOUR3.mp3?CPROG=PCAST&MARKET=DENVER-CO&NG_FORMAT=talk&SITE_ID=636&STATION_ID=KHOW-AM&PCAST_AUTHOR=Caplis_and_Silverman&PCAST_CAT=Spoken_Word&PCAST_TITLE=Caplis_and_Silverman_Radio_Rewind
    It seems like that book is AIM rather than Churchill focused for once, but Churchill helps his projects, and mentoring college students.

  24. Benjamin Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 11:09 am

    Like I said, somebody remind me if/when the libraries get copies. (If/when the libraries start purchasing vanity press publications.)

    And, yeah, from what Mr. Martin has posted, it’s fucking shoddy.

  25. Laurie Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 11:23 am

    Hilda,
    Yes, the book is about AIM… “American Indian Mafia”. Trimbaugh thinks Churchill is a bad joke and it appears that Ward doesn’t get much press here.

    Did you say you have your PhD? What is your field?

    Ben, skip the Starbucks for one day and get the book. You should read it. Don’t be as you accuse others of being. Arrogant ignorance doesn’t look good on you.

  26. Benjamin Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 11:56 am

    Like I said, when it hits the libraries, I’ll get to it. I have a long backlist of reading material and, to be frank, vanity press publications recommended to me by no one but you, Snapple and John Martin ain’t likely to rise to the top. That’s not arrogant ignorance, that’s prioritization.

    And there’s no way in hell I’ll pay for it. That’s out.

  27. Hilda Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 3:13 pm

    mm, oceanography of estuaries would be a good description.

    By the way, Yeagley got 102 votes in an election.

    Here is a warning against a Potter toy that I got in my email.

    self-publishing is good, I wish there were more textbook options like that.

  28. Snapple Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 5:21 pm

    [Still deleted.  Still ain’t reading the fucking thing until it hits the libraries.]

  29. Snapple Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 6:21 pm

    [Deleted.  Please, Snapple, have your physician up your dose.  Do it for all of us.]

  30. Snapple Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 6:50 pm

    [Deleted.]

  31. Hilda Says:
    December 17th, 2007 at 10:37 pm

    s’courage

    “take marriage oaths numerous times (with different spouses), drink and take drugs until they pass out in gutters and fantasize about violence, ”

    Hey, have you noticed that this somewhat describes our next republican presidential candidate, unless Huckabee squeaks in. Giuliani didn’t even get divorced first, between spouses.

    Regarding your cartoon in the other thread, there is a table at a local farmer’s market that sells Squaw bread, which I think means it’s sort of nutty or chewy.

  32. MKM Says:
    December 18th, 2007 at 1:25 pm

    What’s “local” from your perspective, Hilda? You mean Boulder?

  33. Hilda Says:
    December 18th, 2007 at 1:41 pm

    no - California is where I am, although I probably am moving this year to somewhere. This was in a liberal neighborhood though. I guess there are lots of recipes for squaw bread online. It was more interesting that the comments on the Peter Pan clip had a lot of people saying that the indian tribe presentation wasn’t a problem.

    at the other blog, they are on a trip about “it’s not normal to peer review books. Why do they expect the Trimbach book to be peer reviewed?”. The reason I had made that comment stemmed from their assertion that Churchill had zero peer reviewed publications, and thus all his books are just unrigorous personal polemic.

  34. Beelzebub Says:
    December 18th, 2007 at 3:21 pm

    Obviously, the ballerinas are trying to have it both ways on this, Hilda. They always do.

    Here’s another example. If Churchill’s material consists only of “unrigorous personal polemic” rather than scholarship, as they keep insisting it is, how could Churchill possibly have “violated scholarly standards,” as they also insist he did?

  35. Rama Lama Fa-Fa-Fa Says:
    December 18th, 2007 at 5:39 pm

    Quite so, Bubbie.

  36. Tyndale Says:
    December 18th, 2007 at 10:02 pm

    Asimov is my personal god and psychological counselor in one. Rowling is mostly a hack who writes children’s books. Heinlein is… meh. That is all.

  37. Rama Lama Fa-Fa-Fa Says:
    December 19th, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    If I want sci-fi, I’ll read a little physical anthropology, Tyndale. Top choice? I recommend E. A. Hooton. Try it. You’ll get a lot of sick laughs out of it.

  38. Beelzebub Says:
    December 20th, 2007 at 7:31 pm

    How about Ales Hrdlika, Rama?

    He worked for the Smithsonian during the early 20th century and wrote what was the standard textbook on physical anthroplogy for about 35 years or so.

    I was always especially keen on his assertion of the “scientific fact” that since the Bible says God created the earth—and people—only a few thousand years ago, Indians couldn’t possibly have been in the Americas for more than 3,000 years.

    How’s THAT for fiction?

Leave a Reply