Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Moccasins.

I agree, which is my point about looking back in time and seeing it 'rosy'. I suppose that if we could be transported back in time with the same psychology as a 18/19C woman we might find life more bearable but being transported back with the minds and habits we have today would be very different. Most science-fiction books/series don't seem to change the psychology of the characters they transport. I wonder if one day there will be a 'beam-me-up-Scotty' device which will also change our mindset?




Everyman wrote:


Choisya wrote:
Manor House wasn't at all like the 1900 house, which was much more realistic and less of a 'entertainment' type show, more of a documentary. Indeed it was quite harrowing to watch at times as when the mother was struggling to do family wash by dolly tub and mangle - a challenge whichever era you lived in. Yes it is different if you are born to a certain life - any one of us who has had a drastic change in their home circumstances knows that. Nevertheless, as many authors showed, it was a very difficult life for the women of those times.

From the perspective of people used to automatic washing machines, certainly. I imagine that to them, a documentary (if they had had TV then) of life in 1400 would have looked very harrowing; and to the 1400 viewers, life in Neanderthal days would have looked very harrowing.

I'm sure that 150 years from now, people will look back and wonder how we could possibly have lived with some of the things we now take for granted in our lives.


Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Moccasins.

After I wrote my post I was having fun thinking about what a teenager in 2157 might think if they watched a documentary about life in 2007.

"Egad, look at all those fat people. Why didn't they just go to the wellness center for gene adjustments to a make their bodies normal and healthy?"

"My gosh, you mean they didn't just talk to their computers -- they actually had to pound their fingers up and down on a hunk of plastic thousands of times a day? How totally painful. They really were pretty stupid back then, weren't they?"

"Oh, gross, they actually scraped the hair off their faces and legs with METAL BLADES??? How totally barbaric. By Miranda, I'm glad I didn't have to live in those awful times."

"I love watching those traffic jams they had back then. It's such a riot watching all the people going nowhere and getting madder and madder and honking their horns and even shooting other people now and then. Cars are so horse-and-buggy, aren't they? Mom, I'm going to anti-grav over to Bunny's to study my quantum mechanics; it's only 200 miles, so I should be back in an hour or so."


Choisya wrote:
I agree, which is my point about looking back in time and seeing it 'rosy'. I suppose that if we could be transported back in time with the same psychology as a 18/19C woman we might find life more bearable but being transported back with the minds and habits we have today would be very different. Most science-fiction books/series don't seem to change the psychology of the characters they transport. I wonder if one day there will be a 'beam-me-up-Scotty' device which will also change our mindset?




Everyman wrote:


Choisya wrote:
Manor House wasn't at all like the 1900 house, which was much more realistic and less of a 'entertainment' type show, more of a documentary. Indeed it was quite harrowing to watch at times as when the mother was struggling to do family wash by dolly tub and mangle - a challenge whichever era you lived in. Yes it is different if you are born to a certain life - any one of us who has had a drastic change in their home circumstances knows that. Nevertheless, as many authors showed, it was a very difficult life for the women of those times.

From the perspective of people used to automatic washing machines, certainly. I imagine that to them, a documentary (if they had had TV then) of life in 1400 would have looked very harrowing; and to the 1400 viewers, life in Neanderthal days would have looked very harrowing.

I'm sure that 150 years from now, people will look back and wonder how we could possibly have lived with some of the things we now take for granted in our lives.




_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: (Completely off-topic but funny)

LOL Everyman - your flights of fancy, as ever, are hilarious. You should have been a novelist instead of a lawyer. My style has always been boringly prosaic - which is what you would expect of a politico I guess:smileysad:




Everyman wrote:
After I wrote my post I was having fun thinking about what a teenager in 2157 might think if they watched a documentary about life in 2007.

"Egad, look at all those fat people. Why didn't they just go to the wellness center for gene adjustments to a make their bodies normal and healthy?"

"My gosh, you mean they didn't just talk to their computers -- they actually had to pound their fingers up and down on a hunk of plastic thousands of times a day? How totally painful. They really were pretty stupid back then, weren't they?"

"Oh, gross, they actually scraped the hair off their faces and legs with METAL BLADES??? How totally barbaric. By Miranda, I'm glad I didn't have to live in those awful times."

"I love watching those traffic jams they had back then. It's such a riot watching all the people going nowhere and getting madder and madder and honking their horns and even shooting other people now and then. Cars are so horse-and-buggy, aren't they? Mom, I'm going to anti-grav over to Bunny's to study my quantum mechanics; it's only 200 miles, so I should be back in an hour or so."


Choisya wrote:
I agree, which is my point about looking back in time and seeing it 'rosy'. I suppose that if we could be transported back in time with the same psychology as a 18/19C woman we might find life more bearable but being transported back with the minds and habits we have today would be very different. Most science-fiction books/series don't seem to change the psychology of the characters they transport. I wonder if one day there will be a 'beam-me-up-Scotty' device which will also change our mindset?




Everyman wrote:


Choisya wrote:
Manor House wasn't at all like the 1900 house, which was much more realistic and less of a 'entertainment' type show, more of a documentary. Indeed it was quite harrowing to watch at times as when the mother was struggling to do family wash by dolly tub and mangle - a challenge whichever era you lived in. Yes it is different if you are born to a certain life - any one of us who has had a drastic change in their home circumstances knows that. Nevertheless, as many authors showed, it was a very difficult life for the women of those times.

From the perspective of people used to automatic washing machines, certainly. I imagine that to them, a documentary (if they had had TV then) of life in 1400 would have looked very harrowing; and to the 1400 viewers, life in Neanderthal days would have looked very harrowing.

I'm sure that 150 years from now, people will look back and wonder how we could possibly have lived with some of the things we now take for granted in our lives.







Frequent Contributor
Posts: 112
Registered: ‎06-05-2007
0 Kudos

Trivia

Choisya, do you know if it has anything to do with the Trivia of Roman mythology?
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

Well, Trivia was the goddess of witchcraft who had three faces, which, I suppose, could represent confusion. Meeting of three roads, three faces - confusion might be a connection but I don't know for sure. Any ideas anyone??




Prof wrote:
Choisya, do you know if it has anything to do with the Trivia of Roman mythology?


Scribe
Laurel
Posts: 5,747
Registered: ‎10-29-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

Here's what the Encyclopedia Mythica says:

Trivia
by Micha F. Lindemans
In Roman mythology, Trivia is the personified deity of crossroads, derived from the Latin trivium ("meeting of three roads"). She was represented with three faces, and sometimes identified with the Greek Hecate.

Hecate
by Guil Jones
Hecate is the Greek goddess of the crossroads. She is most often depicted as having three heads; one of a dog, one of a snake and one of a horse. She is usually seen with two ghost hounds that were said to serve her. Hecate is most often mispercepted as the goddess of witchcraft or evil, but she did some very good things in her time. One such deed was when she rescued Persephone, (Demeter's daughter, the queen of the Underworld and the maiden of spring), from the Underworld. Hecate is said to haunt a three-way crossroad, each of her heads facing in a certain direction. She is said to appear when the ebony moon shines.

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/t/trivia.html

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hecate.html



Choisya wrote:
Well, Trivia was the goddess of witchcraft who had three faces, which, I suppose, could represent confusion. Meeting of three roads, three faces - confusion might be a connection but I don't know for sure. Any ideas anyone??




Prof wrote:
Choisya, do you know if it has anything to do with the Trivia of Roman mythology?





"Truth must of necessity be stranger than fiction, for fiction is the creation of the human mind, and therefore is congenial to it." ~~G.K. Chesterton
Correspondent
rbehr
Posts: 354
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: Extreme Positions

I didn't think I was familiar with Nietzsche's concepts, but, found myself familiar with this concept of his from a book I'd read by Eric Hoffer - The True Believer:Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

“Extreme positions are not succeeded by moderate ones, but by contrary extreme positions.”

The book opened my eyes on why you couldn't "reason" with many people with extreme positions. The book posits that fanatics of all types - political, religious, conservative, liberal - aren't open to logical arguments. They're much more open to extreme positions and are more likely to switch extreme positions (from far right to far left, for example) than to adopt moderate positions.

Here's are links to the book:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&bnit=H&bnrefer=U1001&EAN=97800605059...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

Ever though it was written in the 50's, the book is great for gaining insight into the fanatics of our time - fanatics just change causes, not their basic characteristics.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

[ Edited ]
Mmmmm...yes...but how is all that connected to the words trivia and trivial which we use today? (Which I think was Prof's original question.) That is why I thought it might be to do with confusion - three different heads, three different roads....

My OEED gives the archaic meaning of trivial as being from the Latin for commonplace. Is that nearer to today's meaning?



Laurel wrote:
Here's what the Encyclopedia Mythica says:

Trivia
by Micha F. Lindemans
In Roman mythology, Trivia is the personified deity of crossroads, derived from the Latin trivium ("meeting of three roads"). She was represented with three faces, and sometimes identified with the Greek Hecate.

Hecate
by Guil Jones
Hecate is the Greek goddess of the crossroads. She is most often depicted as having three heads; one of a dog, one of a snake and one of a horse. She is usually seen with two ghost hounds that were said to serve her. Hecate is most often mispercepted as the goddess of witchcraft or evil, but she did some very good things in her time. One such deed was when she rescued Persephone, (Demeter's daughter, the queen of the Underworld and the maiden of spring), from the Underworld. Hecate is said to haunt a three-way crossroad, each of her heads facing in a certain direction. She is said to appear when the ebony moon shines.

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/t/trivia.html

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hecate.html



Choisya wrote:
Well, Trivia was the goddess of witchcraft who had three faces, which, I suppose, could represent confusion. Meeting of three roads, three faces - confusion might be a connection but I don't know for sure. Any ideas anyone??




Prof wrote:
Choisya, do you know if it has anything to do with the Trivia of Roman mythology?









Message Edited by Choisya on 06-26-2007 04:58 PM
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

Mmmmm...yes...but how is all that connected to the words trivia and trivial which we use today? (Which I think was Prof's original question.)
Perhaps because the OED reports it passing through the meaning common, ordinary, which may have come from the trivium because at that time it was common, ordinary learning for people to study the trivium, not exotic as it is today. From common and ordinary, the word apparently then came to mean less important.
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Scribe
Laurel
Posts: 5,747
Registered: ‎10-29-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

Just as "elmentary" has the meaning of "basic" but has come to mean--"trivial."



Everyman wrote:
Mmmmm...yes...but how is all that connected to the words trivia and trivial which we use today? (Which I think was Prof's original question.)
Perhaps because the OED reports it passing through the meaning common, ordinary, which may have come from the trivium because at that time it was common, ordinary learning for people to study the trivium, not exotic as it is today. From common and ordinary, the word apparently then came to mean less important.


"Truth must of necessity be stranger than fiction, for fiction is the creation of the human mind, and therefore is congenial to it." ~~G.K. Chesterton
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

Thanks Everyman - that makes sense:smileyhappy:




Everyman wrote:
Mmmmm...yes...but how is all that connected to the words trivia and trivial which we use today? (Which I think was Prof's original question.)
Perhaps because the OED reports it passing through the meaning common, ordinary, which may have come from the trivium because at that time it was common, ordinary learning for people to study the trivium, not exotic as it is today. From common and ordinary, the word apparently then came to mean less important.


Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

'Elementary my dear Laurel:smileyhappy:'



Laurel wrote:
Just as "elmentary" has the meaning of "basic" but has come to mean--"trivial."



Scribe
Laurel
Posts: 5,747
Registered: ‎10-29-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Trivia

:smileyvery-happy::smileyvery-happy::smileyvery-happy:



Choisya wrote:
'Elementary my dear Laurel:smileyhappy:'



Laurel wrote:
Just as "elmentary" has the meaning of "basic" but has come to mean--"trivial."






"Truth must of necessity be stranger than fiction, for fiction is the creation of the human mind, and therefore is congenial to it." ~~G.K. Chesterton
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: Friedrich Nietzsche On Many Things

Last night I decided to go back to this page and print all of these ideas of yours out. It's easier to 'see' on a sheet of paper, than staring at words on a monitor. All of these 'many things' to think about, and I flat out couldn't turn many of them into something I could seriously wrap my head around. Too many thoughts to think about, and I tend to shut them all out completely. I read and reread last night, and I still couldn't think of a whole concept to really talk about, except for a few ideas from words I let jump out at me.

The first thing I saw were the single words(synopsis): Chaos - in soul to give birth to a dancing star. Tension - For deeper lives. Drama - meaningful, worth living. Words I avoid identifying with, (not realizing them until now). I've always looked for calm in my life. Or maybe it was just order that was needed. I looked at these words and saw how I had applied them througout my life.

I don't how much of Nietzsche I agree or don't agree with.

The word that stuck in my head was 'egoism'. This word threw me. I know the psychological references to the word 'ego', in the Freudian theory, but not the use of the word egoism. You wrote: Nietzsche - "egoism is the source of art. Our illogical side is creative".

This short paragraph comes from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/ In further reading, it gets more complex.

Egoism can be a descriptive or a normative position. Psychological egoism, the most famous descriptive position, claims that each person has but one ultimate aim: her own welfare. Normative forms of egoism make claims about what one ought to do, rather than describe what one does do. Ethical egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be morally right that it maximize one's self-interest. Rational egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be rational that it maximize one's self-interest.

The ego is said to be reality oriented, and without the 'I' where does the illogical side of creativity fit in? Am I thinking logical, or illogical when creating art? Or both? Is creativity selfless or selfish?

I described these acts/sides of us, as "needs". The fact that I'm writing this, as well as all of us here in this group, putting thoughts in front of everyone, where does that place us in these catagories? Am I(we)needing to do this, and for what reason?

It's mind boggling!
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: Friendships

In #2 of your notes: A friend should be a master at guessing and keeping still: you must not want to see everything. I don't agree with all this statement. I think it's more complex than that.

To be a master at guessing is not a comfortable position to be in. Because with true friendships, (as I define them) these guessings of thoughts can be hazardous and detrimental to a friendship. Keeping still, and listening is probably one of the most difficult things to learn, in any relationship, but first learned through honest conversations. But to NOT want to see everything, I don't agree with. I see that the more you learn about each other, friendships will only grow stronger because of this. But respect for another persons privacy is particularly important.

Respect the enemy in our friend. I'm not sure I know what this means. How much someone lets you into their lives, allowing you to see sides you may not show otherwise, has to be a mutal decision. What/who is the enemy? Lies?

Explain this?: Love is blind; friendship closes its eyes.

This whole topic of friendships has been one I've thought about, and I have done some minor (personal) reseach on, over this past year. It's become more complicated as I've been on these boards. Establishing friendships, outside of my normal face to face friends, then comparing the two. How do you define a friendship? It's been defined, simply, by some people, and some can't define it at all.... but it becomes more complicated as each individual tries to define feelings, each saying it differently.

I can't go into it in depth in this descussion group, only to say that I've learned a great deal about writing thoughts, and seeing how we each read and percieve them. It makes it much more of a challenge than face to face relationships.

The one major problem is the reality you find yourself in. What is real and what isn't, not just through writing about friendships, but in the reality any relationship? What is meaningful and real to one person, may not be to another. Take my word for it, virtual realities can be hazardous to your health!

Rejoicing in all of our joys is something to hold on to and cherish; all of our sufferings should also give meaning and depth to friendships. It seems to me, these two should go hand in hand. What makes friendships grow, if not the sharing and understanding of these two elements?

Kathy S.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: Friedrich Nietzsche On Many Things

Good post KathyS but I couldn't begin to address all this deep psychology. That we all have 'egos' is certain. Some are more egotistical than others for various reasons. We need a Freud here!:smileysurprised:



KathyS wrote:
Last night I decided to go back to this page and print all of these ideas of yours out. It's easier to 'see' on a sheet of paper, than staring at words on a monitor. All of these 'many things' to think about, and I flat out couldn't turn many of them into something I could seriously wrap my head around. Too many thoughts to think about, and I tend to shut them all out completely. I read and reread last night, and I still couldn't think of a whole concept to really talk about, except for a few ideas from words I let jump out at me.

The first thing I saw were the single words(synopsis): Chaos - in soul to give birth to a dancing star. Tension - For deeper lives. Drama - meaningful, worth living. Words I avoid identifying with, (not realizing them until now). I've always looked for calm in my life. Or maybe it was just order that was needed. I looked at these words and saw how I had applied them througout my life.

I don't how much of Nietzsche I agree or don't agree with.

The word that stuck in my head was 'egoism'. This word threw me. I know the psychological references to the word 'ego', in the Freudian theory, but not the use of the word egoism. You wrote: Nietzsche - "egoism is the source of art. Our illogical side is creative".

This short paragraph comes from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/ In further reading, it gets more complex.

Egoism can be a descriptive or a normative position. Psychological egoism, the most famous descriptive position, claims that each person has but one ultimate aim: her own welfare. Normative forms of egoism make claims about what one ought to do, rather than describe what one does do. Ethical egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be morally right that it maximize one's self-interest. Rational egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be rational that it maximize one's self-interest.

The ego is said to be reality oriented, and without the 'I' where does the illogical side of creativity fit in? Am I thinking logical, or illogical when creating art? Or both? Is creativity selfless or selfish?

I described these acts/sides of us, as "needs". The fact that I'm writing this, as well as all of us here in this group, putting thoughts in front of everyone, where does that place us in these catagories? Am I(we)needing to do this, and for what reason?

It's mind boggling!


Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: My Life but No Literature today...

[ Edited ]
I don't know where to post this but thought I could put it at the end of the Nietzshe thread. Perhaps KathyS will say it is egotistical of me to post it but I thought it would interest one or two folks here:-

I had an exciting day in London today, watching our exiting Prime Minister, Tony Blair, say his farewells to the House of Commons (Hooray!) and seeing our new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, enter Downing Street (Bigger Hooray!!).

You may like to know that I knew GB quite well when he first came into the HoC and tipped him to be our future leader because of his superb performances in the Commons from the outset. I shared an office with his brother Andy, who was his assistant, for nearly a year and I got my younger daughter a job teaching him how to use a Wang computer - he has been an excellent Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years so she did a good job:smileyhappy:.

Gordon is a Scot, 'son of the manse' with a Presbyterian background and was educated at his local state school. He was so clever that he went to senior school when he was 10, sat his Highers when he was 14 - two years early - and went to Edinburgh University to study history when he was 16, gaining a PhD when he was 21. He is possibly the cleverest Prime Minister Britain has ever had. He is well read in history and the classics and has written a couple of political biographies. He lost the sight of one eye as a student, after being injured in a rugby match, prior to that he was a talented rugby and tennis player. He is often called 'dour' but he isn't - he is just serious minded and committed to what he does - he 'cares' and is very idealistic. He has an excellent sense of humour and is great fun to be with, as is his wife, Sarah, a PR consultant. They have two young sons. They are very different to the Blairs, much less fond of the 'high life'.

Next week I have another meeting with the Great and the Good (I am the Bad:smileyvery-happy:) at the HoC where I hope to meet some members of the newly appointed Cabinet. I hope everything eventually comes up to my expectations - one of which is an early exit from Iraq!

Message Edited by Choisya on 06-27-2007 01:54 PM
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: My Life but No Literature today...

hope everything eventually comes up to my expectations - one of which is an early exit from Iraq!

I have to agree with you there. It is certainly in the best interests of the West to withdraw immediately and totally from Iraq and leave them to a bloody civil war which will certainly be won by the hard line Islamics who will impose an Iranian-linked Sharia government which will impose fundamentalist Muslim restrictions on women, among other things. Our attempt to impose a democratic form of government with Western style freedoms on the country has totally failed, and we should accept defeat and leave them to run their country according to their fundamentalist Muslim principles, generously funded by the West's insatiable appetite for their oil, which they will use to force the global economy to dance to their tune.

That is the far, far better thing we do.
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Melissa_W
Posts: 4,124
Topics: 516
Kudos: 966
Blog Posts: 3
Ideas: 15
Solutions: 33
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: My Life but No Literature today...

Choisya - Please tell me you have all these anecdotes written down and saved somewhere! You always post about the things you've done and the people you met - you could write a book :smileysurprised:



Choisya wrote:
I don't know where to post this but thought I could put it at the end of the Nietzshe thread. Perhaps KathyS will say it is egotistical of me to post it but I thought it would interest one or two folks here:-

I had an exciting day in London today, watching our exiting Prime Minister, Tony Blair, say his farewells to the House of Commons (Hooray!) and seeing our new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, enter Downing Street (Bigger Hooray!!).

You may like to know that I knew GB quite well when he first came into the HoC and tipped him to be our future leader because of his superb performances in the Commons from the outset. I shared an office with his brother Andy, who was his assistant, for nearly a year and I got my younger daughter a job teaching him how to use a Wang computer - he has been an excellent Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years so she did a good job:smileyhappy:.

Gordon is a Scot, 'son of the manse' with a Presbyterian background and was educated at his local state school. He was so clever that he went to senior school when he was 10, sat his Highers when he was 14 - two years early - and went to Edinburgh University to study history when he was 16, gaining a PhD when he was 21. He is possibly the cleverest Prime Minister Britain has ever had. He is well read in history and the classics and has written a couple of political biographies. He lost the sight of one eye as a student, after being injured in a rugby match, prior to that he was a talented rugby and tennis player. He is often called 'dour' but he isn't - he is just serious minded and committed to what he does - he 'cares' and is very idealistic. He has an excellent sense of humour and is great fun to be with, as is his wife, Sarah, a PR consultant. They have two young sons. They are very different to the Blairs, much less fond of the 'high life'.

Next week I have another meeting with the Great and the Good (I am the Bad:smileyvery-happy:) at the HoC where I hope to meet some members of the newly appointed Cabinet. I hope everything eventually comes up to my expectations - one of which is an early exit from Iraq!

Message Edited by Choisya on 06-27-2007 01:54 PM


Melissa W.
I read and knit and dance. Compulsively feel yarn. Consume books. Darn tights. Drink too much caffiene. All that good stuff.
balletbookworm.blogspot.com
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Ilana's Journal Week 5: My Life but No Literature today...

I don't want to get into a political debate, believe it or not, Everyman and I can sympathise with your scenario except that I don't think they will be able to force the 'global economy' to do anything - China and India are fast coming on stream and IMO we will all soon be dancing to their tune, buying their oil etc etc (hence my emphasis upon reading Eastern literature:smileyvery-happy:). I also try to believe in the Micawber principle vis a vis our dependence on oil - 'Something will turn up.:smileyhappy:




Everyman wrote:
hope everything eventually comes up to my expectations - one of which is an early exit from Iraq!

I have to agree with you there. It is certainly in the best interests of the West to withdraw immediately and totally from Iraq and leave them to a bloody civil war which will certainly be won by the hard line Islamics who will impose an Iranian-linked Sharia government which will impose fundamentalist Muslim restrictions on women, among other things. Our attempt to impose a democratic form of government with Western style freedoms on the country has totally failed, and we should accept defeat and leave them to run their country according to their fundamentalist Muslim principles, generously funded by the West's insatiable appetite for their oil, which they will use to force the global economy to dance to their tune.

That is the far, far better thing we do.