Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aqueducts
FarmI wrote:
I wish I could classify things! it must be wonderful to be able to do that! About as much as I can manage is to get out my Horticultural Dictionary and look at individual leaf shapes and tree shapes and then try to identify things from there. Very unsatisfactory and frustrating. It doesn't get better than that. What makes it easier is just doing it frequently so you learn a few names. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"George W. Frost" writes:
"Trish Brown" wrote in message ... George W. Frost wrote: wrote in message ... And they are all dead now... But, some of their aqueducts are still standing and being used 'Aqueducts'! Yes! Aqu*e*ducts! Thank you! -- Trish {|:-} Newcastle, NSW, Australia Sorry Trish, wasn't trying to be facetious, I just typed it as I thought and wasn't concerned with how others spelled it aqua-plane aque-duct aqui-culture All too confusing. Let's standardise and have them all begin "aqua". -- John Savage (my news address is not valid for email) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"Trish Brown" wrote in message
... (snip) Just the other day, I was quoting 'The Man From Snowy River' at my daughter *who had never heard it recited before*. How can it be that such an icon of the Australian heritage can be left out of today's education system? 1: we have many "education systems", not just one :-) 2: it would certainly feature in some classes, but not others. the list of available literature for schools is massive - from within that, teachers decide. 3: i've heard it recited before & tbh, it does nothing for me. (one person's classic is another's waste of time, it's just how it is :-) 99% of people who know me cannot BELIEVE what my favourite book is. usually, i can't believe theirs, either g I can never read that poem without shedding a little tear! Having been a horsewoman for most of my life, I can picture the stripling's wild ride with such clarity, it hurts. I want my kids to be able to share such experiences and also to communicate them to others. I have a theory that it will be far fewer years than we could imagine before kids no longer need to learn to read or write or spell or punctuate because machines will do it for them. why would anyone make a machine to do that if _nobody_ knows (nor presumably, cares)? that doesn't make sense. The art forms we call 'the novel' and 'the poem' will disappear in favour of video movies and thus all the imagery of the great poets and writers will become antique and therefore no longer have currency. How awful! it would be awful, but frankly i think you're being a little alarmist. the death of novels & poems has been predicted but it is doubtful it will happen (for one thing, if would-be video artists don't know the written word, how would they be able to read the instructions? ;-) again tbh, i can foresee worse than the disappearance of poems (which i generally consider to be one of the worst forms of self-indulgence ;-) but even so, poets just keep pumping them out! certainly the nature of performance and storytelling changes (bards are a rare thing these days) but generally what we've always had & presumably will continue to have are just different ways of people telling their stories to others. the novel is nowhere near dead - there have never been as many works of fiction (or for that matter, non-fiction) available to so many people at once. mass literacy has brought that about & people do value their literacy. i'd say the novel replaced bards & gossips & "wise men" of old, video is akin to watching a play or a dance (although we still have plays & dance performances - & again, more than ever). lastly, not all of the "great" poets & writers really stand up these days anyway. sometimes, things just lose currency. there's always a hardcore of nerds who care about Brilliant Writer X, but not everything ages well. shrug. imo, the truly remarkable thing about shakespeare (for example) is that it never loses currency (or hasn't so far, anyway). most of his contemporaries clearly didn't have what he had - they've lost currency. it happens. not to make excuses, but i've tried & tried to read some stuff (the iliad, for e.g.) & just find the style so inadequate compared to people who came later. the bible is another good example - some bits are just tops, & others so very, very ordinary (all right, let's be frank - badly written, outlandish and silly) that they just don't pass muster & simply wouldn't be published in modern, more discerning times. I think it's interesting to note that Latin names for plants are easily understood by most of us and leave no doubt as to a plant's identity when various common names might be in use... That's exactly right. Everyone agrees there has to be a common denominator (as it were) in language. Kylie P.S. There you go, Farmie!! I told you I know capitals bg! ROTFL! I guess it all comes down to learning about what matters to us, doesn't it? gasp! i've forgotten my capitals for this one!! thinking about gum trees, many of them have 5-10 "common" names. the place of latin names (for the common folk) is to make clear exactly which one you're referring to. also, lots of plants are _only_ known by their latin names. i think people who are sensitive about others using latin names have a generalised anxiety you can't address or change for them :-) kylie |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
... "0tterbot" wrote in message news:WXkij.2641 P.S. There you go, Farmie!! I told you I know capitals bg! Well done Otter! Now you just have to use them, ya slack tart! :-)) that's Slack Tart to you!!!!!! BTW, could you e-mail me please? moura at bluemaxx and add the country code at the end. ok! i think i have seen your gate. i can't remember where it is, though. kylie Fran |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
... And 'ass' for 'arse' - I tend to ask why they are into donkey abuse. something that cracks me right up is: have you heard that (yank) expression, that someone is a jackass? well, a jackass is meant, of course, to be jackASS. but i've heard a few youngsters saying jackarse, because they want to use the word but know how ridiculous "ass" (as in arse) sounds in our accent! gosh it makes me laugh. (internally, so as not to appear rude). i don't worry as jackass is undoubtedly a short lived fad that will go away. i'm not quite sure what a jackass is anyway. being an australian lover of cricket, i have to wonder if it's related to a monkey or a *******. g! kylie |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
Ooo! What a great post! Thanks for the considered reply! :-)
0tterbot wrote: 1: we have many "education systems", not just one :-) Yep! I'm in touch with other educators in every state and most share my paranoia. (That is, 'most of those whom I know', not 'most of those who exist'.) 2: it would certainly feature in some classes, but not others. the list of available literature for schools is massive - from within that, teachers decide. Yep! My point is that classic Oz literature from Banjo Paterson, Henry Kendall, CJ Dennis and so on ought to have a permanent place in schools because they reflect a period of our development. I'm pretty fond of John Marsden and other modern authors/poets too, but they don't come from the pioneering era. Ever read Ethel Turner's books? They describe pretty accurately what Oz kids did at the turn of the last century. We oughtn't to pretend our history didn't happen! 3: i've heard it recited before & tbh, it does nothing for me. (one person's classic is another's waste of time, it's just how it is :-) 99% of people who know me cannot BELIEVE what my favourite book is. usually, i can't believe theirs, either g Fair enough! Not gonna argue there! What *is* your favourite book, just out of interest? I love finding a good read through other people! :-) snip I have a theory that it will be far fewer years than we could imagine before kids no longer need to learn to read or write or spell or punctuate because machines will do it for them. why would anyone make a machine to do that if _nobody_ knows (nor presumably, cares)? that doesn't make sense. Well, I've been in the computer industry on and off for - geez! - nearly thirty years now! I've watched 'WYSIWYG', 'multi media', 'multi tasking' and 'the information superhighway' arrive and take hold. I've seen storage media change from 12" floppies that held 4k of info give way to terabytes of storage. I've learned that technology does have massive power to change what we do and how we do it. Kids today don't need to spell, for example. The language they use to communicate on their phones and MSN bears little resemblance to accepted English, yet they understand each other perfectly. It's utilitarian, isn't it? Voice recognition has taken a long time to come along in a useful form, but it's nearly there. I can see a day when it'll no longer be necessary to write what you want to say. Your computer will 'hear' your voice through supermicrophones and transmit your info to someone else who will simply listen to it and save it in audio format. Where's the need to write anything? Just a suspicion I have... The art forms we call 'the novel' and 'the poem' will disappear in favour of video movies and thus all the imagery of the great poets and writers will become antique and therefore no longer have currency. How awful! it would be awful, but frankly i think you're being a little alarmist. the death of novels & poems has been predicted but it is doubtful it will happen (for one thing, if would-be video artists don't know the written word, how would they be able to read the instructions? ;-) again tbh, i can foresee worse than the disappearance of poems (which i generally consider to be one of the worst forms of self-indulgence ;-) but even so, poets just keep pumping them out! certainly the nature of performance and storytelling changes (bards are a rare thing these days) but generally what we've always had & presumably will continue to have are just different ways of people telling their stories to others. the novel is nowhere near dead - there have never been as many works of fiction (or for that matter, non-fiction) available to so many people at once. mass literacy has brought that about & people do value their literacy. i'd say the novel replaced bards & gossips & "wise men" of old, video is akin to watching a play or a dance (although we still have plays & dance performances - & again, more than ever). Yep! I hear what you're saying and respectfully keep my own counsel. :-) D'you happen to like classical ballet? I think poetry is very like ballet: it's stylised and has boundaries and rules, that's all. Not everyone can write a poem; not everyone can perform a great ballet, but they do have standards of excellence and neither is everyone's cup of tea... Among my favourite poets: Paul Simon (seventies writer of songs: Simon and Garfunkel) stands far out there! Also, Till Lindemann of Rammstein, an East German group. lastly, not all of the "great" poets & writers really stand up these days anyway. sometimes, things just lose currency. there's always a hardcore of nerds who care about Brilliant Writer X, but not everything ages well. shrug. imo, the truly remarkable thing about shakespeare (for example) is that it never loses currency (or hasn't so far, anyway). most of his contemporaries clearly didn't have what he had - they've lost currency. it happens. not to make excuses, but i've tried & tried to read some stuff (the iliad, for e.g.) & just find the style so inadequate compared to people who came later. Hmmm... I think I can see your point. I have to say, though, that 'great' writers such as Shakespeare, Dickens, Dostoyevsky etc etc are often an acquired taste and come with age. I only managed to read 'The Lord of the Rings' (generally regarded as one of the great modern classics from the Days of My Youth) by putting it in the dunny and reading it in short bursts. I can't *stand* Tolkein's inflated, self-conscious writing style. the bible is another good example - some bits are just tops, & others so very, very ordinary (all right, let's be frank - badly written, outlandish and silly) that they just don't pass muster & simply wouldn't be published in modern, more discerning times. LOL! I've often wondered what was the drug of choice among those ancient prophets. I think the Bible stands alone, though, since it's pretty much unique in its origins, history and purpose. It takes a certain kind of mind to want to wade through much of its allegory and ancient forms. gasp! i've forgotten my capitals for this one!! thinking about gum trees, many of them have 5-10 "common" names. the place of latin names (for the common folk) is to make clear exactly which one you're referring to. also, lots of plants are _only_ known by their latin names. i think people who are sensitive about others using latin names have a generalised anxiety you can't address or change for them :-) kylie Yeah, but did you know the taxonomy of gum trees has recently been changed? Just to upset all our applecarts, I s'pose. In fact, a friend who is a botanist in Texas broke the news to me. I was talking to her about Angophoras and she gently corrected me, saying 'You mean 'Corymbia', don't you?' Apparently, the whole family Myrtaceae has been revamped and 'fixed' so that many former Eucalyptus species now come under 'Corymbia'. I think there's more info on the SGAP website. Ack! Why do they do these things to us? Again, thanks for a really enjoyable post and interesting point of view! :-D -- Trish {|:-} Newcastle, NSW, Australia |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
In article ,
"0tterbot" wrote: shrug. imo, the truly remarkable thing about shakespeare (for example) is that it never loses currency (or hasn't so far, anyway). most of his contemporaries clearly didn't have what he had - they've lost currency. it happens. not to make excuses, but i've tried & tried to read some stuff (the iliad, for e.g.) & just find the style so inadequate compared to people who came later. the bible is another good example - some bits are just tops, & others so very, very ordinary (all right, let's be frank - badly written, outlandish and silly) that they just don't pass muster & simply wouldn't be published in modern, more discerning times. The two books you're complaining about are translations, and a lot depends on the skill of the translator. AFAIK most modern translations of the Bible have not set beauty as an objective, unlike the translators of the KJV. Most set a great deal of store on accuracy of translation (resulting in an academically-useful but wooden text) or accuracy of vibe (where a lot of the 'foreign' bits are made less foreign -- my favourite example is a Yank translation where King Saul "went to the bathroom" in the cave!) No doubt translators of the Iliad have the same problems. Me, I love poetry. But it has to be something that *sounds* good. Most hip new poetry is too hip to last imo. -- Chookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/ |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"Trish Brown" wrote in message
... Ooo! What a great post! Thanks for the considered reply! :-) 0tterbot wrote: 1: we have many "education systems", not just one :-) Yep! I'm in touch with other educators in every state and most share my paranoia. (That is, 'most of those whom I know', not 'most of those who exist'.) Well then, i probably think you're _all_ worrying a bit over nothing :-) 2: it would certainly feature in some classes, but not others. the list of available literature for schools is massive - from within that, teachers decide. Yep! My point is that classic Oz literature from Banjo Paterson, Henry Kendall, CJ Dennis and so on ought to have a permanent place in schools because they reflect a period of our development. I see. I don't necessarily disagree. (I LOVE "Mulga Bill's Bicycle"!!!!) but really, I don't think it's the sort of thing you could spend an entire term on, or anything like that. Certainly those things have historical significance. Then again, so do other things. How does one choose? One thing that drives me a bit bats is everyone dumping on schools & school kids re the curriculum. I asked a recent year-12 what he studied in English for his HSC & was promptly gobsmacked. They did 10-odd different things which seemed to include a spot of comparitive media studies thrown in. I didn't do my HSC (dropped out) but at my school you'd do one "biggie" a term. One Shakespeare play, one English classic of some sort (sadly, Jane Austen [blurghhh!] seems to have featured heavily), and something "modern" (perhaps from the 1960s or 70s) & then you must have had to revise, or something - truthfully, I only remember doing one thing in year 11 but we must have filled up the time somehow with soemthing boring I've forgotten about. Same with my kids' schedule for primary school - they cover so much in the curriculum while at the same age I did virtually nothing in the same time frame! So when people are saying kids "should" be doing this or that, I would ask "what the hell do you want them to drop so they can fit it in?!" We oughtn't to pretend our history didn't happen! I'm not sure that they do. But equally, we can't know our history through literature particularly well anyway - it was all written by white men. :-) Fair enough! Not gonna argue there! What *is* your favourite book, just out of interest? I love finding a good read through other people! :-) It's "Wuthering Heights". Now shaddup & stop laughing g why would anyone make a machine to do that if _nobody_ knows (nor presumably, cares)? that doesn't make sense. Well, I've been in the computer industry on and off for - geez! - nearly thirty years now! I've watched 'WYSIWYG', 'multi media', 'multi tasking' and 'the information superhighway' arrive and take hold. I've seen storage media change from 12" floppies that held 4k of info give way to terabytes of storage. I've learned that technology does have massive power to change what we do and how we do it. Kids today don't need to spell, for example. The language they use to communicate on their phones and MSN bears little resemblance to accepted English, yet they understand each other perfectly. It's utilitarian, isn't it? But this is partly what set this thread going - the dude who wanted cuttings didn't write "properly" for a newsgroup - he wrote sms-style. He didn't write it "wrong" so much as he had the _context_ all wrong. I rarely send sms because I just plain cannot be bothered - it's just so tedious to me, so when I do, I abbreviate as much as I can. (Almost everyone does.) BUT - if a person doesn't know a word, I can't see that it can be abbreviated sensibly either. Everyone who uses sms has already had a good (hopefully) grounding in Proper English (which changes with time anyway) beforehand, otherwise the whole system falls down. People really do go on & on about this & I'm not saying you're being silly or anything, but I cannot see the risk of people "no longer" using good spelling or whatnot. In Australia, literacy is very near total - unlike, say, 50 years ago when it simply was not. Literate people play with language, deliberately. What you see with sms is really just a by-product of mass literacy, in my view. It doesn't undermine or particularly effect the standard English that everyone has to use in daily life if they want to participate in society. IIUC, Braille (novels, say) for good (older) readers is very, very abbreviated, otherwise things would simply take too long to get through (the hand being so much slower than the eye), but until you know what is being abbreviated, you need to learn full spellings in order to understand the abbreviations. If I've got that wrong about Braille I am happy to be corrected, but that's a good example, isn't it? Voice recognition has taken a long time to come along in a useful form, but it's nearly there. I can see a day when it'll no longer be necessary to write what you want to say. Your computer will 'hear' your voice through supermicrophones and transmit your info to someone else who will simply listen to it and save it in audio format. Where's the need to write anything? Just a suspicion I have... Sounds a bit like that wacky modern invention, the "telephone". g! Gawd, I sound like a technophile when really I'm a bit of a Luddite - but I do strongly think people get worried about literacy somewhat unduly - instead of enjoying the effects of mass literacy, they see it as further excuse to get into a panic about the country going down the toilet. Yep! I hear what you're saying and respectfully keep my own counsel. :-) D'you happen to like classical ballet? I think poetry is very like ballet: it's stylised and has boundaries and rules, that's all. Not everyone can write a poem; not everyone can perform a great ballet, but they do have standards of excellence and neither is everyone's cup of tea... I rather do like classical ballet although not to the point of going to see it. I approve of its existence :-) And I _did_ very much approve of poetry when I was younger, but I just got over it. It's not that I think poetry is bad or irrelevent - it's more part of a general gripe of mine about people faffing about with the "arts" as though it makes them a better person, when in truth the vast majority of them simply don't have enough talent or relevence & are just being utterly self-indulgent. Among my favourite poets: Paul Simon (seventies writer of songs: Simon and Garfunkel) stands far out there! Also, Till Lindemann of Rammstein, an East German group. Ja, Rammstein. Cookie Monster got a new job & that's what it was G! sorry ;-) I think you bring up an interesting thing, though - poetry set to music (i.e. a "song") will always have a far greater audience. I think there's a human need for song but no corresponding great need for poetry. Or so it seems to me. Hmmm... I think I can see your point. I have to say, though, that 'great' writers such as Shakespeare, Dickens, Dostoyevsky etc etc are often an acquired taste and come with age. I only managed to read 'The Lord of the Rings' (generally regarded as one of the great modern classics from the Days of My Youth) by putting it in the dunny and reading it in short bursts. I can't *stand* Tolkein's inflated, self-conscious writing style. Um, I'd just say that Tolkein just isn't that good & be done with it. :-) I wouldn't consider it a modern classic whatsoever. LOTR does have mass nerd-appeal, though. Some things just do - it defies explanation & is hard to pick. The others? Shakespeare - excellent. Dickens - infantile. Dostoyevsky - actually pretty readable if that's your thing. We could go on. I'm sure we agree that there's something for everyone out there! :-) LOL! I've often wondered what was the drug of choice among those ancient prophets. I think the Bible stands alone, though, since it's pretty much unique in its origins, history and purpose. It takes a certain kind of mind to want to wade through much of its allegory and ancient forms. I find it pretty interesting & i'm NOT a believer. & yes, mostly it's interesting due to historical significance - not for its own sake. So that's probably a different category again. But do I think it could be published now? No - just not good enough. I'm pretty sure the Revelation is a record of either a drug experience or a psychiatric event :-) The bible doesn't stand alone so much as it stands with other religious "classics". They're all a bit mental, but as you say, it's just a different case. Yeah, but did you know the taxonomy of gum trees has recently been changed? Yes. But fortunately, having known almost nothing about any of them under the old classifications, the new ones therefore don't bother me!! :-D Just to upset all our applecarts, I s'pose. In fact, a friend who is a botanist in Texas broke the news to me. I was talking to her about Angophoras and she gently corrected me, saying 'You mean 'Corymbia', don't you?' Apparently, the whole family Myrtaceae has been revamped and 'fixed' so that many former Eucalyptus species now come under 'Corymbia'. I think there's more info on the SGAP website. Ack! Why do they do these things to us? Again, thanks for a really enjoyable post and interesting point of view! :-D Well, you too!! We are very on-topic here, as a rule!! Kylie |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"Chookie" wrote in message
news:ehrebeniuk-A0DDC4.23363817012008@news... The two books you're complaining about was i complaining? i thought i was just airing my views! sorry about that. are translations, and a lot depends on the skill of the translator. excellent point. AFAIK most modern translations of the Bible have not set beauty as an objective, unlike the translators of the KJV. i like the kjv. there IS no other bible!!! Most set a great deal of store on accuracy of translation (resulting in an academically-useful but wooden text) or accuracy of vibe (where a lot of the 'foreign' bits are made less foreign -- my favourite example is a Yank translation where King Saul "went to the bathroom" in the cave!) oh noooooooooooooooooooo...! i don't suppose you happen to know what they did about onan "spilling his seed upon the ground" **. (one shudders to think!) No doubt translators of the Iliad have the same problems. Me, I love poetry. But it has to be something that *sounds* good. Most hip new poetry is too hip to last imo. probably, in the 16th century (etc) there was a lot of hip poetry that didn't last :-) kylie ** i must have been about 25 before i even worked out what that _meant_!! |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"0tterbot" wrote in message
i'm not quite sure what a jackass is anyway. being an australian lover of cricket, i have to wonder if it's related to a monkey or a *******. g! Jack = male, ass = donkey as opposed to a female donkey which is a Jenny, but I don't think that there is such as thing as a Jennyass. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"Chookie" wrote in message
Me, I love poetry. But it has to be something that *sounds* good. Me too. Betjeman especially. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
... "0tterbot" wrote in message i'm not quite sure what a jackass is anyway. being an australian lover of cricket, i have to wonder if it's related to a monkey or a *******. g! Jack = male, ass = donkey as opposed to a female donkey which is a Jenny, but I don't think that there is such as thing as a Jennyass. oh! i thought it must have been some sort of cross (like a mule or something!) don't we just say "jack" for a male donkey? kylie |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
"0tterbot" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message "0tterbot" wrote in message i'm not quite sure what a jackass is anyway. being an australian lover of cricket, i have to wonder if it's related to a monkey or a *******. g! Jack = male, ass = donkey as opposed to a female donkey which is a Jenny, but I don't think that there is such as thing as a Jennyass. oh! i thought it must have been some sort of cross (like a mule or something!) don't we just say "jack" for a male donkey? Dunno. I've only ever known one donkey on close terms and that wasn't one of the words used for it. None of the words used is repeatable in polite company. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
OT: The Romans Tried Aquaducts
0tterbot wrote:
snip One thing that drives me a bit bats is everyone dumping on schools & school kids re the curriculum. Oh, I *so* agree with you! Kids today have to assimilate everything we did and then some. We never had computers to contend with, or media studies or any of the trade courses they offer today. I have a young friend who just sat for Engineering in his HSC! Mind you I have great respect for the Mind of the Kid and believe they can suck up anything you throw at them (within reason, of course). But as you say, everyone seems to want schools to be all things and it's just not possible! I'm not sure that they do. But equally, we can't know our history through literature particularly well anyway - it was all written by white men. :-) Much as I might love for it to be otherwise, my history was white anglo-celtic. My ancestors came to N'cle in 1835 and lived within the confines of the towns. AFAICT, they had virtually no contact with Aborigines and were merchants and farmers and glovers. I wish someone *would* compile a local aboriginal history for those of us who'd love to read it! I've rummaged through as much as I could at our local reference library and there's sadly not much available. I think it had a lot to do with the fact that Aborigines didn't write their history down and white folks never thought to do it for them. There are a few tragic, tragic stories about atrocities that happened a bit farther away from here (Lake Macquarie area), but precious little about the tribes or how and where they lived. It's "Wuthering Heights". Now shaddup & stop laughing g Not me! I love it too! Just listened to the Talking Book of it a few weeks ago (bloody rotten eyesight!) Have you ever looked at 'Hornblower' or 'Master and Commander' or any of the Wilbur Smiths? I'm in the middle of re-reading all of those (no wonder the eyesight's so rotten...) But this is partly what set this thread going - the dude who wanted cuttings didn't write "properly" for a newsgroup - he wrote sms-style. Oh, certainly. Except, he failed to make consideration for his audience. He wasn't writing to his SMSing peers, he was writing to people who use regular grammar and syntax *and who have no background in fonespeke*. If you have something to say or want to ask for something, then it helps to use a language your audience will be able to compute. Sounds a bit like that wacky modern invention, the "telephone". g! Exactly. So portable, so efficient, so everywhere (can I say 'ubiquitous'?) The technology on computer is just a millifirkin away from being ported over to phones and then away we'll go! Once everyone has a phone-computer in his pocket, the skills that were once so vital (reading, writing, 'rithmetic) won't have currency any longer. And hey! I'm an old-fashioned teacher and it horrifies me that this could happen. I'd love to stop it if I could, but change has to go with technology and that's really a good thing, when you think about it. Gawd, I sound like a technophile when really I'm a bit of a Luddite - but I do strongly think people get worried about literacy somewhat unduly - instead of enjoying the effects of mass literacy, they see it as further excuse to get into a panic about the country going down the toilet. Nah! Most people (like me) who whinge are getting old enough to loathe change for its own sake. At a certain point in life (probably around middle-age), you start looking back as well as forward. Suddenly, history becomes more important to you as you begin to put your own life into context. Next, you try to assist younger folk to see the history with the same scale-free eyes that you do (my poor, *poor* kids!) And do be fair! People who have lived a long time *do* know more in many areas than those who haven't. Wisdom! It's a wonderful thing! If you can acquire that along the way, then you're rich indeed! I rather do like classical ballet although not to the point of going to see it. I approve of its existence :-) ROTFL! I don't go because I couldn't afford to in a pink fit! I've loved the ballet all my life and have never ever seen one performed live. Snif. (We-ee-ell... if you count the appallingly horrible annual concerts my daughter was involved in... I gotta tell you, there is *no* pleasure to be had in watching Other People's Daughters romping around a stage and obscuring your own!) And I _did_ very much approve of poetry when I was younger, but I just got over it. It's not that I think poetry is bad or irrelevent - it's more part of a general gripe of mine about people faffing about with the "arts" as though it makes them a better person, when in truth the vast majority of them simply don't have enough talent or relevence & are just being utterly self-indulgent. Cynical! Read the words of Till Lindemann (google Rammstein: there's a really good translaton site of theirs out there somewhere). And google the song 'Democracy' by Leonard Cohen. It's pretty long, but I do love the way he puts things (if you've just read 'Amerika' by Rammstein, it's even more poignant). Among my favourite poets: Paul Simon (seventies writer of songs: Simon and Garfunkel) stands far out there! Also, Till Lindemann of Rammstein, an East German group. Ja, Rammstein. Cookie Monster got a new job & that's what it was G! sorry ;-) I think you bring up an interesting thing, though - poetry set to music (i.e. a "song") will always have a far greater audience. I think there's a human need for song but no corresponding great need for poetry. Or so it seems to me. Please don't slag Rammstein! I'm a groupie! ;- I think poetry appreciation is a learned art. An elderly schoolmistress who was a friend of our family had me reciting Tennyson when I was only four. She pointed out things like alliteration, onomatopeia and imagery to me (in a very basic way, of course). And she read poetry to me in a voice that made it all clear. This set me up for life! I've been a poetry junkie for fifty years now and for me, poetry, art, dance and music have very fuzzy lines between them. They capture our culture (such as it is) and each of us can interpret the message in his own way. That's the point of this whole discussion, though. You don't just read a poem or look at a painting or hear a symphony in isolation. You need to know the history it's depicting. I mean, how can you compare, say, Bach and Rachmaninoff? Different! Ages apart! But both magnificent! Same with Banjo Paterson and P!nk (another modern poet I'm rather fond of). Um, I'd just say that Tolkein just isn't that good & be done with it. :-) I wouldn't consider it a modern classic whatsoever. LOTR does have mass nerd-appeal, though. Some things just do - it defies explanation & is hard to pick. ROTFLMAO!!! I used to say that. However, better minds than mine seem to think it's the equivalent of the Highly Boble - if so many others get so much out of it, then who am I to say it's $#!+? ;- The others? Shakespeare - excellent. Dickens - infantile. Dostoyevsky - actually pretty readable if that's your thing. We could go on. I'm sure we agree that there's something for everyone out there! :-) Of course! Mind you, I watched 'Bleak House' on the ABC and then, fired with enthusiasm, read the book. It was great! Maybe I'm nearly old enough to read Dickens...? :-D Well, you too!! We are very on-topic here, as a rule!! Well... it started out with Oz poetry and it does say 'aus' in the ng title. I've put OT in the header, though. :-D -- Trish {|:-} Newcastle, NSW, Australia |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
The Romans Tried Aquaducts
In article ,
Trish Brown wrote: Yeah, but did you know the taxonomy of gum trees has recently been changed? Just to upset all our applecarts, I s'pose. In fact, a friend who is a botanist in Texas broke the news to me. I was talking to her about Angophoras and she gently corrected me, saying 'You mean 'Corymbia', don't you?' Apparently, the whole family Myrtaceae has been revamped and 'fixed' so that many former Eucalyptus species now come under 'Corymbia'. I think there's more info on the SGAP website. Ack! Why do they do these things to us? Because our botany hasn't been studied for very long, we're still working things out. Most eucalypts are still eucalypts. -- Chookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Aquaducts - irrigating Australia | Australia | |||
Has anyone tried Burpee's "Chianti" sunflower? | Gardening | |||
Anyone tried the mower deck Wash Port? | Lawns | |||
Has anyone tried liquid EPDM? | Ponds | |||
Watering Idea.. anyone tried it..? | United Kingdom |