Nothing to Read
Willow Arune
(1) I even contemplate buying more, and
(2) I have this lost feeling that "I don't have anything to read!"
Many books I buy are for "instant gratification" - books that must be
started that very day and finished as soon as possible. Strangely, a lot of
those are history and other non-fiction. Finding a first of "The Johnstown
Flood" created an instant need to know all about an event that happened
years ago and miles away, but for unknown reasons it was devoured. I
sometimes think I manage to know more about things and events that everyone
else is very content to not know anything about at all. Some have suggested
that a conversation with me is likely to take some rather unusual bends.
What, I ask, is wrong with a thrilling one hour plus chat about the Boer War
in the middle of a cocktail party? If one of the purposes of acquiring
knowledge is to pass some of it on, do I not have a duty to do so? As long
as I can tell an interesting tale and not bore my audience? In fact,
looking at my habits form afar, I do seek out points of interest by
conversational gambits, little hooks let down to see what bites. Once a
nibble is felt, I am off with a theme that is close to the interests of the
party to whom I am speaking. (I do tell others that I have a butterfly
switch located on my right shoulder. Reach out, press down, and I turn off.
Only once has anyone actually done that!).
Other books are knowingly bought with a long protracted stay on the shelves
planned before reading. I know I will read them; I know I must read them.
The matter of "when" is left open. Dorothy Dunnett's two series are like
that. Worse yet, with those two, is that one can read almost all of one
book and place it back on the shelf for another long stay until just the
right spirit strikes. With Dennett and some other writers, I can't seem to
get all the way through, so stop and place it back on the shelf knowing that
just the right moment will come again.
Unhappily, this happens more often than one might wish, resulting in a crowd
of books on the shelf that need completing, but not just yet. In fact, on
the shelves, a small bookcase near my bed especially for "those" books.
A very few books are bought because they are books I "should" read. To
broaden my horizons, to investigate new alternatives, to increase my
understanding of something I know nothing about or- to be frank - don't want
to know anything about. "American Alone" comes to mind. Now, there are two
"America Alone"s. One is of keen interest, written I am told by two very
conservative chaps. Of course, it seems to conform to the views I already
hold - that Bush and his group have done more to harm the United States than
Harding and Grant put together. Fillmore too, for that matter - the errant
customs collector. Oh yes, by all means. The other is written by a fellow
who's views I suspect are miles away from mine. The first will be done up
quickly, and with relish; the second taken in a big gulp. In actual fact,
part of the second is already read, and even the intro got me on edge.
Decrying the West for the "feminization" of policies and government is not
going to get on my good side at all. As near as I can tell, the West if bad
for allowing multiculturalism and not having enough babies. This means that
the evil empires are going to swallow us whole as we, poor souls, are
feminized enough to tolerate differences and do not propagate sufficiently
to make up for the tons of fifteen-year olds in the Gaza Strip, all hungry
for our lives, assets and real property. Oh well, I promised to read it. I
shall.
Oh yes, I love books that are about "little nothings". One book is on the
creation of a model of the Battle of Waterloo by a certain British Captain.
Turns out he chose the wrong moment to capture, one that did not show the
Iron Duke at his very, very best. In fact, it rather suggested that the
Prussians might have had a fair bit to do with the outcome. So instead of
going on to a wonderful exhibit, it and its creator were banished by
Wellington to dusty corners of the realm. No promotion, not a penny for
detailed work on hundreds of tiny lead soldiers. That's a little nothing,
for me. Another "little nothing" explores German porcelain makers or gives
me the full and complete story of the pencil, the Robertson screw, and other
things like that.
And with literally thousands of books surrounding me, at this very moment, I
don't have anything to read...
Willow
needles
"Willow Arune" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:mgYgi.14629$tB5.192@edtnps90...
Now, why is it that with shelves loaded up and more books on the way:
(1) I even contemplate buying more, and
(2) I have this lost feeling that "I don't have anything to read!"
This happened to me this month, so I started to read some of my husbands
mystery books, just to see why he likes them so much.
Right now I am reading *Code 61* by Donald Harstad.
elf
As near as I can tell, the West if bad
> for allowing multiculturalism and not having enough babies. This means
that
> the evil empires are going to swallow us whole as we, poor souls, are
> feminized enough to tolerate differences and do not propagate sufficiently
> to make up for the tons of fifteen-year olds in the Gaza Strip, all hungry
> for our lives, assets and real property. Oh well, I promised to read it.
I
> shall.
Well, drawing on what I recall of world history since, oh, the founding of
Jericho, the civilization with the expanding population has inevitably
swallowed its stagnant, or just more slowly growing, neighbors. Maybe not
perfectly so (someone always has a quibble or two),but that's certainly
where the smart money would go on a wager.
The Egyptians warred among themselves until the unified Kingdom, the first
dynasty, was established. Which, lacking anyplace else to go (the deserts
being formidable barriers for thousands of years) maintained an unusual
stability. Eventually enough roads and irrigation (and numerous enough
large enough ships) were built that the splendid isolation of Old Egypt
ended.
And they got swallowed up.
The Akkadians conquered the first Empire in the middle east, and then
fortunes changed over time as new expanding, or reinvigorated expanding
civilizations conquered their successive empires (I'm not even going to try
to get them all straight of the top of my memory). Each new expansion
swallowing up its predecessor.
Finally, its not so much the 15 year olds in Gaza so much, as their
ideological twins already in Europe.
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p114456_index.html :
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper explores the use and acceptance of the cultural
defense in German courts in cases involving so-called "honor killings."
Approximately sixty honor killings-homicides in which young women are killed
by male members of their family for allegedly tainting the honor of the
clan-are known to have occurred in Germany over the last twenty years. In
almost all cases, the defendants-mostly Turkish, Kurdish, and Afghani
Muslims-have offered a cultural defense, claiming that killing the woman who
has dishonored the family was an obligation imposed by morality, culture and
tradition. Surprisingly, German judges have accepted this cultural defense
in numerous cases and imposed only reduced sentences, most often for
manslaughter instead of premeditated murder. Such lenience is triply
puzzling and disturbing. First, reduced sentences for German perpetrators of
such violent crimes are virtually unheard of and raise troubling questions
for the principle of the equal application of the law. Second, it sends the
message that young male relatives have the right to monitor and punish -even
by death-the conduct of their female relatives if they come from a
conservative Muslim community. Third, this ostensible -but, as I shall
argue, misguided-cultural tolerance is curiously at odds with Germany's
general approach to cultural minority rights. Germany privileges ethnic
membership in the community and seeks to limit the legal, political and
social accommodation of "non-Western" cultural-religious traditions as much
as possible. A key aim of the paper, therefore, is to ascertain and explain
the rationale behind this departure from standard legal and policy practice
regarding the accommodation of cultural minority rights. Finally, I will
offer a comparison between Germany's policy towards honor killings and that
of the United States, a country with a long tradition of legal pluralism,
where several honor killings have occurred over the past years.
News story:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/22/i_ins.01.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43304
elf
Willow Arune
certainly, many things such as "honour killings" cannot be permitted in a
western society any more that shirra courts. I think that if a Sikh wants
to join an army, for example, he gives up any right to wear a turban on
parade. In other worlds, keep your traditions where they do not skinflint
with your new life. In those cases, the "new life" wins. A quid pro quo...
Obviously, I would not be in favour of a cultural defence. Such goes
against the rules of the new society, fundamentally so.
It is a bending of both sides, an accommodation of one side to the
traditions of the newcomers, a necessary modification by the newcomers the
ways of the new country. A tender process. It shall take time until both
the old and new come to some sort of agreement on where that line is. For
example, I for one do not think a Sikh should be allowed to carry a knife,
religious meaning or not, in places where others can take a knife. One
problem I have noted is that those in the "old country" are called upon to
rule on traditions unfolding in the "new country". That too will change as
the new develops its own priests and traditions, conforming to the new
country to some degree.
Frankly, I think any immigrant should be able to speak one of our two
languages, and to settle in an area where that language predominates. In
fact, I think we should be able to direct an immigrant to certain
communities and impose some rule to live there for at least five years.
This is not a forced process - but it is a long one where each side
determines who far it can, or even must go. But the tail dos not wage the
dog, to put it bluntly. Where doubt, the issue is resolved in favour of the
new country.
Not very liberal, is it. Well, we are all a mixture...
Willow