BSE infects Sunday Express *FOC* reviewer
Hugh Robertson
Howdy,
did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
<calming breath>
I read the thread last week in which pterry mentioned it's easier to
gain acceptance ( from critics et al ) as a writer of childrens books
rather than a fantasy writer. I believe this proves the point. I ahve
seen reviews that have dissected books, but never one that says " if
you read this book you're a cretin". Maybe I've just led a sheltered
life.
Sorry for the space consuming bitching, but this really annoyed me at
the time.
What, you could tell?
Hugh
Bob Potter
In article <4oue7n$d...@news72.supernews.com>, Hugh Robertson
<h...@paisley.ac.uk> writes
-- Old saying... those who can do, those who can't teach, those who can't teach
administrate, those who can't administrate, become critics.
There are any number of critics out there who slag off ANYTHING, especially if
it's popular, critics only seem to like films/books/plays that are one (or more)
of the following.
1.Totally incomprehensible
2.Kitchen sink dramas
3.Depressing tales of life that have you reaching for the wrist slashing razors
by chapter 4
4.Highly unlikely to be popular/make money
The purpose of stories (as I see it) is to inform/entertain/allow a temporary
escape. I think critics miss the point.
<gets off soapbox, and awaits howls of criticism>
Bob Potter
Terry Pratchett
In article <4oue7n$d...@news72.supernews.com>
h...@paisley.ac.uk "Hugh Robertson" writes:
> did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
> somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
> it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
> of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
> attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
> I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
> Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
Be kind to the lady. Knowing what happened last time a reviewer tried this,
she's going to get a lot of mail from retired schoolteachers and pillars
of the community -- and A S Byatt, possibly, on the basis of another cutting
here...
On the other hand, there was a nice review in the Observer and even the Indy
on Sunday found something nice to say about fans (how nice and quiet they
were in the queue in Croydon).
Terry Pratchett
pirat...@argonet.co.uk
> >Howdy,
> >did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
> >somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
> escape. I think critics miss the point.
>
> <gets off soapbox, and awaits howls of criticism>
> Bob Potter
Bravo! Who needs Brookside, Coronation Street, and Neigh-bores when real life
is depressing enough.
--
All the best!
|\ /|
| \/ |ike: In the service of the Smut Empire______________________________
pirat...@argonet.co.uk
> Howdy,
> did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
Ah. Well, that's yer actual "Science Fiction Anoraxia that is" (lit: fear of
anything lit. that taxes the mind). Probably said journo was (a) sober for a
change, (b) suffering as a result, (c) had done the usual journo trick of
shrieking "What does Terry Pratchett write?" in the office, and (d) received a
"My kiddywinkie has just read Johnny and the Dead" as an answer.
Just athought: Given that the typical journo savages SF AND that Pterry is an
ex journo who can give as good as he gets - what fireworks will there be at the
DW Con?
Me? I'm hoping to get the Press Liaision Officer's post for next year's
Eastercon. I'll give e'm
anoraksandsillycostumesandrubberearsand"livelongandprosper"Grrrrr!
On a more serious note: if anybody can upload a transcript (and an address) then
we can all jam her box (snail mail, that is) with an irate form letter.
Dave Le Good
In article <4oue7n$d...@news72.supernews.com>,
h...@paisley.ac.uk (Hugh Robertson) wrote:
>Howdy,
>did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
>somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
>it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
>of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
>attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
>I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
>Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
>
><calming breath>
>
>I read the thread last week in which pterry mentioned it's easier to
>gain acceptance ( from critics et al ) as a writer of childrens books
>rather than a fantasy writer. I believe this proves the point. I ahve
>seen reviews that have dissected books, but never one that says " if
>you read this book you're a cretin". Maybe I've just led a sheltered
>life.
>
Assuming that she read the book before writing the article and that she was
paid, then she must be a professional cretin <g>.
Brings to mind a letter from GB Shaw to one of his critics along the lines
of:
"I am sitting in the smallest room of my house. Your critique is in front
of me. Shortly it will be behind me."
Dave
Dick Eney
In article <4oue7n$d...@news72.supernews.com>,
Hugh Robertson <h...@paisley.ac.uk> wrote:
>did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
>somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
>it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
>of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
>attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
>I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
>Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
>
><calming breath>
>
>I read the thread last week in which pterry mentioned it's easier to
>gain acceptance ( from critics et al ) as a writer of childrens books
>rather than a fantasy writer. I believe this proves the point. I ahve
>seen reviews that have dissected books, but never one that says " if
>you read this book you're a cretin". Maybe I've just led a sheltered
>life.
>Hugh
BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
_are_ bobble hats?)
-- Tamar
David Heil
God said
>
>On the other hand, there was a nice review in the Observer and even the Indy
>on Sunday found something nice to say about fans (how nice and quiet they
>were in the queue in Croydon).
>
>Terry Pratchett
I WAS THERE!!!! I was a little behind the lass with the green pointed
hat with WIZZARD on it. I was the twit who asked about you and Neil
possibly working together again.
Incidently, it was the first time I'd ever been to Croydon and I got
lost going through Crystal Palace. And Lewisham. And Catford. And
Peckham Rye.
Thanks for signing me book though. I was dead chuffed.
Cheerio.
--
David Heil
P J Bleackley
Hugh Robertson (h...@paisley.ac.uk) wrote:
: Howdy,
: did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
: somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
: it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
: of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
: attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
: I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
: Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
Console yourself with two points.
1)[1] The Observer gave Feet of Clay a fairly decent review, along the
lines of, "OK, it's a good detective story and a good fantasy story, but
it's a REALLY good comedy."
2) The Daily Express headlined a perfectly ordinary article about a
possible postal strike on Monday with a truly surreal printing error.
[1] Ceci n'est pas un footnote. [2]
[2] But this is.
--
~~~PETE "QUANTUM" BLEACKLEY~~~
Good evening everybody, and welcome to Surrealists Hieronymous
College of St. Hild and St. Bede~ ~University of Durham
P.J.Bl...@durham.ac.uk ~ http://www.dur.ac.uk/~d20u6s
Lethargic Man
bl
A long time ago, on a Usenet far, far away, Bob Potter scribed:
^
>There are any number of critics out there who slag off ANYTHING, especially if
>it's popular, critics only seem to like films/books/plays that are one (or more)
>of the following.
>
>1.Totally incomprehensible
>
>2.Kitchen sink dramas
>
>3.Depressing tales of life that have you reaching for the wrist slashing razors
>by chapter 4
In which case us Pratchett readers have nothing to fear, since Pterry never
reaches Chapter 2, let alone Chapter 4.
ttfn,
Mchl Grnt
(founder, alt.fan.alt-fan-pratchett)
---------IN--MEMORIAM--PHOENICIS.CANTABRIGENSIS.ACADEMIAE.UK------*Whelk!*------
Quote of the week: "Anyone who considers arithmetical | Risus Sardonicus :-]
methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a | (Michael S. Grant)
state of sin" - John von Neumann | gra...@aston.ac.uk
----------< http://www.aston.ac.uk/~grantms// >---------------------------------
Alan Carlisle
I am reminded of Brendan Behan's definition, which goes something
like this:
"A critic," he said, "is like a eunuch in a harem. He sees it
done every night, he knows how it should be done, but can't do it
himself".
A bit OTT, maybem but with a grain of truth...
Alan Carlisle, Luxembourg.
--
Alan Carlisle, European Parliament, Luxembourg
Victoria Martin
On 5 Jun 1996, Alan Carlisle wrote:
> I am reminded of Brendan Behan's definition, which goes something
> like this:
>
> "A critic," he said, "is like a eunuch in a harem. He sees it
> done every night, he knows how it should be done, but can't do it
> himself".
>
Whereas appreciative critics are like the women in the harem? They see it
done every night, they know how it should be done, but it's not very
often that they experience it done right.
God, can't you just tell it was a male writer who came up with this metaphor?
Victoria
Paul Bailey
Hugh Robertson wrote:
>
> I read the thread last week in which pterry mentioned it's easier to
> gain acceptance ( from critics et al ) as a writer of childrens books
> rather than a fantasy writer. I believe this proves the point. I ahve
> seen reviews that have dissected books, but never one that says " if
> you read this book you're a cretin". Maybe I've just led a sheltered
> life.
There was a British newspaper (Independent on Sunday, AFAIR)
review of Interesting Times a couple of years ago, which
concluded with something like:
'For mature children and immature adults.'
As well as being the sort of showy journalism that gives
critics a bad name, this was calculatedly insulting to Terry
and his readers. The poor woman just didn't *get* it.
Still, send Anita Brookner to review Oasis and you're
hardly likely to find a meeting of minds.
Paul Bailey
pau...@aisb.ed.ac.uk
Ben Waggoner
Dave Le Good (da...@minuet.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Brings to mind a letter from GB Shaw to one of his critics along the lines
: of:
: "I am sitting in the smallest room of my house. Your critique is in front
: of me. Shortly it will be behind me."
What was G.B. Shaw doing in a broom closet on the fourth floor?
--Ben
Lethargic Man
bl
A long time ago, on a Usenet far, far away, Victoria Martin scribed:
>On 5 Jun 1996, Alan Carlisle wrote: ^
<spog>
Yes - oh, sorry, I thought you were addressing me.
</spog>
<runs away very fast>
ttfn,
Mchl Grnt
(founder, alt.fan.most-of-alt-fan-pratchett)
P.S. Congratulations TO Piers Forrest for the best .sigs around a ce moment.
Alan Connell
Sometime, somewhere in alt.fan.pratchett,
dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>_are_ bobble hats?)
Ahh, a bobble hat [1]. This is a breed of wooley hat (as
seen everywhere), with a woolen ball sewn onto the top. It
looks something like this [2]:
__O__
/ \
| |
+++++++
Sometimes the bobble would look like a '*', i.e. stringy looking.
Alan.
| Alan Connell. alan.c...@ces-cdr.be
| I only work here. I do not speak for my employers.
|
| Hello! My name is Inigo of Borg!
| You killed my father! Prepare to be assimilated!
[1]. I used to wear one when I was a kid. My mother made me :-(
[2]. I will *not* apologise for my ascii art.
Jean Lamb
I used to have a headpiece called Deely-Bobbers which I used to wear
to cons (I've grown up now--my Minnie Mouse Ears are _far_ more
dignified).
>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>_are_ bobble hats?)
Jean Lamb, tla...@gp.magick.net
Queen of her own Universe, Unrealty Office opening soon!
See her story "Galley Slave" in the August _Analog_.
Remington Stone
P J Bleackley said:
}Hugh Robertson (h...@paisley.ac.uk) wrote:
}: Howdy,
}: did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
}: somone-or-other in the Sunday Express yesterday? I couldn't believe
}: it. Talk about a vitriolic attack on fans. After a mild slagging off
}: of the book, she devolves ( literally :-) into an ameoba^H^H^H^H^H^H
}: attack on the "sort of people who read Pratchett books".
}: I have no bobble hat, and do read other books thank you very much Mz
}: Kate thingy. And as far as I'm concerned you can just ...
Is it possible that she had read no other pTerry, and that FoC is less
accessible to those who have not read G!G! and MAA?
}2) The Daily Express headlined a perfectly ordinary article about a
}possible postal strike on Monday with a truly surreal printing error.
Oh, please tell us... I don't want to wait for the Daily Express to
be released over here...
Remington Stone Mail Al...@Lspace.Org for newbie info.
A.T.A.F.O.T. \\\\\\
\\\\\\\__o
______________\\\\\\\'/____________________________________
James Brokaw
In his/her own special way, Jean Lamb wrote:
> I used to have a headpiece called Deely-Bobbers which I used to wear
> to cons (I've grown up now--my Minnie Mouse Ears are _far_ more
> dignified).
Well, I still wear my coxcomb to class sometimes. Cheers the lecture
hall up a little.
--
\\\\\ ----> hedg...@photobooks.com <----
\\\\\\\__o Bringing hedgehogs to the common folk since 1994.
__\\\\\\\'/________________________________________________________
Terry Pratchett
I'd better add some stuff here...
I get reviewed in the nationals quite a lot -- three or four for FoC so
far.
But that's been so for the books way back to 1990 and before -- Indy, Times,
Grauniad,Telegrah and the whole slew of posh Sundays, besides all the
not-posh press.
Yet almost every major article about Terry Pratchett and the Discworld says
that the books are 'seldom' or 'never' reviewed; sometimes these articles
are in papers that have reviewed the books pretty regularly for years.
This is strange.
Terry Pratchett
James Brokaw
In his/her own special way, Terry Pratchett wrote:
> This is strange.
I talked to a British SF/Fantasy book importer today. He carried *1*
Robert Rankin book, and about seven of yours. The whole list was about
fifty pages or so, double sided, fine 6 or 8 point print.
Lordy lord. Aren't you both consistant bestsellers?
<sigh>
Simon Dainty
Some time around Sat, 08 Jun 96, Terry did scribble thus:
[Media contradictions]
I'm sure there's a spell for it somewhere.
> This is strange.
And this coming from the guy who keeps me awake half the night following
the adventures of Granny Weatherwax.
SYL,
Si.
--
Izzy's Domain - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/4694
--
Medge
In article <internews...@argonet.co.uk>, pirat...@argonet.co.uk
says...
>
>> Howdy,
>> did anyone else read the travesty of a review of Feet of Clay by Kate
>
>
>Ah. Well, that's yer actual "Science Fiction Anoraxia that is" (lit: fear of
>anything lit. that taxes the mind). Probably said journo was (a) sober for a
>change, (b) suffering as a result, (c) had done the usual journo trick of
>shrieking "What does Terry Pratchett write?" in the office, and (d) received a
>"My kiddywinkie has just read Johnny and the Dead" as an answer.
>
>
>Just athought: Given that the typical journo savages SF AND that Pterry is an
>ex journo who can give as good as he gets - what fireworks will there be at
>the DW Con?
Footnote: Neil was in Perth at Easter and was interviewed by a loony journo.
She kept saying "As a Science Fiction writer..." to Storm Constantine, and "How
do you fiind drawing Sandman?" to Neil. She had recieved this tape thing that
started.
"You mission, should you choose to accept it is to interview these two Brit
writers (SF I think) this tape will self destruct in five seconds."
And that is all she had, no research, no reading, nothing at all. Douglas Adams
gets the same thing out here too. Journo's, no wander when Neil was once and
his mother asked him what he did for a living he said "I am a piano player in a
brothel."
medge
Mark Burbidge
In a message posted on 4 Jun 1996 15:30:20 -0400 to the newsgroup
alt.fan.pratchett, Dick Eney wrote:
>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>_are_ bobble hats?)
A woollen hat with a bobble on top!
Like this : *<B-)
Typically worn only when it's too cold to be cool! ;-)
Mark Burbidge http://www.ftech.net/~monark/
--
Currently Reading: The Philby Files by Genrikh Borovik
So far: Good book, Genrikh talked to Philby for over
50 hours in the years before he died, and had access
to file 5581 after Philby's Death..
Owen Dunn
Terry Pratchett <Ter...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I get reviewed in the nationals quite a lot -- three or four for FoC so
>far.
[snip]
>This is strange.
As is the fact that I looked on the front of today's Sunday Times
Books section to see a review of `Feet of Clay'. Impressed, I read on:
`A Study of Gurus, by Anthony Storr.'
The strangest coincidences happen in the publishing world, I suppose.
(S)
--
Caius College, Cambridge CB2 1TA, UK [+44 1223 315565] <osd...@cam.ac.uk>
http://chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk/~osd1000/ <osd...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk>
`Competence with pain, coherent miseries, a bite and sup,
we hug our little destinies again.'
Noel Foster
Terry Pratchett (Ter...@unseen.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
> I get reviewed in the nationals quite a lot -- three or four for FoC so
> far.
>
> that the books are 'seldom' or 'never' reviewed; sometimes these articles
> are in papers that have reviewed the books pretty regularly for years.
>
> This is strange.
These are journos. What do you expect?
Sorry, you were one yourself, weren't you?
Open mouth, insert foot.
Noel
--
When a person puts his best foot forward and it gets stepped on - that's life
Dr. Laurence Peter, 5000 Gems of Wit & Wisdom.
Dick Eney
In article <4p6848$6...@news.Belgium.EU.net>,
Alan Connell <alan.c...@ces-cdr.be.be> wrote:
>dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
>
>>_are_ bobble hats?)
>
>
> __O__
> / \
> | |
> +++++++
>
>Sometimes the bobble would look like a '*', i.e. stringy looking.
>
>Alan.
Oh, a standard knitted (winter) hat. :) Whaddya mean, you wore them when
you were a kid? I _still_ wear them. So does my uncle, the muscular
truck driver-- oops, no, he wears the kind without a bobble, the Navy
"Watch Cap", worn by macho men everywhere. Which leads me to think, it's
probable the UK symbolic equivalent of those "stupid hats"[1] with the
bill-type brim, the front half of a hat, and the back half made of plastic
webbing with an adjustable plastic thing so onesizefitsmost, obligatory
brand logo or macho funny saying imprinted.
_Now_ I understand. It's what is worn with the anorak. Which also has no
stigma in the US.
-- Tamar
[1] Garfield named them that, in the US
P J Bleackley
Remington Stone (ez06...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu) wrote:
: P J Bleackley said:
: }2) The Daily Express headlined a perfectly ordinary article about a
: }possible postal strike on Monday with a truly surreal printing error.
: Oh, please tell us... I don't want to wait for the Daily Express to
: be released over here...
Instead of the intended headline, there were three lines of typographical
instructions. It went something like;
X 80pt X franklin X gothic X bold X 3 X line X centered X
Gabriel Krabbe
On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Terry Pratchett wrote:
> I'd better add some stuff here...
>
> I get reviewed in the nationals quite a lot -- three or four for FoC so
> far.
>
[minor snip]
>
> Yet almost every major article about Terry Pratchett and the Discworld says
> that the books are 'seldom' or 'never' reviewed; sometimes these articles
> are in papers that have reviewed the books pretty regularly for years.
>
> This is strange.
well, you see, there's quite likely millions of
universes in which your books have never yet
been reviewed.
it's probably due to quantum.
gabriel
---
"Hi-ho, hi-ho, it's hand grenades I throw..."
e-mail: sa...@bofh.studfb.unibw-muenchen.de
snail-mail: UniBwM 106/2-305, 85577 Neubiberg, Germany
Mailing list re german afp meet:
list...@bofh.studfb.unibw-muenchen.de
with body (not subject) 'sub afp-gcon' 'end'
'73 Chevy Pick-up
In article 834273...@unseen.demon.co.uk, Terry Pratchett <Ter...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes:
[..]
>Yet almost every major article about Terry Pratchett and the Discworld says
>that the books are 'seldom' or 'never' reviewed; sometimes these articles
>are in papers that have reviewed the books pretty regularly for years.
>
>This is strange.
Not really.
There's nothng your average journo on the nationals likes more than
to give the impression to us readers that they're party to the
latest in thing and we're lucky that we're being let in on the secret,
being loyal readers of the rag in question.
It doesn't matter that Terry has authored a luggageload of books, has
been in the best seller lists for years and is read worldwide. The
point is that in the incestuous little world of journalism based around
the capital, Discworld has been a closed book ;).
Now maybe they're 'officially' discovering it. The problem is that
your book reviewer can hardly say, "This Pratchett has been around
for a fair while and his output is of consistently high quality,
is accessible and popular. Now that my friends and I have read one,
we think that it's quite good too. What a pity we were so far behind
popular opinion on this one. What will my editor say?".
No. It goes more like this (translated):
"Here's a review of the latest book by Terry Pratchett. I am
deliberatley stating that he has seldom/never been reviewed before
as I wish to give you the impression that I have just discovered
this new talent.
He will be all over the other papers by next week
as my friends and I were all at the same parties last weekend so
we will all be chucking out similar copy over the next fortnight.
But you will remember that you read about him here first. Oh what
a clever boy am I.
You may read somewhere that he is already popular
but be advised that I will now attempt to classify his current
readership as a bunch of working class oiks or techno-anoraks who
could not possibly get all the references in his latest tome wot
us literary types have just spotted. In this way I am initiating
you, as a discerning individual, into the wonders of the Discworld
and when I tell you next week that it is really popular now
you will thank me for that warm feeling you have at already being in
the know.
If I told you any more I'd be cutting my own throat.
Ahahahaha. I always try to add a quote from the book in my review
in a doomed attempt appear clever."
'73
Alan Connell
Sometime, somewhere in alt.fan.pratchett,
dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
>In article <4p6848$6...@news.Belgium.EU.net>,
>Alan Connell <alan.c...@ces-cdr.be.be> wrote:
>>dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
>>
>>>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>>>_are_ bobble hats?)
>>
>>Ahh, a bobble hat. This is a breed of wooley hat (as
>>seen everywhere), with a woolen ball sewn onto the top. It
>Oh, a standard knitted (winter) hat. :) Whaddya mean, you wore them when
>you were a kid? I _still_ wear them. So does my uncle, the muscular
So do I. Well, without the bobble and only when it's really cold.
Though I noticed that all the 'cool' skiing hats have very distinctive
bobbles on them now. I think they just look silly.
>_Now_ I understand. It's what is worn with the anorak. Which also has no
>stigma in the US.
Exactly. Headwear for train-spotters. [1]
>-- Tamar
Alan.
| Alan Connell. alan.c...@ces-cdr.be
| I only work here. I do not speak for my employers.
|
| Hello! My name is Inigo of Borg!
| You killed my father! Prepare to be assimilated!
[1]. Afpologies to any train-spotters around here.
The Fat Aardvark
On Sat, 08 Jun 96 22:30:26 GMT, Terry Pratchett
<Ter...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:-) I get reviewed in the nationals quite a lot -- three or four for FoC so
:-) far.
And I wonder what those reviewers did with their copies???
:-) Yet almost every major article about Terry Pratchett and the Discworld says
:-) that the books are 'seldom' or 'never' reviewed; sometimes these articles
:-) are in papers that have reviewed the books pretty regularly for years.
Could it be that the journo's don't read... their own paper, or is it
that they feel slightly superior to us normal readers, since they keep
saying "I found ....." and "If you haven't...." etc.
Oneup-person-ship to a slightly odd degree (about 67 deg)
Graham O'Mara (Yes My real name ....)
|"A true friend is one who cares. |
|I am glad I have true friends" |
|The Fat Aardvark 1995 |
Emmet O'Brien
>>>dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
>>>
>>>>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>>>>_are_ bobble hats?)
Come on, this is too easy. I've _made_ the Vernor Vinge joke here, people.
Give me a _challenge_..
Emmet, VP in charge of Shooting Fish in Barrels
--
It's not so much experimenting with drugs, as a large, comprehensive and
thorough research programme.
Jake Kesinger
Dick Eney (dick...@access4.digex.net) wrote:
: In article <4p6848$6...@news.Belgium.EU.net>,
: Alan Connell <alan.c...@ces-cdr.be.be> wrote:
: >dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) penned the following :
: >
: >>BSE indeed. What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
: >>_are_ bobble hats?)
: >Ahh, a bobble hat. This is a breed of wooley hat (as
: >
: > __O__
: > / \
: > | |
: > +++++++
: >
: >Sometimes the bobble would look like a '*', i.e. stringy looking.
: >
: >Alan.
: Oh, a standard knitted (winter) hat. :) Whaddya mean, you wore them when
: you were a kid? I _still_ wear them. So does my uncle, the muscular
: truck driver-- oops, no, he wears the kind without a bobble, the Navy
: "Watch Cap", worn by macho men everywhere. Which leads me to think, it's
Until recently I had a rather nice {Hunting Orange}-colo[u]r hat of
this sort (sans bobble) that had a nifty little patch with a moose on
on the front. i.e.
__
/ \
| |
| |
| |
| WW |
Where ``WW'' is the moose patch. It was on the inside and upside down,
so that one could roll it up and have a little moose on the forehead.
BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
Geez, what silly words won't they think of next?
--
--Jake _ Jake Kesinger (kesi...@math.ttu.edu), Outrageous Liar
LUBBOCK -> _|*~- http://www.math.ttu.edu/~kesinger/
\, _} ``It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way
\( to spell a word.'' (Andrew Jackson)
Andromeda
In article <4ps68f$h...@ttacs7.ttu.edu>, Jake Kesinger
<kesi...@math.ttu.edu> writes
>
>BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
Tuques...
- ANDREA
--
^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
<and...@bloodaxe.demon.co.uk> ANDROMEDA - Internet Goddess
<aj...@ukc.ac.uk>
Bloodaxe's History Links - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5055/
Dick Eney
Jake Kesinger <kesi...@math.ttu.edu> wrote:
>Tamar Lindsay (Dick Eney (dick...@access4.digex.net) wrote:
>: Alan Connell <alan.c...@ces-cdr.be.be> wrote:
>: >Tamar Lindsay (dick...@access4.digex.net) penned the following :
>: >
>: >>What's wrong with bobble hats? (Maybe I should ask, what
>: >>_are_ bobble hats?)
<snip>
>: > __O__
>: > / \
>: > | |
>: > +++++++
>: >
>: >Alan.
>
>: Oh, a standard knitted (winter) hat. :) Whaddya mean, you wore them when
>: you were a kid? I _still_ wear them. So does my uncle, the muscular
>: truck driver-- oops, no, he wears the kind without a bobble, the Navy
>: "Watch Cap", worn by macho men everywhere.
>
>this sort (sans bobble) that had a nifty little patch with a moose on
>on the front. i.e.
>
> __
> / \
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | WW |
>
>Where ``WW'' is the moose patch. It was on the inside and upside down,
>so that one could roll it up and have a little moose on the forehead.
>
>
>-- --Jake _ Jake Kesinger (kesi...@math.ttu.edu), Outrageous Liar
Another way to spell "took" is "tocque." :)
-- Tamar (sharing account dick...@access.digex.net)
I used to live in NH, which is not all that far from Canada
LI Endell
Dick Eney (dick...@access1.digex.net) wrote:
: Jake Kesinger <kesi...@math.ttu.edu> wrote:
: >
: >BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
: >Geez, what silly words won't they think of next?
: >
: >-- --Jake _ Jake Kesinger (kesi...@math.ttu.edu), Outrageous Liar
: > ``It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way
: >to spell a word.'' (Andrew Jackson)
: Another way to spell "took" is "tocque." :)
: -- Tamar (sharing account dick...@access.digex.net)
: I used to live in NH, which is not all that far from Canada
And in 4X they're also called 'beanies' which threw a friend of mine.
She came over here (uk) to work as a speech therapist and used a picture
of one of these hats as a test for stroke patients. She marked quite a
few wrong as they worked hard to tell her it was a 'bobble hat' til she
asked her flatmate (me) what on earth they were talking about...
So that'll be *3* nations divided by a common tongue :-)
Lindsay
Laethargic Man
bl
A long time ago, on a Usenet far, far away, Andromeda scribed:
^
^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
Sorry, Andrea, but I couldn't resist it...
<DAMERELL>
Awooga! Awooga! Right hand margin violation!
..........
. blurgle! .
..........
> .. @
>- ANDREA . /^\ @
>-- . | \|@
>^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^-@@ <CRASH!>
* * * * \V/ @@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
</DAMERELL>
ttfn,
Mchl Grnt
(founder, alt.fan.alt-fan-pratchett)
---------IN--MEMORIAM--PHOENICIS.CANTABRIGENSIS.ACADEMIAE.UK------*Whelk!*------
"Don't look behind you; the lemmings are catching up."=8-0| Risus Sardonicus :-]
"King Dharos, meanwhile, was tucking into breakfast: fried| (Michael S. Grant)
eggs, from the royal fowl." - Twilight Trails, Chapter 4 | gra...@aston.ac.uk
----------< http://www.aston.ac.uk/~grantms// >---------------------------------
Andromeda
In article <Dt9GM...@aston.ac.uk>, Laethargic Man
<GRA...@BRAVO.aston.ac.uk> writes
> bl
>A long time ago, on a Usenet far, far away, Andromeda scribed:
> ^
>^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
>
>Sorry, Andrea, but I couldn't resist it...
Control yourself...puleeese...!!!...:-)
>
>Awooga! Awooga! Right hand margin violation!
My nice wavy line is exactly 65 characters long, 7 characters less than
the recommended wrap length of 72 characters...so there...:-P
- ANDROMEDA - Character counting Goddess...
--
^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
Dick Eney
LI Endell <li...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>Dick Eney (dick...@access1.digex.net) wrote:
>: Jake Kesinger <kesi...@math.ttu.edu> wrote:
>: >
>: >BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
>: >Geez, what silly words won't they think of next?
>: >
>: >-- --Jake _ Jake Kesinger (kesi...@math.ttu.edu), Outrageous Liar
>
>
>: -- Tamar (sharing account dick...@access.digex.net)
>: I used to live in NH, which is not all that far from Canada
>
>And in 4X they're also called 'beanies' which threw a friend of mine.
>She came over here (uk) to work as a speech therapist and used a picture
>of one of these hats as a test for stroke patients. She marked quite a
>few wrong as they worked hard to tell her it was a 'bobble hat' til she
>asked her flatmate (me) what on earth they were talking about...
>
>So that'll be *3* nations divided by a common tongue :-)
>
>Lindsay
My family also calls them beanies. "Tocque" is (non-PC) Canuck, or
perhaps, educated... or 1920s, anyway (when they, or something very
like them, were high fashion). -- Tamar Lindsay
!David/ Kirsty Damerell
Andromeda <and...@bloodaxe.demon.co.uk> wrote:
><GRA...@BRAVO.aston.ac.uk> writes
>>Awooga! Awooga! Right hand margin violation!
>My nice wavy line is exactly 65 characters long, 7 characters less than
>the recommended wrap length of 72 characters...so there...:-P
And it's a .signature to boot and thus can go all the way out to 79 if it
likes.
--
David 'Gotterdammerung' Damerell, GCV Sauricon. djs...@hermes.cam.ac.uk.
Trinity College, Cambridge University. CUWoCS President. All Hail Discordia!
|___| WOODHAL2.WAD ftpable from ftp.cdrom.com and the current mirrors. |___|
| | | I'm currently working on an as yet nameless WAD for Aliens-TC. | | |
Andromeda
In article <4qefcv$k...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, !David/ Kirsty Damerell
<djs...@thor.cam.ac.uk> writes
>Andromeda <and...@bloodaxe.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>><GRA...@BRAVO.aston.ac.uk> writes
>>>Awooga! Awooga! Right hand margin violation!
>>My nice wavy line is exactly 65 characters long, 7 characters less than
>>the recommended wrap length of 72 characters...so there...:-P
>
>And it's a .signature to boot and thus can go all the way out to 79 if it
>likes.
>
- ANDROMEDA
John S. Ewing
In article: <4qc289$e...@access1.digex.net> dick...@access1.digex.net
Sounds similar to a 'tammy' or 'tam-o'-shanter' - the sort
of bunnet (yes I do mean to spell that with a 'u') you see
the Tartan Army wearing at football matches.
--
John S. Ewing | internet: jo...@gelsalba.demon.co.uk
Glaschu / Glasgow |
Alba / Scotland |
Dick Eney
John S. Ewing <jo...@gelsalba.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>dick...@access1.digex.net
>(Dick Eney) writes:
>>
>> LI Endell <li...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >Dick Eney (dick...@access1.digex.net) wrote:
>> >: Jake Kesinger <kesi...@math.ttu.edu> wrote:
>> >: >
>> >: >BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
>> >: >Geez, what silly words won't they think of next?
>> >: >
>> >: >-- --Jake _ Jake Kesinger (kesi...@math.ttu.edu)
>> >
>> >
>> >: -- Tamar (sharing account dick...@access.digex.net)
>> >
>> >She came over here (uk) to work as a speech therapist and used a
>> >picture of one of these hats as a test for stroke patients. She marked
>> > quite a few wrong as they worked hard to tell her it was a 'bobble
>> >hat' til she asked her flatmate (me) what on earth they were talking
>> >about...
>>
>> My family also calls them beanies. "Tocque" is (non-PC) Canuck, or
>> perhaps, educated... or 1920s, anyway (when they, or something very
>> like them, were high fashion). -- Tamar Lindsay
>
>Sounds similar to a 'tammy' or 'tam-o'-shanter' - the sort
>of bunnet (yes I do mean to spell that with a 'u') you see
>the Tartan Army wearing at football matches.
>
>-- John S. Ewing | internet: jo...@gelsalba.demon.co.uk
Not quite. A tammy or bunnet is much looser, being slightly larger around
the middle than at the brim (the part that goes around the forehead) so
they can lie flat and circular. A beanie is more smoothly hemispherical,
(approximately) and fits tightly to the head, like a bobble hat but
without the bobble.
-- Tamar
Gordon Steemson
dick...@access1.digex.net (Dick Eney) writes:
>John S. Ewing <jo...@gelsalba.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>dick...@access1.digex.net
>>(Dick Eney) writes:
>>> LI Endell <li...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> >Dick Eney (dick...@access1.digex.net) wrote:
>>> >: Jake Kesinger <kesi...@math.ttu.edu> wrote:
>>> >: >
>>> >: >BTW, in Canada these things are called ``tooks'' (``touks''?).
>>> >: >Geez, what silly words won't they think of next?
>>> >:
>>> >
>>> >She came over here (uk) to work as a speech therapist and used a
>>> >picture of one of these hats as a test for stroke patients. She marked
>>> > quite a few wrong as they worked hard to tell her it was a 'bobble
>>> >hat' til she asked her flatmate (me) what on earth they were talking
>>> >about...
>>>
>>> perhaps, educated... or 1920s, anyway (when they, or something very
>>> like them, were high fashion). -- Tamar Lindsay
>>
>>Sounds similar to a 'tammy' or 'tam-o'-shanter' - the sort
>>of bunnet (yes I do mean to spell that with a 'u') you see
>>the Tartan Army wearing at football matches.
>
>the middle than at the brim (the part that goes around the forehead) so
>they can lie flat and circular. A beanie is more smoothly hemispherical,
>(approximately) and fits tightly to the head, like a bobble hat but
>without the bobble.
In a sudden fit of sad but nevertheless uncontrollable pedantry, I
feel compelled to mention that I (who own, and proudly wear every
winter, *two* of the things[1]) have only ever seen it spelt 'toque'
or 'touque', except where the writing in question is very old, in
which case it is 'tocque' or toucque'. HTH and *sorry*, I don't know
what's come over me...
On a related note, anyone know why the things get so staticky and make
your head itch, even in a torrential downpour? (No, I don't try to use
woolens &c. as rain hats; we just get lots of unexpected rain around
here. Lots that IS expected too in fact...)
Regards,
GtM (gste...@sfu.ca)
[1] Yes, *including* the one with the little maple leaf on the band.