The Death of Intimacy (long) (ranty thing)
Darkcell
After the Tech crash, I have gone from Network Admin to retail counter
person and asst. manager because of my refusal to take state assistance. In
the midst of this temporary (IHOPE IHOPE IHOPE) career change, something has
started nuggling into my brain, it has been there for a while, but it is
really bugging me now..
Technology and its impact on the intimacy of everyday relations.
I can give 3 examples I see everyday.
1) Cell phones: This "tool" of the modren person is a key ingredient to the
loss of true intrapersonal communications. I can already hear the junkies
screaming - "How can you say that!! With my phone I can have access to any
of my friends at any time!" This is true, but does that maybe reduce the
amount of time you actually spend with them IRL? How about the impact it
has on the day to day travels we go through. So many times I have had
people involved in conversations while making monetary transactions that it
makes me sick. The person WORKING behind the counter has become no more
than a biological dollar slot for business. They are there for "Customer
Service" and yet a good portion of the customers do not even acknowledge
they are biological entities. I have gotten into the habit of smiling at
the phone junkie and saying, I am ready when you are.
2) The Internet: The Global community is grand. I am as much a victim of it
as are many others. I have friends in almost every state and in quite a few
countries. It is nice to be able to plug in and talk to someone with common
interests. The question I raise, however, is the impact this is having on
person to person interaction. I have discovered that many people do not
even know their neighbor's name. Yes, this is due, partially to the
Urbanification and Industrialization of the moden age, but is that really an
excuse? It wasn't long ago that local business owners knew their regular
customers by name and the customers would ask how the family was doing.
Have you ever had to call a friend to jump your car at your house? Why not
ask a neighbor? I am not saying that anyone here is a cause, because our
neighbors are just as guilty as we are. I know my neighbors.. only because
I live in the country, 25 miles away from town. I am surrounded by
rednecks, non-techies... Yes they spend a lot of time drunk on their
porches, and yes they are not the most erudite conversationalists in the
world, and yes they listen to country music, but they have also fed me when
I am broke, given me gas money to get to work, given me furniture when I had
none, and invited me to their parties (the only thing I have ever asked has
been to borrow money for gas when I am out). They are not saints, or
particularly intellectual, but they know how to interact. They introduced
themselves to me and within 2 days of my moving here, I was invited into
their homes for dinner. None of them have cell phones, one has a "damned
computer" for emailing and downloading porn, and they are all in the lower
middle class earning area... as am I, but I am also a heavy user of the
machinery... They know I am a bit "different" from them, but they don't
care.
"Why don't you become one with them, you redneck loving bonehead?"
I have no desire to. I am just pointing out that they know something about
relating to people that those of us who are engulfed/enmeshed in technology
have either lost or never learned.
3) Computers and Television in general: No, I am not going to throw my boxes
out next garbage day.. this is just food for thought. The TV is truly
becoming the focal point for the evenings of many families. They eat dinner
and all sit around the tube to watch "program X" as a family event. How
about a board game, cards, conversation? This is not news to anyone here I
think.. again, just observations. I had a friend proudly tell me the other
day that he got rid of his TV because he doesn't watch it any more. This
same person spends between 4-8 hours a day playing games and surfing the net
on his computer. What has he really changed? Sure he is using his mind, but
that is not the core of the issue I am talking about. He is still a
veritable shut-in, anti-social being. Think then of the advertising we are
subjected to on a continuous basis from both TV and the internet. I have a
pop-up killer that is about 90% effective, but still we see the banner ads
on almost every site we look at. We see 30 second bytes on TV, and we are
subjected to full page ads for underwear in the newspapers. We need the
better car, nicer clothes, or new new lipstick shade because no matter who
you are - it has an impact. Here is a no shit quote from the newspaper
today -
"When you look at the positive things and see that there is a world full of
bargains out there...then the holiday season can be cheerful."
Just ignore everything going on.. ignore the war, ignore that we are on the
brink of a horrifying abyss, just ignore it all.. and shop. Does anyone
else want to wretch at such a thought? Ignore that we as a culture are
losing the ability to interact with each other.. ignore the fact that the
mental health industry is booming with people complaining of displacement of
emotions... shop and it will be OK.. you will be a good American... show
your patriotism and spend money on shit you and your friends and family
don't really need.. feed the machine and you will find peace.
Well, I have probably exceeded my allowable rant/bullshit time..
Be well.
DC
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> I have been thinking... this is a dangerous thing.
> After the Tech crash, I have gone from Network Admin to retail counter
> person and asst. manager because of my refusal to take state assistance. In
> the midst of this temporary (IHOPE IHOPE IHOPE) career change, something has
> started nuggling into my brain, it has been there for a while, but it is
> really bugging me now..
>
> Technology and its impact on the intimacy of everyday relations.
> I can give 3 examples I see everyday.
> 1) Cell phones: This "tool" of the modren person is a key ingredient to the
> loss of true intrapersonal communications. I can already hear the junkies
> screaming - "How can you say that!! With my phone I can have access to any
> of my friends at any time!" This is true, but does that maybe reduce the
> amount of time you actually spend with them IRL? How about the impact it
> has on the day to day travels we go through. So many times I have had
> people involved in conversations while making monetary transactions that it
> makes me sick. The person WORKING behind the counter has become no more
> than a biological dollar slot for business. They are there for "Customer
> Service" and yet a good portion of the customers do not even acknowledge
> they are biological entities. I have gotten into the habit of smiling at
> the phone junkie and saying, I am ready when you are.
Okay, and here's some more ranting, from me:
I go into this place or that place, and rather than have people just be the
biological coin-slot to me -- and to avoid having the biological coin-slot
think of me a "just another customer-unit" of a generally icky appearance who
ought to be made to go elsewhere -- I try to do more than just the usual
routine ritual for dealing with the BCS (biological coin-slot) Unit. I try to
have an actual conversation if time or a lack of a line permits. I have
occasionally gotten extremely strange reactions from people over this, in some
cases. Females generally seem to think I'm doing heavy flirting, males
occasionally seem to wonder the same. I have had as many as 20 interactions
with the same individual before they even register that I'm that same repeat
customer.
> 2) The Internet: The Global community is grand. I am as much a victim of it
> as are many others. I have friends in almost every state and in quite a few
> countries. It is nice to be able to plug in and talk to someone with common
> interests. The question I raise, however, is the impact this is having on
> person to person interaction. I have discovered that many people do not
> even know their neighbor's name. Yes, this is due, partially to the
> Urbanification and Industrialization of the moden age, but is that really an
> excuse? It wasn't long ago that local business owners knew their regular
> customers by name and the customers would ask how the family was doing.
See above. For some years, as best I can tell, the only way that I was
differentiated from other UICU (ubiquitous indistinguishable customer unit)
was that I was dressed differently and was generally regarded as Trouble.
However, this sort of thing mostly went on in YuppieLand or suburbia, and
generally was had only from the exact sort of people who probably grew up with
a Mac mouse in one hand and a cellphone in the other.
> Have you ever had to call a friend to jump your car at your house? Why not
> ask a neighbor? I am not saying that anyone here is a cause, because our
> neighbors are just as guilty as we are. I know my neighbors.. only because
> I live in the country, 25 miles away from town. I am surrounded by
> rednecks, non-techies... Yes they spend a lot of time drunk on their
> porches, and yes they are not the most erudite conversationalists in the
> world, and yes they listen to country music, but they have also fed me when
> I am broke, given me gas money to get to work, given me furniture when I had
> none, and invited me to their parties (the only thing I have ever asked has
> been to borrow money for gas when I am out). They are not saints, or
> particularly intellectual, but they know how to interact. They introduced
> themselves to me and within 2 days of my moving here, I was invited into
> their homes for dinner. None of them have cell phones, one has a "damned
> computer" for emailing and downloading porn, and they are all in the lower
> middle class earning area... as am I, but I am also a heavy user of the
> machinery... They know I am a bit "different" from them, but they don't
> care.
> "Why don't you become one with them, you redneck loving bonehead?"
> I have no desire to. I am just pointing out that they know something about
> relating to people that those of us who are engulfed/enmeshed in technology
> have either lost or never learned.
There is something to this. I have one new neighbor who is apparently employed
in software testing and the last thing this person wants to do after work is
even see a computer. Fairly approachable and friendly person, likes to talk
etc. Understands the whole concept of "personability". A _lot_ of people I
encounter do not. And this is something that will probably be shot down for
one or another reason, but... okay, I was at a party and somehow didn't catch
on that this gal I'd been chatting with was the sister of my long-time buddy
(who I hadn't seen for some time). I hadn't exactly been hitting on her since
she was obviously with someone also at the party, but still it was
embarassing. My friend said, can't you see the resemblance? And other than
them both being "euro" in coloration I really couldn't see it. My friend says,
"you know, you ought to try spending more time with white people now and
then". And now that you mention it, I think I understand why I have, for many
years, generally preferred to hang out with black folk than with white ones.
Most of the black folks I know are keepin' it real. They have manners, ways,
etc. These manners and ways might not be exactly what my parents would have
approved, but at least they seem to have 'em more than do a lot of the younger
white folks I meet. And this ability to actually interact with someone sitting
right next to you, to take an interest of _any_ sort, increasingly it's
missing, IMNSHO, and like you, I think I blame cellphones, e-mail, and all of
that "I'll have my secretary call your secretary and they can play
message-machine phone-tag" mentality.
You know what's bizarre? I don't think I know anyone who has a cellphone.
Everyone that I actually _know_ doesn't have one, or they reserve it only to
call out for emergencies.
Okay, here's my own solution, and first some observations.
Okay, recently I decided I would get involved in some neighborhood promotion.
It seems my neighborhood is basically a high-crime district. It's not so much
high-crime like you'd expect in a downtown ghetto or some destitute mid-sized
town way out in the bankrupt sticks, it's more like a very high rate of
disorderly conduct, spouse abuse, and in the juvenile arenas, a lot of
truancy, increasing drop-out rate, etc. Much of this is due to the
demographic: in the specific areas where the crime rate is increasing, it's
semi-affordable apartments and condos, 70-percent of families are single
parent, something like 70-percent of those are single-parent working-mother
with more than one job, and over half of those are foreign-born and often with
limited English skills. To make it odder, since this is the lowest rate of
computer-owners in the State outside of the downtown Baltimore ghetto, you'd
think that you'd be seeing a lot more neighborliness, but there isn't; unlike
(for example) California or Texas, there isn't a single large minority of
foreign-born who are are mostly from one nation and who all speak the same
language. This neighborhood is the most diverse community with the highest
percentage of immigrants in the whole Washington-DC area: 187 languages are
spoken here. For instance, there are a very large number of francophones
here... but French is their second language, and their primary languages are
tribal langauges and if one person from (say) Nigeria runs across someone else
from Nigeria, their tribal languages may be from enemy tribes. There are a lot
of hispanophones here, but they are from a whole lot of countries where they
didn't get along too well with their neighboring nations. So you have, once
again, a lot of people who come home from work, pull down the blinds and keep
the kids inside no matter the weather, and watch TV.
The kids arrive at school with perfectly-accented English with a vocabulary of
maybe 200 words, and almost no social skills. Meanwhile, in the present
economy, extremely high rents downtown are forcing the people -- especially
those who have used up their lifetime allotment of time on Welfare -- out of
the District, and into the apartments and condos up the street. Families are
doubling up and tripling up in neighborhood houses, where formerly there would
be one old retired couple. The density of the population is instantly
tripling, house by house as the houses' elderly owners retire and the kids
sell or put these houses up for rent.
It's worrisome... and so I've gotten involved as I can be.
In my Civic Association there are maybe 3 people including myself who are
under 50, and I think only one is under 30.
In a meeting of regional Civic Association representatives organized to deal
with increasing crime and associated other issues of the trends detailed
above, it's pretty much more of the same, though the center of the
age-distribution curve is closer to 35 instead of 55 in my local C.A.
Interestingly, at the last meeting, there was one young face, someone
completing their AA degree and I think they were there mostly on class
assignment, I'm not too sure how involved they intended to be or if there
would be continued involvement. However, the observation was made by this
person that we could possibly solve some community-cleanup manpower shortages
(old folks aren't real fast or strong when it comes to major landscaping) by
getting ahold of high-school students needing to make up community-service
hours towards graduation requirements.
And here, maybe, is the problem in a nutshell and the solution as well,
perhaps. There are probably a lot of younger folks who would have a great time
actually doing something useful towards a valuable goal, if only someone found
such a goal and went looking for those who want to get involved. Better than
board games or cards, eh? and a lot less virtual and solipsistic than
immersing in websurfing or e-games. While the people who are satisfied to sit
at home and contemplate their navel via InterNet do exactly that, those who
get out, build relationships with each other and the rest of the accessible
public, and generally do real things in the real world, will eventually wind
up running the real world, or at least their little part of it.
Of course, as the majority of people slip into some sort of little
involutional psychosis or some media-mediated analogue thereof, they may not
even notice that we've taken over, and what would be the fun of that, other
perhaps that we might be able to prop up the world enough so that they can
continue to be so self-invoved that they never meet another nor reproduce,
solving a lot of other problems through that means.
Well, I'm not real sure how well that would play out or how desirable such
scenarios are, open the subject for debate then.
And now I myself am done with the ranting.
--
Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow. <-----> http://earthops.net/klaatu/
Nyx
news:V3MF9.7320$ta5.8...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
> "Why don't you become one with them, you redneck loving bonehead?"
> I have no desire to. I am just pointing out that they know something
> about relating to people that those of us who are engulfed/enmeshed in
> technology have either lost or never learned.
Also, they don't expect you to. There's a lot less conformity expected
among that type of person. They don't expect you to shop at the gap, or
have a car that runs and if you occasionally do coke and shoot at raccons
off the porch that's ok, too. It's the upper middle class that expect you
to keep your grass mowed and have the latest model car.
And actually they tend to respect you if you know a lot about computers.
Sounds like you found a bunch that haven't embraced the new tech yet, but
they will. They respect anyone who knows about and works with machinery.
From cars to chainsaws to computers, they have a lot of respect for
technology and those who can use it. They just don't have a lot of need for
technology.
Nyx
--
"Whatever it takes, and then some." Captain Malcolm Reynolds, Firefly.
www.sxxxy.org, www.weirdco.com
aim: nyxxxxx yahoo: nyxxxx icq: 9744630
fiona
"Darkcell" <awakeni...@earthlink.net> wrote
> 1) Cell phones: This "tool" of the modren person is a key ingredient to
> the loss of true intrapersonal communications.
<snip a bit>
> So many times I have had people involved in conversations while making
> monetary transactions that it makes me sick. The person WORKING
> behind the counter has become no more than a biological dollar slot for
> business. They are there for "Customer Service" and yet a good portion
> of the customers do not even acknowledge they are biological entities.
> I have gotten into the habit of smiling at the phone junkie and saying,
> I am ready when you are.
And yet, businesses seem to endorse the 'personal touch', fighting against
their staff being indistinguishable from automatons - although one might
argue they are in fact doing the opposite: my friend's mother works for a
college, assessing people for NVQs (National Vocational Qualifications),
which are believed to be of value to employers. There's one entitled
"Customer Service", or words to that effect, for which my friend's mum
observes students behind the counter - if they say, "Hello, how are you?",
they get a tick.
Fiona
"When I feel like exercising I just lie down until the feeling goes away."
--Robert M. Hutchins
Tiny Human Ferret
What, for or against their ratings?
I've begun to get the feeling, that interacting with the Ubiquitous
Interchangeable Customer Units as if they were individuals possessed of
existence outside of the marketing machine, was rated by Management as a
complete waste of time and effort and Detrimental to the Plan.
crimson halo
>
> Technology and its impact on the intimacy of everyday relations.
> I can give 3 examples I see everyday.
> 1) Cell phones: This "tool" of the modren person is a key ingredient to the
> loss of true intrapersonal communications. I can already hear the junkies
The problem with these fscking things is that once people get hooked, the
majority of them seem to get dumber and dumber as time goes on, yapping
like an untrained dog about every little thing that goes on in their life.
It seems that only after one gets a cellphone, suddenly it becomes important
to talk to friends whilst in the supermarket looking for food, while taking
part in face-to-face meetings, while driving in a high accident zone, etc.
There is nothing so rude as a person who suddenly picks up their cell
in the middle of a dinner, meeting, or formal gathering, and dismisses
the people in front of them to talk to someone about last night's party
or some mundane thing that no sane person would have brought up under
the same circumstances ten years ago.
In my own experience, it seems that cellphone addicts can become horribly
insecure, sometimes being unable to deal with simple daily events unless
they are on the phone with another person. They're good at talking, all
right, but they aren't always so good at other things that require human
interaction and emotion, particularly face-to-face conversation and
creativity based tasks.
My philosophy on the phones comes down to a matter of need: do you have
a job where human lives are on the line, where you *need* to be on call
24 hours a day? If that's the case, you're likely to make reasonable,
non-excessive use of your cellphone. Most of your day, you're probably
doing something more productive and useful with time than talking on
your phone.
For the rest of the lot, the cellphone is a luxury item, plain and simple.
It can be passive escapism, a way to pass the time, etc. Not unlike
Internet porn, television 'entertainment', and drug ab/use.
Not to mention the potential health issues raised by one repeatedly placing
a high-frequency transmitter next to their brain. Despite whatever the
industry wants me to think, I very much doubt that it's as harmless as the
manufacturers claim.
> they are biological entities. I have gotten into the habit of smiling at
> the phone junkie and saying, I am ready when you are.
I'd encourage that attitude for anyone in a customer service position. The
likelihood that a customer could seriously fuck up because they're busy
gabbing about last week's sitcom is fair to high, save for the unappreciated
human behind the desk who has some sort of clue about the task at hand.
> 3) Computers and Television in general: No, I am not going to throw my boxes
> out next garbage day.. this is just food for thought. The TV is truly
> becoming the focal point for the evenings of many families. They eat dinner
If not for premium satellite channels, the only choices left would be to watch
mediocre channels that broadcast badly reported news, PPV porn movies, bands
that pretend to be punk, boring 'reality' shows, and soulless sitcoms.
Some choice indeed.
I'd sooner heave both units out a window and stick to reading books.
Computers, on the other hand, offer better choice. Since one can make the
user experience into whatever they want and do tasks that challenge them,
this makes it worth saving, at least in my mind.
On the other hand, it *is* a good idea not to base our lives entirely
around their existence. :-)
> Here is a no shit quote from the newspaper today -
> "When you look at the positive things and see that there is a world full of
> bargains out there...then the holiday season can be cheerful."
> Just ignore everything going on.. ignore the war, ignore that we are on the
> brink of a horrifying abyss, just ignore it all.. and shop. Does anyone
But that's the point, there's always a new way for people to ignore real
life and buy into the shrink-wrapped crap that purports to be reality.
The matter is whether we, as a society, can find strength to stay closer
to reality and establish meaningful goals, as opposed to letting go of
care, honour, and hope.
> else want to wretch at such a thought? Ignore that we as a culture are
> losing the ability to interact with each other.. ignore the fact that the
> mental health industry is booming with people complaining of displacement of
I remember coming across a website one time that highlighted the illustrious
ways in which humanity could kill itself off; one of these was to go utterly
and irrevocably insane. Basically, we'd all come to be damaged so badly in
the mind that we'd become unsustainable and unable to eat, think, or fuck.
If technology continues to displace emotion, I wonder if we might not be
that far off from mild insanity. Consumer culture, for one, embraces a
single-minded and unsustainable ideology that can prove disastrous in the
long run if left unchecked.
> shop and it will be OK.. you will be a good American... show
And remember, as a dutiful American, you have no right to question John
Ashcroft if he wants to put a wiretap on your line and stick a parabolic
microphone up your arse. To do so would be thought crime, and the Gestapo
could go after you for that.
http://zoom.cafepress.com/0/1586010_zoom.jpg
http://zoom.cafepress.com/8/1587588_zoom.jpg
http://zoom.cafepress.com/7/1448347_zoom.jpg
Brian
--
"Never you mind the devil; my generation sold its soul to the silicon chip."
erithromycin
>Technology and its impact on the intimacy of everyday relations.
>I can give 3 examples I see everyday.
>1) Cell phones: This "tool" of the modren person is a key ingredient to
the
>loss of true intrapersonal communications. I can already hear the junkies
>screaming - "How can you say that!! With my phone I can have access to any
>of my friends at any time!" This is true, but does that maybe reduce the
>amount of time you actually spend with them IRL?
Is that a function of the mobile phone though? What if it doesn't reduce the
time one spends with one friends? What if one uses it as what it was
intended for, a time-saving device? With it I can telephone to say I'm late
_while_ I walk, rather than instead of. A recent 'survey' suggested that the
average Briton had 14 'close friends', some of whom were classified
according to the rarity with which one saw them. Included amongst them the
'friend' who called upon you in a crisis, and at no other time, and, indeed,
the 'friend' that you only called upon when in need. All told a callous
exercise calculated to inspire jealousy, which really only served to make
those who 'qualified' seem pitiable creatures, obsessed with themselves.
>How about the impact it
>has on the day to day travels we go through. So many times I have had
>people involved in conversations while making monetary transactions that it
>makes me sick. The person WORKING behind the counter has become no more
>than a biological dollar slot for business. They are there for "Customer
>Service" and yet a good portion of the customers do not even acknowledge
>they are biological entities. I have gotten into the habit of smiling at
>the phone junkie and saying, I am ready when you are.
What happens if I'm telephoned in an emergency? I've had conversations while
making transactions, and I've called them to a close as quickly as possible.
Is it still bad if the customer says sorry?
>2) The Internet: The Global community is grand. I am as much a victim of
it
>as are many others. I have friends in almost every state and in quite a
few
>countries. It is nice to be able to plug in and talk to someone with
common
>interests. The question I raise, however, is the impact this is having on
>person to person interaction. I have discovered that many people do not
>even know their neighbor's name. Yes, this is due, partially to the
>Urbanification and Industrialization of the moden age, but is that really
an
>excuse?
You can't blame the Internet for a trend that started with Suburbs. The
telephone and the automobile have greater culpability for this one. People
don't see their neighbours when they drive from their attached garage to
their office. They hire people to cut their lawns because they're driving to
the mall on Sunday Morning. Perhaps the occasional conversation over the
fence of the pool?
>It wasn't long ago that local business owners knew their regular
>customers by name and the customers would ask how the family was doing.
Yes, but there aren't many local business owners anymore. Though the greeter
at Wal*Mart might know your name.
>Have you ever had to call a friend to jump your car at your house? Why not
>ask a neighbor?
No. There's a second car in the driveway?
>I have no desire to. I am just pointing out that they know something about
>relating to people that those of us who are engulfed/enmeshed in technology
>have either lost or never learned.
Substitute. Not a displacing effect. Hell, when was the last time you heard
of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
>3) Computers and Television in general: No, I am not going to throw my
boxes
>out next garbage day.. this is just food for thought. The TV is truly
>becoming the focal point for the evenings of many families.
If by 'becoming' you mean 'since the 1970s', yes.
>They eat dinner and all sit around the tube to watch "program X" as a
family >event. How about a board game, cards, conversation?
Too tired. Too stressed. Too difficult.
>I had a friend proudly tell me the other day that he got rid of his TV
because he
>doesn't watch it any more. This same person spends between 4-8 hours a day
playing
>games and surfing the net on his computer. What has he really changed?
Sure he is
>using his mind, but that is not the core of the issue I am talking about.
He is
>still a veritable shut-in, anti-social being.
Where is there to go? Starbucks?
>Think then of the advertising we are
>subjected to on a continuous basis from both TV and the internet. I have a
>pop-up killer that is about 90% effective, but still we see the banner ads
>on almost every site we look at. We see 30 second bytes on TV, and we are
>subjected to full page ads for underwear in the newspapers.
Nothing is free, not even the internet. Attention is the only coin you'd be
willing to spend in order to get good conversation, and you're complaining
about having to spend a little more?
Panurge
>there's always a new way for people to ignore real
>life and buy into the shrink-wrapped crap that purports to be reality.
And the shrink-wrapped crap does a better and better job of purporting
all the time.
>The matter is whether we, as a society, can find strength to stay closer
>to reality and establish meaningful goals, as opposed to letting go of
>care, honour, and hope.
Step 1 in that process is no longer treating "reality" as a synonym for
"disappointment".
>And remember, as a dutiful American, you have no right to question John
>Ashcroft if he wants to put a wiretap on your line and stick a parabolic
>microphone up your arse. To do so would be thought crime, and the Gestapo
>could go after you for that.
Good "posters", but...
>http://zoom.cafepress.com/7/1448347_zoom.jpg
TECH NOTE: John Ashcroft is already the Attorney General; the first
Secretary of Homeland Security will likely be Tom Ridge.
And don't forget our old friend Admiral John Poindexter from the
Iran-_contra_ scandal. What's he up to now? Why, running the Defense
Department's new Total Information Awareness program, natch!
Oh, and about those high-frequency transmitters: Lee Atwater always
blamed those for the brain tumor that cut his life short.
--
"Composers tend to think most people really care a lot about music.
Well, most people don't." --Aaron Copland
Panurge
>You can't blame the Internet for a trend that started with Suburbs. The
>telephone and the automobile have greater culpability for this one. People
>don't see their neighbours when they drive from their attached garage to
>their office. They hire people to cut their lawns because they're driving to
>the mall on Sunday Morning. Perhaps the occasional conversation over the
>fence of the pool?
That speaks to something besides suburbs. I grew up in a very
close-knit suburban neighborhood; six of the households that were on my
block thirty-five years ago are still there now. Low turnover and a
civic association or garden club can do wonders.
I wonder if people don't talk to their neighbors because it would force
them to face the idea that they've taken on a social role--a way of
life--that they didn't really want, in their heart of hearts, to have.
"Helllp!! I'm SQUAAAARRE!!!"
>Hell, when was the last time you heard
>of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
I would've ridden a bike myself. Why go to Mom for a ride when you can
have your own?
>>They eat dinner and all sit around the tube to watch "program X" as a
>family event. How about a board game, cards, conversation?
>
>Too tired. Too stressed. Too difficult.
Not after a couple of hours' rest, surely. You know, people used to
gather around a *piano*, and someone would *play* it while other people
*sang*. And that was when the workday was ten hours long.
OK, so maybe they didn't do it every day (except for the piano player).
>>I had a friend proudly tell me the other day that he got rid of his TV
>>because he doesn't watch it any more....He is
>>still a veritable shut-in, anti-social being.
>
>Where is there to go? Starbucks?
Better than nothing. How about the mall? Not the best answer, but it's
the one available at the moment.
Peter H. Coffin
> And don't forget our old friend Admiral John Poindexter from the
> Iran-_contra_ scandal. What's he up to now? Why, running the Defense
> Department's new Total Information Awareness program, natch!
Family legacy, natch! CIA takes care of its own.
--
94. When arresting prisoners, my guards will not allow them to stop and grab a
useless trinket of purely sentimental value.
--Peter Anspach's list of things to do as an Evil Overlord
erithromycin
Panurge:
>erithromycin:
>>You can't blame the Internet for a trend that started with Suburbs. The
>>telephone and the automobile have greater culpability for this one.
>>People don't see their neighbours when they drive from their attached
>>garage to their office. They hire people to cut their lawns because
>>they're driving to the mall on Sunday Morning. Perhaps the occasional
>>conversation over the fence of the pool?
>That speaks to something besides suburbs. I grew up in a very
>close-knit suburban neighborhood; six of the households that were on my
>block thirty-five years ago are still there now. Low turnover and a
>civic association or garden club can do wonders.
A mobile population then, who'll have several homes between their first and
last. Rented accomodation too, and a workforce who'll cross state lines
because their employer will too.
>I wonder if people don't talk to their neighbors because it would force
>them to face the idea that they've taken on a social role--a way of
>life--that they didn't really want, in their heart of hearts, to have.
>"Helllp!! I'm SQUAAAARRE!!!"
It may be that. To retreat from the idyll that the Brady's had, and clutter
one's life with 'my stuff'. A cave for the self, not an entity within an
other. A subdivision, not a neighbourhood. A collection of castles,
inviolate, wrapped around in aesthetically pleasing cul-de-sacs with easy
access to good schools and the local mall. The endless march of concrete
progress, one zipcode at a time.
>>Hell, when was the last time you heard
>>of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
>I would've ridden a bike myself. Why go to Mom for a ride when you can
>have your own?
How many kids own bicycles? I'm sure the numbers are down.
>>>They eat dinner and all sit around the tube to watch "program X" as a
>>>family event. How about a board game, cards, conversation?
>>Too tired. Too stressed. Too difficult.
>Not after a couple of hours' rest, surely. You know, people used to
>gather around a *piano*, and someone would *play* it while other people
>*sang*. And that was when the workday was ten hours long.
>OK, so maybe they didn't do it every day (except for the piano player).
Except people expect their entertainment to come out of a box. To hark back
to earlier conversations, we've lost our games of 'Master calls Servant' and
the joy of playing with mud and sticks.
>>>I had a friend proudly tell me the other day that he got rid of his TV
>>>because he doesn't watch it any more....He is
>>>still a veritable shut-in, anti-social being.
>>Where is there to go? Starbucks?
>Better than nothing. How about the mall? Not the best answer, but it's
>the one available at the moment.
Is it a community? Where do people interact socially? In other people's
houses? There's a trend in the region around London for single people to buy
houses with three bedrooms so their friends can stay over in comfort when
they entertain. What motivates that sort of behaviour? The distance between
home and work? Did the commute kill people's social lives? I used to spend
three hours a day in a car on my own, listening to drive time radio [or,
when I felt sane, Add N to (X) and the like, but I digress]. Previously, my
commute was 45 minutes on a bus wrapped around a visit to a coffeehaus where
I was _guaranteed_ to see people I knew and could have a conversation with,
even if my friends were otherwise busy. How many people still have that?
--
erith - trimmed title
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Panurge:
> >erithromycin:
<snips>
> >I wonder if people don't talk to their neighbors because it would force
> >them to face the idea that they've taken on a social role--a way of
> >life--that they didn't really want, in their heart of hearts, to have.
> >"Helllp!! I'm SQUAAAARRE!!!"
>
> It may be that. To retreat from the idyll that the Brady's had, and clutter
> one's life with 'my stuff'. A cave for the self, not an entity within an
> other. A subdivision, not a neighbourhood. A collection of castles,
> inviolate, wrapped around in aesthetically pleasing cul-de-sacs with easy
> access to good schools and the local mall. The endless march of concrete
> progress, one zipcode at a time.
Yes, you've pretty much nailed that one.
I was riding around with one of the neighbors recently, looking for some
landscaping supply, and I was remarking upon the "elf shacks" as I call them,
referring to the ubiquitous and undistinguished (other than by location)
condominium blocks. Probably most of the units have the same floor plan as ten
million other units across the county, state, nation. In the conversation,
worker mobility came up, and in my county, the average stay of residence in
the county is about 7 years. Thus, the average person would have moved 7 times
by the time they were 50. Rather than become overly familiar with the
landmarks and territory, why not become attached to a floor plan? The
community would always be changed, left behind, in 7 years, for a new
territory. And with the rapid pace of change and growth and recycling, even if
one did remain in the same area, the territory might change so much that one
might as well become attached, if not to a particular generic box, to the
concept of living in a box so generic that if one were to find one's self
working on the opposite coast, one could still sleepwalk to the bathroom
without barking one's shins.
>
> >>Hell, when was the last time you heard
> >>of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
>
> >I would've ridden a bike myself. Why go to Mom for a ride when you can
> >have your own?
>
> How many kids own bicycles? I'm sure the numbers are down.
By quite a bit, I am sure. When I was a kid, every kid in this neighborhood
had a bicycle. Nowadays, the busses are so ubiquitous, I don't even know if
the kids know how to ride bikes.
<snips>
> >>Where is there to go? Starbucks?
>
> >Better than nothing. How about the mall? Not the best answer, but it's
> >the one available at the moment.
>
> Is it a community? Where do people interact socially? In other people's
> houses? There's a trend in the region around London for single people to buy
> houses with three bedrooms so their friends can stay over in comfort when
> they entertain. What motivates that sort of behaviour? The distance between
> home and work? Did the commute kill people's social lives?
Either that or it killed one's friends... and thus at least that part of the
social life.
The Malls are, insanely enough, the substitute for the old-fashioned Parks in
most non-city environments. First, they are generally climate-controlled, and
have multiple diversions. Secondly, they provide people with the dual excuse
of shopping in the hopes of running across acquaintances and friends with few
formalities required of one, and also provide an informal setting for friends
and acquaintances to get together with the formalities foregone, under the
pretext of shopping. Surely the latter could be accomplished with small shops,
but there's a greater chance of having more interactions with more people down
at the Mall.
> I used to spend
> three hours a day in a car on my own, listening to drive time radio [or,
> when I felt sane, Add N to (X) and the like, but I digress]. Previously, my
> commute was 45 minutes on a bus wrapped around a visit to a coffeehaus where
> I was _guaranteed_ to see people I knew and could have a conversation with,
> even if my friends were otherwise busy. How many people still have that?
I sure don't. I _could_ have that if I were to move back downtown to DC, but
it's not worth the trouble, generally, so I just stick it out in the 'burbs,
where my own moping isn't noticed by all of the burbanites who are all far too
absorbed in their own alienation to care.
Panurge
>...in my county, the average stay of residence in
>the county is about 7 years. Thus, the average person would have moved 7 times
>by the time they were 50. Rather than become overly familiar with the
>landmarks and territory, why not become attached to a floor plan?
I understand this to an extent. I had an apartment in Tampa where I
felt fairly comfortable because the apartment plan itself seemed
familiar, even though it was one I'd never lived in before; I think the
carpet and the presence of My Stuff (especially my trusty GE clock
radio, which I got for Christmas when I was 14) helped a lot.
OTOH, we _are_ talking about averages, here. If you imagine 14
addresses within one's lifetime, two of those might come in childhood,
and six or seven might come during the college years and after, as one
tries to find a place in the world. Then there's the starter house, the
long-term house, and the old folks' home. That's 11 or 12 right there.
>When I was a kid, every kid in this neighborhood
>had a bicycle. Nowadays, the busses are so ubiquitous, I don't even know if
>the kids know how to ride bikes.
It might've started in the mid-'70s, when parents started getting
worried that their kids might start pulling Evel Kneivel-style stunts in
the driveway and bash their own heads in, which a few kids were doing
back then. And let's face it--no self-respecting 13-year-old wants to
solo on a bike wearing a helmet.
>The Malls are, insanely enough, the substitute for the old-fashioned Parks in
>most non-city environments.
Which is essentially the point I was driving at. I might also bring up
the old town square or plaza--or, to bring things back around full
circle, the town market.
>I just stick it out in the 'burbs,
>where my own moping isn't noticed by all of the burbanites who are all far too
>absorbed in their own alienation to care.
But do they acknowledge their own alienation, or do they try to smother
it by buying into the Neo-Square paradigm and telling themselves they're
*doing it _ironically_*?
A diet of nothing but lemonade is bad for the soul, y'know.
kest
news:3DF2703B...@earthops.net:
> Thus, the average person would have moved 7 times by the time they
> were 50. Rather than become overly familiar with the landmarks and
Seven? SEVEN? I've lived in three states in the past six years, in a total
of <takes a moment to count> 12 residences. And I'm probably moving again
in February. (grr.) Of course, I spent the *first* seventeen years of my
life in the same house, and eventually I hope to settle down a bit more,
but still!
And I think having the same floorplan all the time might be a bit dull.
Although I know that my extremeleft anger at corporations is tempered by
the fact that no matter where I go I know what to expect when I walk into
Target and therefore have a little less hunting all over kingdom come to do
for such necessities of life as a shower curtain.
k
erithromycin
>erithromycin:
>>Panurge:
>>>erithromycin:
><snips>
>>>I wonder if people don't talk to their neighbors because it would force
>>>them to face the idea that they've taken on a social role--a way of
>>>life--that they didn't really want, in their heart of hearts, to have.
>>>"Helllp!! I'm SQUAAAARRE!!!"
>>It may be that. To retreat from the idyll that the Brady's had, and
>>clutter one's life with 'my stuff'. A cave for the self, not an entity
>>within an other. A subdivision, not a neighbourhood. A collection of
>>castles, inviolate, wrapped around in aesthetically pleasing cul-de-sacs
>>with easy access to good schools and the local mall. The endless march of
>>concrete progress, one zipcode at a time.
>Yes, you've pretty much nailed that one.
It's what I'm good at. That, and this thing with my elbow and a bottle cap.
>I was riding around with one of the neighbors recently, looking for some
>landscaping supply, and I was remarking upon the "elf shacks" as I call
>them, referring to the ubiquitous and undistinguished (other than by
>location) condominium blocks. Probably most of the units have the same
>floor plan as ten million other units across the county, state, nation.
Hey, you only need to pay one architect. Building codes might require
material changes [note pun] but they're easy enough.
>In the conversation, worker mobility came up, and in my county, the
>average stay of residence in the county is about 7 years.
Hang on, aren't you in a DCian suburb? Isn't 7 years a suspicious number?
Maybe you've just got itinerant colonies of incumbent impersonators.
>Thus, the average person would have moved 7 times by the time they were
>50. Rather than become overly familiar with the landmarks and territory,
>why not become attached to a floor plan? The community would always be
>changed, left behind, in 7 years, for a new territory. And with the rapid
>pace of change and growth and recycling, even if one did remain in the
>same area, the territory might change so much that one might as well
>become attached, if not to a particular generic box, to the concept of
>living in a box so generic that if one were to find one's self working on
>the opposite coast, one could still sleepwalk to the bathroom without
>barking one's shins.
Knowing that you were within driving distance of a McDonalds, a Laundromat,
and an adult video store.
>>>>Hell, when was the last time you heard
>>>>of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
>>>I would've ridden a bike myself. Why go to Mom for a ride when you can
>>>have your own?
>>How many kids own bicycles? I'm sure the numbers are down.
>By quite a bit, I am sure. When I was a kid, every kid in this
>neighborhood had a bicycle. Nowadays, the busses are so ubiquitous, I
>don't even know if the kids know how to ride bikes.
That's a little scary, really. Though I haven't been on a bike for a while.
<snips>
>>>>Where is there to go? Starbucks?
>>>Better than nothing. How about the mall? Not the best answer, but it's
>>>the one available at the moment.
>>Is it a community? Where do people interact socially? In other people's
>>houses? There's a trend in the region around London for single people to
>>buy houses with three bedrooms so their friends can stay over in comfort
>>when they entertain. What motivates that sort of behaviour? The distance
>>between home and work? Did the commute kill people's social lives?
>Either that or it killed one's friends... and thus at least that part of
>the social life.
I'm not sure if there are statistics in relation to the recovery of networks
of friendships after fatalities within them.
>The Malls are, insanely enough, the substitute for the old-fashioned Parks
>in most non-city environments.
Have become. It's like saying, with a straight face, that the oil-tanker
you've just lost will join the marine habitat.
>First, they are generally climate-controlled, and have multiple
>diversions. Secondly, they provide people with the dual excuse of shopping
>in the hopes of running across acquaintances and friends with >few
formalities required of one, and also provide an informal setting for
>friends and acquaintances to get together with the formalities foregone,
>under the pretext of shopping. Surely the latter could be accomplished
>with small shops, but there's a greater chance of having more interactions
>with more people down at the Mall.
Because Malls are bigger? More central? Have better parking? Why the need
for unnatural informality? Why not hope to run across friends and
acquaintances in places with _souls_?
>>I used to spend
>>three hours a day in a car on my own, listening to drive time radio [or,
>>when I felt sane, Add N to (X) and the like, but I digress]. Previously,
>>my commute was 45 minutes on a bus wrapped around a visit to a coffeehaus
>>where I was _guaranteed_ to see people I knew and could have a
>>conversation with, even if my friends were otherwise busy. How many
>>people still have that?
>I sure don't. I _could_ have that if I were to move back downtown to DC,
>but it's not worth the trouble, generally, so I just stick it out in the
>'burbs, where my own moping isn't noticed by all of the burbanites who are
>all far too absorbed in their own alienation to care.
I live in an early 'burb, with good local services. Parks too. Though most
of my social life is in town, though that's around half an hour away.
--
erith - .sig
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> klaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(still not bored)aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatu:
I use _rechargable_ energizer batteries!
> >erithromycin:
> >>Panurge:
> >>>erithromycin:
>
> ><snips>
<chomp>
> >>It may be that. To retreat from the idyll that the Brady's had, and
> >>clutter one's life with 'my stuff'. A cave for the self, not an entity
> >>within an other. A subdivision, not a neighbourhood. A collection of
> >>castles, inviolate, wrapped around in aesthetically pleasing cul-de-sacs
> >>with easy access to good schools and the local mall. The endless march of
> >>concrete progress, one zipcode at a time.
>
> >Yes, you've pretty much nailed that one.
>
> It's what I'm good at. That, and this thing with my elbow and a bottle cap.
Oi! I used to do that. Chased a lot of bottlecaps around the room, gave it up
as not easily done. But I can zip a bottle cap for quite a distance with a
snapping motion.
>
> >I was riding around with one of the neighbors recently, looking for some
> >landscaping supply, and I was remarking upon the "elf shacks" as I call
> >them, referring to the ubiquitous and undistinguished (other than by
> >location) condominium blocks. Probably most of the units have the same
> >floor plan as ten million other units across the county, state, nation.
>
> Hey, you only need to pay one architect. Building codes might require
> material changes [note pun] but they're easy enough.
Yes. But I suspect it's for the added familiarity. You know, square holes for
square pegs to slot right into. </square alert>
>
> >In the conversation, worker mobility came up, and in my county, the
> >average stay of residence in the county is about 7 years.
>
> Hang on, aren't you in a DCian suburb? Isn't 7 years a suspicious number?
> Maybe you've just got itinerant colonies of incumbent impersonators.
There's a reason I wrote that damned novel. Vampires? Who cares? DC has bigger
problems.
Folks actually living in the District may be presumed to be attached to the
Federal machine or its hangers-on, but in terms of raw numbers, the majority
would be Civil Service types, and considering that it doesn't generally get
any better than a posting in the District, those would actually be those who
tended to stay put for 30 years, the length of a Federal Career started in
young adulthood. I expect you're thinking of the "carpetbaggers" who come in
on the coattails of the incoming Administration, and then remain and serve at
the pleasure of their patron, and then generally leave town in a big hurry
once they're let go.
A lot of the locals have an immensely bad attitude about anyone coming to the
area from the outside, even if you grew up here, left, and came back. It's the
"inside the Beltway" attitude, though of course it extends rather far beyond
the beltway. It's an Enclave sort of mentality, it's just a much larger and
more pervasive enclave than you might expect.
In some ways, it feels a lot like we got invaded and occupied 30-40 years ago,
and are now in the second generation of occupation, but most people never
notice it, generally when they notice it they leave town in a big damn hurry
because the size of it all scared the bejebus out of them. also apply that
quote from Neitzsche.
>
> >Thus, the average person would have moved 7 times by the time they were
> >50. Rather than become overly familiar with the landmarks and territory,
> >why not become attached to a floor plan? The community would always be
> >changed, left behind, in 7 years, for a new territory. And with the rapid
> >pace of change and growth and recycling, even if one did remain in the
> >same area, the territory might change so much that one might as well
> >become attached, if not to a particular generic box, to the concept of
> >living in a box so generic that if one were to find one's self working on
> >the opposite coast, one could still sleepwalk to the bathroom without
> >barking one's shins.
>
> Knowing that you were within driving distance of a McDonalds, a Laundromat,
> and an adult video store.
Fsck, that's _anyplace_ in the US, except for maybe East Bumfsck.
>
> >>>>Hell, when was the last time you heard
> >>>>of kids going round to a friend's house and walking?
>
> >>>I would've ridden a bike myself. Why go to Mom for a ride when you can
> >>>have your own?
>
> >>How many kids own bicycles? I'm sure the numbers are down.
>
> >By quite a bit, I am sure. When I was a kid, every kid in this
> >neighborhood had a bicycle. Nowadays, the busses are so ubiquitous, I
> >don't even know if the kids know how to ride bikes.
>
> That's a little scary, really. Though I haven't been on a bike for a while.
Seriously... you see adults riding bikes. You don't see kids riding them much.
>
> <snips>
> >>>>Where is there to go? Starbucks?
>
> >>>Better than nothing. How about the mall? Not the best answer, but it's
> >>>the one available at the moment.
>
> >>Is it a community? Where do people interact socially? In other people's
> >>houses? There's a trend in the region around London for single people to
> >>buy houses with three bedrooms so their friends can stay over in comfort
> >>when they entertain. What motivates that sort of behaviour? The distance
> >>between home and work? Did the commute kill people's social lives?
>
> >Either that or it killed one's friends... and thus at least that part of
> >the social life.
>
> I'm not sure if there are statistics in relation to the recovery of networks
> of friendships after fatalities within them.
That is actually an intriging thought. Care to elaborate on it? How could you
go about compiling and interpreting such stats, I wonder?
>
> >The Malls are, insanely enough, the substitute for the old-fashioned Parks
> >in most non-city environments.
>
> Have become. It's like saying, with a straight face, that the oil-tanker
> you've just lost will join the marine habitat.
>
> >First, they are generally climate-controlled, and have multiple
> >diversions. Secondly, they provide people with the dual excuse of shopping
> >in the hopes of running across acquaintances and friends with >few
> formalities required of one, and also provide an informal setting for
> >friends and acquaintances to get together with the formalities foregone,
> >under the pretext of shopping. Surely the latter could be accomplished
> >with small shops, but there's a greater chance of having more interactions
> >with more people down at the Mall.
>
> Because Malls are bigger? More central? Have better parking? Why the need
> for unnatural informality? Why not hope to run across friends and
> acquaintances in places with _souls_?
I suspect it's -- by design -- quintessentially unAmerican, at least for the
Sub-Urbanites. The genuine Urbanites wouldn't stand for the notion of
MegaMalls. The countrifried folks seem to like Malls, though, if they're not
too pretentious and gaudy.
>
> >>I used to spend
> >>three hours a day in a car on my own, listening to drive time radio [or,
> >>when I felt sane, Add N to (X) and the like, but I digress]. Previously,
> >>my commute was 45 minutes on a bus wrapped around a visit to a coffeehaus
> >>where I was _guaranteed_ to see people I knew and could have a
> >>conversation with, even if my friends were otherwise busy. How many
> >>people still have that?
>
> >I sure don't. I _could_ have that if I were to move back downtown to DC,
> >but it's not worth the trouble, generally, so I just stick it out in the
> >'burbs, where my own moping isn't noticed by all of the burbanites who are
> >all far too absorbed in their own alienation to care.
>
> I live in an early 'burb, with good local services. Parks too. Though most
> of my social life is in town, though that's around half an hour away.
Heh, it takes me half an hour at speedlimit to get to the parts of DC where
I'd hang out if I was going down there. However, it takes at least an hour to
find parking, or I can pay $10.00 to park if the lots aren't full. Fuck that.
If there are not enough parking spaces for me to park easily, for free or for
no more than parking-meter change, town's too damned full for me to enjoy it.
Some idiot actually went and did a webpage for my neighborhood. Send me some
mail -- minus the pig latin that's my real addy -- and I'll send you the URL.
Expect a bit of boredom. However, it gives some idea of the resources, the
local parks system is actually excellent and touted nationwide as an example
of how to do things right.
Panurge
>heard recently that one of the 'burbs near chicago has passed a law mandating
>that children under the age of twelve or somesuch must wear helmets.
Passed, naturally, by people who did just fine without them when *they*
were kids. Someone out there really has got today's adults'
number--talk about a control mentality.
>i do wonder just who they arrest/fine if your eight-year-old rides around the
>corner, ditches the helmet, and scoots on their merry way.
You, of course.
Panurge
>Why the need for unnatural informality?
How is it "unnatural"? Does the idea of a pretext strike you as too
self-conscious?
>Why not hope to run across friends and
>acquaintances in places with _souls_?
Speaking of which: How does a place get a soul? And what is it about a
mall which prevents it from having one? The way you have to get there?
The one-swell-foop design, integrated into itself but separated from its
surroundings?
Alternately, how much does it matter if the place where you meet has a
soul or not?
Nyx
in
news:ns_de_cybax_yahoo.com_not.re...@news.newsg
uy.com:
> i'm not trying to pull a disparity on you, but, really? i mean, when
> i was a kid, not everyone had a bicycle. some did, some shared
> communial/family bikes, and some didn't at all. actually, wot i'm
> surprised at more is that today's youth actually ride the bus!?
>
You were in the city, or close to it, right? When I was a kid all of us had
bikes. My favorite was a orange banana seater with the drop down handle
bars. The bicycle equivalent of a lowrider.
And when you got older you just graduated to ten speeds and motorcycles and
3 wheelers or something with an engine until you were old enough to drive.
But, then, that was the country end of suburbia. Kids down the road raised
arabians. When I was 5 I had a pair of apaloosas.
Nyx
1E92B8.230...@nntp.mindspring.com:
> How is it "unnatural"? Does the idea of a pretext strike you as too
> self-conscious?
The Buddha is as comfortable in the mall as he is the temple.
kest
in
news:ns_de_cybax_yahoo.com_not.re...@news.newsg
uy.com:
>
> mandating that children under the age of twelve or somesuch must wear
> factor.
>
All of California passed that law for everyone under 18 sometime while I
was in high school. Actually worked quite the other way for me: suddenly I
wasn't getting beat up anymore just because I was the only one whose mother
was anal about safety. IOW, it's much less humiliating if everyone does
it.
k
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> "erithromycin" <erithr...@ananzi.co.za> wrote:
>
> >Why the need for unnatural informality?
>
> How is it "unnatural"? Does the idea of a pretext strike you as too
> self-conscious?
>
> >Why not hope to run across friends and
> >acquaintances in places with _souls_?
>
> Speaking of which: How does a place get a soul? And what is it about a
> mall which prevents it from having one? The way you have to get there?
> The one-swell-foop design, integrated into itself but separated from its
> surroundings?
Yup. It's the height of the Corbusierian Madness.
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Panurge <jbl...@mindspring.com> wrote in news:jblanks-
> 1E92B8.230...@nntp.mindspring.com:
>
> > How is it "unnatural"? Does the idea of a pretext strike you as too
> > self-conscious?
>
> The Buddha is as comfortable in the mall as he is the temple.
I am not, was never, and shall never be the Buddha, then.
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote:
<snip>
> > By quite a bit, I am sure. When I was a kid, every kid in this neighborhood
> > had a bicycle. Nowadays, the busses are so ubiquitous, I don't even know if
> > the kids know how to ride bikes.
>
> kid, not everyone had a bicycle. some did, some shared communial/family
> bikes, and some didn't at all. actually, wot i'm surprised at more is that
> today's youth actually ride the bus!?
Only the poor kids, I think. Which in my neighborhood appears to be all of
them. The bus route, not surprisingly, has a Mall at either end.
Jennie
newsguy.com>, --nightshade-- wrote:
> heard recently that one of the 'burbs near chicago has passed a law mandating
> that children under the age of twelve or somesuch must wear helmets. now
> _THAT_ will keep kids off bikes, for the humiliation factor.
Lots of kids round here wear helmets quite happily. They
didn't used to, fifteen years ago. It's been as much a cultural change as
anything else. Of course, they still bitch about who has the coolest (ie:
most expensive) one.
Jennie
--
Jennie Kermode jen...@innocent.com
http://www.triffid.demon.co.uk/jennie
Ian Sturrock
<jen...@triffid.demon.co.uk> gibbers
>In article <ns_de_cybax_yahoo.com_not.really.at-E9550E.21371109122002@news.
>newsguy.com>, --nightshade-- wrote:
>> heard recently that one of the 'burbs near chicago has passed a law mandating
>> that children under the age of twelve or somesuch must wear helmets. now
>> _THAT_ will keep kids off bikes, for the humiliation factor.
>
> Lots of kids round here wear helmets quite happily. They
>didn't used to, fifteen years ago. It's been as much a cultural change as
>anything else. Of course, they still bitch about who has the coolest (ie:
>most expensive) one.
Of course, cycle helmets aren't an enormously good idea. . .
They protect to some extent from the wearer's own stupidity -- falling
off the bike through lack of control or whatever. Unfortunately they're
not up to offering serious protection from other people's stupidity,
i.e. a car impact; and yet they have a psychological effect, increasing
risk-taking by both cyclists and drivers.
Dangerous stuff, safety equipment. Ban car airbags & replace them with
large spikes that stick out of the steering wheel, aimed at the driver's
chest. Now *then* you would see some safe driving. Eventually.
--
"Such a day, rum all out - Our company somewhat sober - A damn`d confusion
among us! - Rogues a-plotting - Great talk of separation - so I looked sharp
for a prize - Such a day took one, with a great deal of liquor on board, so
kept the company hot, damned hot; then all things went well again." (Teach)
Nyx
news:3DF633D3...@earthops.net:
> I am not, was never, and shall never be the Buddha, then.
I like malls. I used to do a lot of acid and I'd go to the mall the next
day so I could come down...get back into the mindset of $REALITY.
Sometimes watching mtv helps.
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote in
> news:3DF633D3...@earthops.net:
>
> > I am not, was never, and shall never be the Buddha, then.
>
> I like malls. I used to do a lot of acid and I'd go to the mall the next
> day so I could come down...get back into the mindset of $REALITY.
>
> Sometimes watching mtv helps.
At last, an explanation for the last few years of your posts.
BTW, so that you know that you've done Some Real and Lasting Good for the
World, I know a great many people who are extremely happy that you helped us
all find http://www.mintyass.com/
Got anymore like that:?
Nyx
> BTW, so that you know that you've done Some Real and Lasting Good for
> the World, I know a great many people who are extremely happy that you
> helped us all find http://www.mintyass.com/
>
> Got anymore like that:?
There were a lot of them. But the php is all fucked up and I'm looking
around for something else to use.
It would also help if other people would send links and stories so I don't
have to do all the work. The point of sxxxy.org was a slashdot about sex. I
just wanted to set it up so I could approve the stories that other people
sent in. Unfortunately no one seems to understand that.
If you want to help me set up some sort of script/database combo that could
run the site then please do so. The system is a Solaris running Zeus as the
web server. But it's got php, perl, mysql and the admins are willing to set
up just about anything.
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
> > --nightshade-- wrote:
>
> > > actually, wot i'm surprised at more is that
> > > today's youth actually ride the bus!?
>
> > Only the poor kids, I think.
>
>
> > The bus route, not surprisingly, has a Mall at either end.
>
Well, for me, at present, there's always Gardening, or the other alternative,
which is when I just can't any longer stand to be shut up in the basement, and
am forced to drive to the nearest woodsy place where I can walk off of the
path and be far enough from the path to not be bothered by passers-by, and not
be so far off of the path that I wind up in the homeless-people camp.
When I had a bike, I used to like to ride it, just because it was going
somewhere, and faster than I could walk. Then again, way back when the local
bus-system barely came out to where I was, and didn't really go anywhere,
unless you wanted to walk a mile to catch a bus that took two hours to get you
down to the museums, and you'd have to leave them at 3PM if you wanted to
catch a bus home.
As for now, I'd generally rather be dragged through a cactus patch rather than
actually enter an enclosed Mall. Ewww.
erithromycin
>They protect to some extent from the wearer's own stupidity -- falling
>off the bike through lack of control or whatever. Unfortunately they're
>not up to offering serious protection from other people's stupidity,
>i.e. a car impact; and yet they have a psychological effect, increasing
>risk-taking by both cyclists and drivers.
A helmet doesn't protect you against a broken arm. I'm not sure about the
psychological effect of them either - all the couriers I know don't wear
helmets, and it sometimes seem that it's for the same reasons folks didn't
in 'Nam. Even if it doesn't, it effects your hearing, your vision - easier
to react without it. As for drivers taking risks near cyclists, have you
heard about the proposed law that would see any motorist involved in an
accident that also involved a cyclist fined several hundred pounds? Even if
a drunk cyclist clips your vehicle when it's stopped in traffic. I'm not
saying it's a bad idea, just that the application's foolish. Anyway, the
Highway Code stipulates that you should leave at least a car's width between
you and a cyclist when overtaking. I do. Thousands don't.
>Dangerous stuff, safety equipment. Ban car airbags & replace them with
>large spikes that stick out of the steering wheel, aimed at the driver's
>chest. Now *then* you would see some safe driving. Eventually.
Actually, enforcing the law would do it. Really. I'm overtaken by people on
either side when I'm travelling at the speed limit, have had cars attempt to
merge into me without signalling [in one case it was a truck, and I was
halfway past it], see folks jumping reds, talking on mobile phones, failing
to have their children wear seatbelts, hover on cross-hatched yellows,
'speculatively' stick their vehicles into oncoming traffic, and, to cap it
all, I've been buzzed by the RAF. Which is cheating, really, as my car
weighs less than a Tornado's bombload. Anyway, all of these things are
_not_allowed_ and happen _all_the_time_. That's before we get onto driving
under the influence, or anything else. If you found a stretch of motorway,
and covered it in cameras, and did _everyone_, then you might be getting
somewhere. Especially if you stopped them when they got off so the the Human
Rights Legislation defence couldn't be brought into play.
Now, I'm not going to claim that I'm a perfect driver - it's taken me a week
to clean my windscreen properly, I sometimes forget to dip my headlights [or
engage my high-beams when it's safer to do so], and I've, on occasion, gone
faster than I should have [though usually when I'm overtaking]. What I do
try and avoid doing though, is _breaking_the_law_. It's not safety devices
that you need to worry about, the 'volvo factor' aside - it's the attitude
that a single driver can get away with it 'because they're a good driver'
and that nobody else can. That egotism is what kills people, not a reliance
on airbags.
--
erith - product of the 'me generation': subject to recall
erithromycin
>erith wrote:
>>Why the need for unnatural informality?
>How is it "unnatural"? Does the idea of a pretext strike you as too
>self-conscious?
You trimmed it, but I was talking about 'going shopping' as the
justification for seeing people that one considers one's friends. I'm not
sure if my objection is to shopping as a leisure activity, the attempt to
find something useful to do with time devoted to 'friends', the
self-consciousness of the whole endeavour, or the fact that I just don't
like doing that sort of thing.
>>Why not hope to run across friends and
>>acquaintances in places with _souls_?
>Speaking of which: How does a place get a soul?
When there are people there who you can identify as associated with it.
Probably. Maybe mall-rats count.
>And what is it about a mall which prevents it from having one?
The numbers. The uniformity. The fact that malls blend into each other, an
endless parade of hangars of hangers, linked by tree-filled atria, with a
fountain at one end and a wee stage for the next Britney$pears to make her
way up the charts on.
>The way you have to get there?
That isolating distance, yes.
>The one-swell-foop design, integrated into itself but separated from its
>surroundings?
That - there's no context - I don't like things that are filled with people
that attempt to be an end to themselves. Things don't work like that
anymore. I like my organic urban development.
>Alternately, how much does it matter if the place where you meet has a
>soul or not?
It matters to me. I am not the pressing crush of humanity. Your milage may
vary.
--
erith - I am "Jack's apparent penilecentricity"
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>I'm not sure if there are statistics in relation to the recovery of
>>networks of friendships after fatalities within them.
>That is actually an intriging thought. Care to elaborate on it?
What I'm talking about is those situations where a group of friends loses a
member. Postulate a network of friendships where some people know someone as
a friend, others as an acquaintance, the steps in the relationship map that
you tend to get. You know, my mate Dave's mate Dave, and all that.
What happens to the network when that friend dies? What about hir friend's
friends of a friend? The one's that go through hir, anyway? Do those who
knew hir as a close friend make a new one? Do those who knew hir as an
acquaintance make new ones to replace them? Do they find someone else who
knows about Finnish cinema? Do they find someone else to go to that
Mongolian place with? Do they find someone else to tell them stories about
their kooky indie-credible adventures that always start in a record shop?
What happens to the network of friendships?
>How could you go about compiling and interpreting such stats, I wonder?
I don't know. Mapping for a start. Numerical ratings of closeness? Two or
three degrees of seperation, probably. Watch the warp and weave change.
Postulate two groups of friends of friends with one common link, two trees
that share a trunk, if you will. What happens when the common link is
removed? Do those trees grow back together? Do the traces of acquaintance
flourish? Do they die without the nutrition of cross-pollination, to mix
metaphors. As for compiling, time, observation, surveys. You'd need a before
and an after. Hell, it'd be interesting to watch how such a network changed,
but you'd need a huge pool to account for dropout, and the survey itself
could be a disturbing factor, a new potential for link and commonality where
there would otherwise have been none. As for interpretation, it'd make an
interesting piece of progressive art. A succession of networks, evolving,
node by node, link by link.
--
erith - .sig
erithromycin
>erith:
>>klaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(still not bored)aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatu:
>I use _rechargable_ energizer batteries!
Better for the environment!
>>>erithromycin:
>>>>Panurge:
>>>>>erithromycin:
>>><snips>
><chomp>
>>It's what I'm good at. That, and this thing with my elbow and a bottle
>>cap.
>Oi! I used to do that. Chased a lot of bottlecaps around the room, gave it
>up as not easily done. But I can zip a bottle cap for quite a distance
>with a snapping motion.
I can't quite get that one. I mean, it goes so far, but it lacks that
redneckninja esprit d'death.
>>>I was riding around with one of the neighbors recently, looking for some
>>>landscaping supply, and I was remarking upon the "elf shacks" as I call
>>>them, referring to the ubiquitous and undistinguished (other than by
>>>location) condominium blocks. Probably most of the units have the same
>>>floor plan as ten million other units across the county, state, nation.
>>Hey, you only need to pay one architect. Building codes might require
>>material changes [note pun] but they're easy enough.
>Yes. But I suspect it's for the added familiarity. You know, square holes
>for square pegs to slot right into. </square alert>
Do they wear check-shirts? Dance in eights?
>>>In the conversation, worker mobility came up, and in my county, the
>>>average stay of residence in the county is about 7 years.
>>Hang on, aren't you in a DCian suburb? Isn't 7 years a suspicious number?
>>Maybe you've just got itinerant colonies of incumbent impersonators.
>There's a reason I wrote that damned novel. Vampires? Who cares? DC has
>bigger problems.
Well, there's the swamp for a start.
>Folks actually living in the District may be presumed to be attached to
>the Federal machine or its hangers-on, but in terms of raw numbers, the
>majority would be Civil Service types, and considering that it doesn't
>generally get any better than a posting in the District, those would
>actually be those who tended to stay put for 30 years, the length of a
>Federal Career started in young adulthood. I expect you're thinking of the
>"carpetbaggers" who come in on the coattails of the incoming
>Administration, and then remain and serve at the pleasure of their patron,
>and then generally leave town in a big hurry once they're let go.
Those are in fact the very entities I was refering to.
>A lot of the locals have an immensely bad attitude about anyone coming to
>the area from the outside, even if you grew up here, left, and came back.
>It's the "inside the Beltway" attitude, though of course it extends rather
>far beyond the beltway. It's an Enclave sort of mentality, it's just a
>much larger and more pervasive enclave than you might expect.
A wall in people's heads lasts longer.
>Seriously... you see adults riding bikes. You don't see kids riding them
>much.
Well, who are the most famous people on bikes or skateboards? 30-odd year
olds. The kids play the videogames.
>>I'm not sure if there are statistics in relation to the recovery of
>>networks of friendships after fatalities within them.
>That is actually an intriging thought. Care to elaborate on it? How could
>you go about compiling and interpreting such stats, I wonder?
Alright. Actually, see new thread. Reply to three, start one.
>>Because Malls are bigger? More central? Have better parking? Why the need
>>for unnatural informality? Why not hope to run across friends and
>>acquaintances in places with _souls_?
>I suspect it's -- by design -- quintessentially unAmerican, at least for
>the Sub-Urbanites. The genuine Urbanites wouldn't stand for the notion of
>MegaMalls. The countrifried folks seem to like Malls, though, if they're
>not too pretentious and gaudy.
I hate the fact that it's hard to get lost in malls. I want to find little
things in out of the way nooks, up stairs, round corners, behind places I
seldom go. I like the nest of potential in the realm of the as yet
unexplored - that's what I want from the places I go - discovery.
--
erith - or tea
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret:
> >erith:
> >>klaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(still not bored)aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatu:
>
> >I use _rechargable_ energizer batteries!
>
> Better for the environment!
>
> >>>erithromycin:
> >>>>Panurge:
> >>>>>erithromycin:
>
> >>><snips>
> ><chomp>
>
> >>It's what I'm good at. That, and this thing with my elbow and a bottle
> >>cap.
>
> >Oi! I used to do that. Chased a lot of bottlecaps around the room, gave it
> >up as not easily done. But I can zip a bottle cap for quite a distance
> >with a snapping motion.
>
> I can't quite get that one. I mean, it goes so far, but it lacks that
> redneckninja esprit d'death.
Um. You must be doing it wrong.
Hold bottlecap between thumb and impudent finger, concave part of the
bottlecap on the ball of the thumb.
Extend arm forward, hand palm-down, almost like a seig-heil salute. Bend elbow
as if making a snappy military salute, brit-style, with the palm up-and-out.
(Try to not poke yourelf in the eye this time, then.) Rotate the palm until
it's facing inwards more or less. The position is about halfway between a
salute, and pointing at your own nose in what would be a natural comfortable
position if you weren't holding the bottlecap. Point your elbow about 30
degrees right (if doing this right-handed) of where you want the bottlecap to
sail. Snap your finger so that the bottlecap sails off of the thumb towards
the ring and pinkie fingers.
Bit of practice, and you'll get to where you can pretty consistently hit a
mark nearly as well as you could get the cork in a game of darts. Get that bit
of aim and then you can get to where you can start messing with the amount of
spin, etc.
works for coins, as well. Now imagine something like a quarter, but with the
edges filed sharp...
Ninja enough for ya yet?
Next lesson, flicking nails and cigarette butts.
<snips>
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret:
<sniiips>
> >>>I was riding around with one of the neighbors recently, looking for some
> >>>landscaping supply, and I was remarking upon the "elf shacks" as I call
> >>>them, referring to the ubiquitous and undistinguished (other than by
> >>>location) condominium blocks. Probably most of the units have the same
> >>>floor plan as ten million other units across the county, state, nation.
>
> >>Hey, you only need to pay one architect. Building codes might require
> >>material changes [note pun] but they're easy enough.
>
> >Yes. But I suspect it's for the added familiarity. You know, square holes
> >for square pegs to slot right into. </square alert>
>
> Do they wear check-shirts? Dance in eights?
Nope. Not permitted by the residency compacts. Not enough room, either.
It's sort of the US version of the Japanese "coffin hotels" if you remember
those.
>
> >>>In the conversation, worker mobility came up, and in my county, the
> >>>average stay of residence in the county is about 7 years.
>
> >>Hang on, aren't you in a DCian suburb? Isn't 7 years a suspicious number?
> >>Maybe you've just got itinerant colonies of incumbent impersonators.
>
> >There's a reason I wrote that damned novel. Vampires? Who cares? DC has
> >bigger problems.
>
> Well, there's the swamp for a start.
Heh, the creek's underground and the Mall is quite dry most of the time, thank
you. Unless of course the Potomac floods sufficiently (but then it generally
drains off rather rapidly afterwards).
> >Folks actually living in the District may be presumed to be attached to
> >the Federal machine or its hangers-on, but in terms of raw numbers, the
> >majority would be Civil Service types, and considering that it doesn't
> >generally get any better than a posting in the District, those would
> >actually be those who tended to stay put for 30 years, the length of a
> >Federal Career started in young adulthood. I expect you're thinking of the
> >"carpetbaggers" who come in on the coattails of the incoming
> >Administration, and then remain and serve at the pleasure of their patron,
> >and then generally leave town in a big hurry once they're let go.
>
> Those are in fact the very entities I was refering to.
>
> >A lot of the locals have an immensely bad attitude about anyone coming to
> >the area from the outside, even if you grew up here, left, and came back.
> >It's the "inside the Beltway" attitude, though of course it extends rather
> >far beyond the beltway. It's an Enclave sort of mentality, it's just a
> >much larger and more pervasive enclave than you might expect.
>
> A wall in people's heads lasts longer.
Yup, I think I'm taking your meaning right. Plus, physical walls are subject
to breach, etc. You cannot so easily determine who is an extreme activist in
the political arena -- nor which precise arena -- by their location or
appearance.
>
> >Seriously... you see adults riding bikes. You don't see kids riding them
> >much.
>
> Well, who are the most famous people on bikes or skateboards? 30-odd year
> olds. The kids play the videogames.
True enough.
>
> >>I'm not sure if there are statistics in relation to the recovery of
> >>networks of friendships after fatalities within them.
>
> >That is actually an intriging thought. Care to elaborate on it? How could
> >you go about compiling and interpreting such stats, I wonder?
>
> Alright. Actually, see new thread. Reply to three, start one.
>
> >>Because Malls are bigger? More central? Have better parking? Why the need
> >>for unnatural informality? Why not hope to run across friends and
> >>acquaintances in places with _souls_?
>
> >I suspect it's -- by design -- quintessentially unAmerican, at least for
> >the Sub-Urbanites. The genuine Urbanites wouldn't stand for the notion of
> >MegaMalls. The countrifried folks seem to like Malls, though, if they're
> >not too pretentious and gaudy.
>
> I hate the fact that it's hard to get lost in malls. I want to find little
> things in out of the way nooks, up stairs, round corners, behind places I
> seldom go. I like the nest of potential in the realm of the as yet
> unexplored - that's what I want from the places I go - discovery.
> --
> erith - or tea
Which is why I like to hang out in the woods and parks. BTW -- downtown in the
District, and in a lot of the places in the 'burbs which have been "citified"
longer, have some great little hideyholes and nookish sorts of places, though
many of them are really only of much use during the warmer months.
BTW, since I've had my eye out for them, I am spotting spiffy little
cemeteries all over the place in my suburban and rural roamings. I shall have
to try to compile a list or see if someone else has done so.
Ian Sturrock
<erithr...@ananzi.co.za> gibbers
>Ian Sturrock:
>Unfortunately they're
>>not up to offering serious protection from other people's stupidity,
>>i.e. a car impact; and yet they have a psychological effect, increasing
>>risk-taking by both cyclists and drivers.
>
>A helmet doesn't protect you against a broken arm.
Which is another reason I don't really approve of 'em, because by
increasing risk-taking, they increase the risk of a broken arm.
However, you will likely recover from a broken arm, but not a broken
head! Another reason not to bother with a helmet, since they likely
won't protect against that either.
>I'm not sure about the
>psychological effect of them either -
Numerous studies have suggested strongly that it's there. I don't have
a cite for it off-hand, though there was a mention of one of them in a
recent New Scientist that I could probably dig up if you really want me
to. . .
>all the couriers I know don't wear
>helmets, and it sometimes seem that it's for the same reasons folks didn't
>in 'Nam. Even if it doesn't, it effects your hearing, your vision - easier
>to react without it.
Agreed, they are a little awkward, despite being lightweight and
supposedly comfortable. Couriers don't wear them because they have to
cycle all day long, and even the best cycle helmets aren't great for
that. Plus if said couriers are aware of the psychological effects,
they won't wear helmets because of the increased risk-taking such a
helmet is likely to produce in nearby motorists.
>As for drivers taking risks near cyclists, have you
>heard about the proposed law that would see any motorist involved in an
>accident that also involved a cyclist fined several hundred pounds?
Sounds good.
>Even if
>a drunk cyclist clips your vehicle when it's stopped in traffic.
Shouldn't have been stopped in traffic in the poor drunk cyclist's way,
then.
:)
When it comes to the guy encased in several hundred pounds of fast-
moving steel and the bloke protected by nothing more than fresh air and
reflexes, I think the law should be on the side of the peltast every
time.
>Anyway, the
>Highway Code stipulates that you should leave at least a car's width between
>you and a cyclist when overtaking. I do. Thousands don't.
They should, and I appreciate that you do. This is good.
It's also good for you, though, as courts will almost invariably throw
the book at a driver who overtakes too near a cyclist and hits him, even
if the cyclist "was wobbling about all over the road" as one motorist
put it.
"Every cyclist is entitled to his wobble," replied the judge before
sentencing him.
>Actually, enforcing the law would do it.
<snip>
Agreed. How?
>It's not safety devices
>that you need to worry about, the 'volvo factor' aside -
The 'volvo factor' cannot be set aside because it is the cause of the
all the problems that safety devices cause.
>it's the attitude
>that a single driver can get away with it 'because they're a good driver'
>and that nobody else can. That egotism is what kills people, not a reliance
>on airbags.
It's a combination. Numerous studies have found that the safer one
feels when driving, the more risks one takes. One knows one has
antilock brakes, and so can take that icy corner that little bit
faster... etc.
erithromycin
>erith:
>>Tiny Human Ferret:
><sniiips>
>>>Yes. But I suspect it's for the added familiarity. You know, square
>>>holes for square pegs to slot right into. </square alert>
>>Do they wear check-shirts? Dance in eights?
>Nope. Not permitted by the residency compacts. Not enough room, either.
What's alt.gothic's residency compact? No goats?
>It's sort of the US version of the Japanese "coffin hotels" if you
>remember those.
I do. Though these 'coffins' have a seperate bedroom, kitchenette, and a
half-bath, no?
>>>A lot of the locals have an immensely bad attitude about anyone coming
>>>to the area from the outside, even if you grew up here, left, and came
>>>back. It's the "inside the Beltway" attitude, though of course it
>>>extends rather far beyond the beltway. It's an Enclave sort of
>>>mentality, it's just a much larger and more pervasive enclave than you
>>>might expect.
>>A wall in people's heads lasts longer.
>Yup, I think I'm taking your meaning right. Plus, physical walls are
>subject to breach, etc. You cannot so easily determine who is an extreme
>activist in the political arena -- nor which precise arena -- by their
>location or appearance.
Indeed. In fact, you could have a terrorist, or, indeed, a member of the
Republican Party, sitting right next to you. They could have access to
firearms, and be capable of using OAG FlightDisk!
>>>Seriously... you see adults riding bikes. You don't see kids riding them
>>>much.
>>Well, who are the most famous people on bikes or skateboards? 30-odd year
>>olds. The kids play the videogames.
>True enough.
However, I don't think that it's the videogames to blame - they're no less
'addictive' than television or D&D. It's just that parents seem unwilling to
send their children outside. Perhaps some of it's the lack of supervision,
forced, it seems, by the desire to ensure that there's always someone to sue
in case something goes wrong.
>>I hate the fact that it's hard to get lost in malls. I want to find >
>>little things in out of the way nooks, up stairs, round corners, behind
>>places I seldom go. I like the nest of potential in the realm of the as
>>yet unexplored - that's what I want from the places I go - discovery.
>Which is why I like to hang out in the woods and parks. BTW -- downtown in
>the District, and in a lot of the places in the 'burbs which have been
>"citified" longer, have some great little hideyholes and nookish sorts of
>places, though many of them are really only of much use during the warmer
>months.
My 'local' coffeehaus would not work in a mall. Not least because if they
attempted to decorate my food with pentagrams or swastikas [1] as they
usually do they'd be arrested.
>BTW, since I've had my eye out for them, I am spotting spiffy little
>cemeteries all over the place in my suburban and rural roamings. I shall
>have to try to compile a list or see if someone else has done so.
Are these old? Former parish churches, or little plots of land grabbed where
there was room? Where does suburban America bury its dead? I remember
graveyards when I was a kid, but they sprawled o'er swampland where no
housebuilder would tread.
erith -
[1] Coffeeshop attendants put swastikas and pentagrams on my baked beans
because they believe that I am an evil genius devoted to electro music - I
am not a big Hawkwind fan as I am too busy wearing polonecks in winter.
--
is it a little too posthumous for you?
erithromycin
>erith reformats:
>>Ian Sturrock:
>>>Unfortunately they're
>>>not up to offering serious protection from other people's stupidity,
>>>i.e. a car impact; and yet they have a psychological effect, increasing
>>>risk-taking by both cyclists and drivers.
>>A helmet doesn't protect you against a broken arm.
>Which is another reason I don't really approve of 'em, because by
>increasing risk-taking, they increase the risk of a broken arm.
I didn't take many risks on bicycles when I wore a helmet. I fell of anyway,
due to my then-inherent difficulties with coordination and gravity.
>However, you will likely recover from a broken arm, but not a broken
>head! Another reason not to bother with a helmet, since they likely
>won't protect against that either.
Many don't. The hell of it is that the most common injuries from falling off
a bike are grazes. I once went over the handlebars of a wee bike and had it
land on my head, and all that was actually damaged were my elbows.
>>I'm not sure about the
>>psychological effect of them either -
>Numerous studies have suggested strongly that it's there. I don't have
>a cite for it off-hand, though there was a mention of one of them in a
>recent New Scientist that I could probably dig up if you really want me
>to. . .
I think I may have seen it, or will look it out when I steal this week's
from Jennie.
>>all the couriers I know don't wear
>>helmets, and it sometimes seem that it's for the same reasons folks
>>didn't in 'Nam. Even if it doesn't, it effects your hearing, your vision
>>- easier to react without it.
>Agreed, they are a little awkward, despite being lightweight and
>supposedly comfortable. Couriers don't wear them because they have to
>cycle all day long, and even the best cycle helmets aren't great for
>that. Plus if said couriers are aware of the psychological effects,
>they won't wear helmets because of the increased risk-taking such a
>helmet is likely to produce in nearby motorists.
I'm not sure it has that much of an effect on groups like couriers - they
operate in built-up traffic dense areas, cutting across buses and the like.
The two major causes of injury are getting 'doored' and having motorists
attack them. The implied lethality of the profession ensures that its
practitioners have a Kilgore like aura of invincibility.
>>As for drivers taking risks near cyclists, have you
>>heard about the proposed law that would see any motorist involved in an
>>accident that also involved a cyclist fined several hundred pounds?
>Sounds good.
It's not bad, really, but I've a horrible fear that it'd see cyclists forced
off the streets in the interests of defending motorists.
>>Even if
>>a drunk cyclist clips your vehicle when it's stopped in traffic.
>Shouldn't have been stopped in traffic in the poor drunk cyclist's way,
>then. :)
Don't start. 'Safe' drunk driving bounces at this time of year, leading to
the kind of idiot who'll cruise along on the hard-shoulder at 40. An
absolute nightmare to deal with when they're weaving.
>When it comes to the guy encased in several hundred pounds of fast-
>moving steel and the bloke protected by nothing more than fresh air and
>reflexes, I think the law should be on the side of the peltast every
>time.
Almost every time. For the most part I agree with you, but some applications
of the law would see you fined for having your car in such a position that a
cyclist struck by another motorist hit you. The last thing you want is
people swerving instead of making emergency stops, at least around cyclists.
>>Anyway, the
>>Highway Code stipulates that you should leave at least a car's width
>>between you and a cyclist when overtaking. I do. Thousands don't.
>They should, and I appreciate that you do. This is good.
>It's also good for you, though, as courts will almost invariably throw
>the book at a driver who overtakes too near a cyclist and hits him, even
>if the cyclist "was wobbling about all over the road" as one motorist
>put it.
>"Every cyclist is entitled to his wobble," replied the judge before
>sentencing him.
I remember that, actually. It's a sensible thing, in the same chapter that
deals with overtaking horses. The problem is that very few people encounter
them in rural areas, instead it's suburbia and city centres, where there
isn't _room_ to get past safely. So, rather than wait, people overtake
dangerously. I'd wager that 80% of road accidents could be eliminated if
people were more patient.
>>Actually, enforcing the law would do it.
><snip>
>Agreed. How?
Cover a section of motorway in cameras, and do everyone who breaks the law.
Start with those who overtake on the inside, or fail to indicate, or speed,
or tailgate, or hell, all four. Hit them when they pull off.
>>It's not safety devices
>>that you need to worry about, the 'volvo factor' aside -
>The 'volvo factor' cannot be set aside because it is the cause of the
>all the problems that safety devices cause.
The 'volvo factor' isn't the one responsible for deaths caused by people who
believe airbags are primary devices rather than secondary ones. They kindly
lift people over the steering wheel and through the windscreen.
>>it's the attitude
>>that a single driver can get away with it 'because they're a good driver'
>>and that nobody else can. That egotism is what kills people, not a
>>reliance on airbags.
>It's a combination. Numerous studies have found that the safer one
>feels when driving, the more risks one takes. One knows one has
>antilock brakes, and so can take that icy corner that little bit
>faster... etc.
I've got ABS, airbags, all-welded construction, and I'm shit-scared of
driving most of the time. Or, rather, I'm fully aware of the risks, which
amounts to the same thing.
I think I'm helped by the fact that I own my car outright - each and every
pound of Horus came out of my savings. So, there's the fact that I'm
defending my investment. I'm also fully aware of the risks of trying that
'little bit extra'. I must confess that I have, on occasion, engaged in
behaviour that might be construed as 'risky', though only ever on country
roads with good visibility, or sufficiently late at night that there's no
traffic. Even then, within the speed limit. It's just that some corners have
racing lines, and driving is an enjoyable past-time when you've nobody to
worry about. It's just that most of the time you're surrounded by people who
haven't read the Highway Code since they passed their test, and are fully
aware that they can get away with dangerous behaviour. My biggest bugbear is
taxi-drivers, specifically minicab drivers. Every day I drive I thank the
motorgods that I don't live in London. Of course, looking back, it looks
like I'm asserting that I'm a better driver, which I don't think is true.
I'm just cautious and patient, which is no bloody use in GTAIII.
--
erith - seven checkpoints in the bling-bling scramble
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret:
> >erith:
> >>Tiny Human Ferret:
<snips>
> >BTW, since I've had my eye out for them, I am spotting spiffy little
> >cemeteries all over the place in my suburban and rural roamings. I shall
> >have to try to compile a list or see if someone else has done so.
>
> Are these old? Former parish churches,
Um. There are all sorts. I swear, I may just go out with the USB webcam and
the laptop and start snapping (probably crappy, at 640x480) piccies of them,
and making little notations as to when-and-where.
Almost any little church around here that's older than maybe 50 years has a
boneyard. Heck, smack in the middle of downtown Rockville is the grave of no
less than F. Scott Fitzgerald, overlooking the Billion Dollar City Dump, also
known as the County Courthouse and Office Building, the Source of All Bad Feng
Shui in the area, across an intersection once known as the Eighth Wonder of
Bad Traffic Planning.
> or little plots of land grabbed where
> there was room? Where does suburban America bury its dead?
http://www.ccaw.org/cemeteries_sites/gateofheaven.htm
See also 384K JPG http://www.aspenhillnet.net/hotspot/hotspot.jpg
This is another case of Bad Feng Shui, as it's heavily fenced even though it's
the atrium of all of those developments and neighborhoods.
Out in ruralia, it's indeed the old parish churchyard, though of course it's
not exactly the parish system over here. But considering how fast the Sprawl
has deployed hereabouts, places that were quaint little hamlets in 1930 are
Deep City nowadays. For instance, I don't have image for you, but right at the
intersection of Georgia Avenue and 16th Street, just outside the District Line
in Silver Spring MD, is what would otherwise be a quiet little hamlet's
churchyard and church. Downtown, there are such places as the Old Soldiers'
Home, and the associated huge grounds, the "R" Street cemetery,
Brightwood/Trinity, yeesh. Lotsa cemeteries, wide variety depending on your
tastes. And in someplaces, one finds a patch of suburbia with a hole in one of
the streetfronts and one wonders why there isn't a house there... and then you
get up the the property and see that the people who live there um don't
actually _live_ there.
> I remember
> graveyards when I was a kid, but they sprawled o'er swampland where no
> housebuilder would tread.
>
> erith -
>
> [1] Coffeeshop attendants put swastikas and pentagrams on my baked beans
> because they believe that I am an evil genius devoted to electro music - I
> am not a big Hawkwind fan as I am too busy wearing polonecks in winter.
Aaarghh! Erith and Charlie Yuga have never been seen in the same room
together! You're Michael Jackson!
> --
> is it a little too posthumous for you?
I _also_ was never a Korean to Judaists.
erithromycin
>erith:
><snips>
>>>BTW, since I've had my eye out for them, I am spotting spiffy little
>>>cemeteries all over the place in my suburban and rural roamings. I shall
>>>have to try to compile a list or see if someone else has done so.
>>Are these old? Former parish churches,
>Um. There are all sorts.
It's what you get in areas that grow organically. Sometimes I forget that
there are bits of the states that were not born of porkbarrel and planner's
tables.
>I swear, I may just go out with the USB webcam and the laptop and start
>snapping (probably crappy, at 640x480) piccies of them, and making little
>notations as to when-and-where.
Tara, my digital camera, travels with me chronicling the interesting things
I see. I have an almost endless folder of graffiti that I have found
intriguing.
>Almost any little church around here that's older than maybe 50 years has
>a boneyard. Heck, smack in the middle of downtown Rockville is the grave
>of no less than F. Scott Fitzgerald, overlooking the Billion Dollar City
>Dump, also known as the County Courthouse and Office Building, the Source
>of All Bad Feng Shui in the area, across an intersection once known as the
>Eighth Wonder of Bad Traffic Planning.
You know, most bits of Bad Traffic Planning are in Africa. The Christmas
special of The Economist [a journal I heartily recommend] details the
travails of a shipment of Guinness through it's fourth largest market.
>>or little plots of land grabbed where
>>there was room? Where does suburban America bury its dead?
>http://www.ccaw.org/cemeteries_sites/gateofheaven.htm
>See also 384K JPG http://www.aspenhillnet.net/hotspot/hotspot.jpg
Does suburban America really have dead? Or ones who've stopped moving?
>This is another case of Bad Feng Shui, as it's heavily fenced even though
>it's the atrium of all of those developments and neighborhoods.
Atrium? Focal point? Crux?
>Out in ruralia, it's indeed the old parish churchyard, though of course
>it's not exactly the parish system over here. But considering how fast the
>Sprawl has deployed hereabouts, places that were quaint little hamlets in
>1930 are Deep City nowadays. For instance, I don't have image for you, but
>right at the intersection of Georgia Avenue and 16th Street, just outside
>the District Line in Silver Spring MD, is what would otherwise be a quiet
>little hamlet's churchyard and church.
I've seen such juxtapositions, though not perhaps that one. I find such
growth odd. My neighbourhood is young, and dates to 1912 or therabouts. I
frequent a two year old coffeehaus in a hundred year old building, and a
hundredplus year old union in a forty year old eyesore. The reuse of space.
>Downtown, there are such places as the Old Soldiers' Home, and the
>associated huge grounds, the "R" Street cemetery, Brightwood/Trinity,
>yeesh. Lotsa cemeteries, wide variety depending on your tastes. And in
>someplaces, one finds a patch of suburbia with a hole in one of the
>streetfronts and one wonders why there isn't a house there... and then you
>get up the the property and see that the people who live there um don't
>actually _live_ there.
Brains...
It seems odd that there'd be people comfortable with such proximity to the
dead.
>>I remember
>>graveyards when I was a kid, but they sprawled o'er swampland where no
>>housebuilder would tread.
>>erith -
>>[1] Coffeeshop attendants put swastikas and pentagrams on my baked beans
>>because they believe that I am an evil genius devoted to electro music -
>>I am not a big Hawkwind fan as I am too busy wearing polonecks in winter.
>Aaarghh! Erith and Charlie Yuga have never been seen in the same room
>together! You're Michael Jackson!
No. It's true. The last two times I got beans on toast [well, beans &
toast - thermonuclear beans to be less precise] they were decorated with red
onion slices in the shape of a pentagram and a swastika. In reverse order.
One should maintain one's reputation even in one's choice of breakfast. They
believe me to be an evil genius devoted to electro music because that is
what I am - well, two out of nine, anyway. I wear polonecks in winter. I am
wearing my only nonblack one now. It is blood red, and therefore like
Christmas.
--
erith - on steroids
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Klaatu:
> >erith:
> ><snips>
>
> >>>BTW, since I've had my eye out for them, I am spotting spiffy little
> >>>cemeteries all over the place in my suburban and rural roamings. I shall
> >>>have to try to compile a list or see if someone else has done so.
>
> >>Are these old? Former parish churches,
>
> >Um. There are all sorts.
>
> It's what you get in areas that grow organically. Sometimes I forget that
> there are bits of the states that were not born of porkbarrel and planner's
> tables.
Well... I can't point you to handy photos, but there's "New Hampshire Avenue
Extended", Maryland Route 650, which runs all of the way downtown and runs all
of the way out to a genuinely rustic place called Sunshine. There's a part of
it that's called "Church Alley" and rightly so. There's a huge
classically-styled Orthodox Church complete with onion dome, right next to a
Islamic mosque and whatever's the Islamic equivalent of a seminary. Next door,
some Christian denomination and another across the intersection, up and down
the road it's church after synagogue after house of faith, with the
interspersed remnant fields probably full of dancing pagans of a full-moon
eve. Now, most of these are clearly of very recent construction, especially
the "imported religion" houses of worship. Some, however, are pretty-clearly
from about the time of the Civil War, in various states of disrepair or
Historic Preservation. Generally speaking, it's the ones from before about the
Second World War, or which are quite remote from the larger cities and towns,
which have their own boneyards attached. I think there's some sort of County
regulations now, about where cemeteries may be situated.
Here's an example of an older one:
http://www.earthops.net/klaatu/aesthetic/rockville-cemetery/
Note, if you will, that while it is quite enclosed by, well, not quite
suburbia, not quite a city, but definitely well within the Sprawl, it's also
quite old and is located along a roadbed which is also quite venerable
considering that this is North America, not Europe.
>
> >I swear, I may just go out with the USB webcam and the laptop and start
> >snapping (probably crappy, at 640x480) piccies of them, and making little
> >notations as to when-and-where.
>
> Tara, my digital camera, travels with me chronicling the interesting things
> I see. I have an almost endless folder of graffiti that I have found
> intriguing.
Heh, a digital camera was to be one of my next purchases, but then I ran out
of savings...
>
> >Almost any little church around here that's older than maybe 50 years has
> >a boneyard. Heck, smack in the middle of downtown Rockville is the grave
> >of no less than F. Scott Fitzgerald, overlooking the Billion Dollar City
> >Dump, also known as the County Courthouse and Office Building, the Source
> >of All Bad Feng Shui in the area, across an intersection once known as the
> >Eighth Wonder of Bad Traffic Planning.
>
> You know, most bits of Bad Traffic Planning are in Africa. The Christmas
> special of The Economist [a journal I heartily recommend] details the
> travails of a shipment of Guinness through it's fourth largest market.
Oh, this isn't quite on the order of, say, Boston, but it's pretty horrendous.
Downtown Rockville Maryland is considered a textbook study on How To Do Urban
Renewal As Wrongly As Possible. A web-search on "Rockvile Mall" will probably
cause anyone interested in Urban Planning to scratch their own eyes right out.
>
> >>or little plots of land grabbed where
> >>there was room? Where does suburban America bury its dead?
>
> >http://www.ccaw.org/cemeteries_sites/gateofheaven.htm
>
> >See also 384K JPG http://www.aspenhillnet.net/hotspot/hotspot.jpg
>
> Does suburban America really have dead? Or ones who've stopped moving?
Um. Not shown in that image is 'Rossmoor Leisure World", generally referred to
by anyone except the elderly, as "Seizure World". It's about a half-mile north
of the top of that image.
And yes, suburbia really does have Dead People, you just can't see 'em.
We even have this: http://www.geocities.com/Petsburgh/Farm/6675/page5.html
oddly enough, it's owned by PETA and has a fairly cool 1930s-ish residential
house there.
>
> >This is another case of Bad Feng Shui, as it's heavily fenced even though
> >it's the atrium of all of those developments and neighborhoods.
>
> Atrium? Focal point? Crux?
Well...okay. http://www.aspenhillnet.net/hotspot/maps.html
The Cemetery was always there, and originally it wasn't much fenced, other
than the unavoidable and traditional fencing from the highway. Originally,
everthing to the north and east of it was undeveloped much until about the
mid-1960s, there was a gas-station there and that was it. Then came
Connecticut Avenue Extended and a fair number of houses, etc. But when they
started building all of the apartment and condos, youthful mischief caused a
large heavy fence to be built, and suddenly the very large park-like lands,
which had permitted pedestrian passage from neighborhood to neighborhood,
became impassable. Might as well have been a huge block of concrete.
>
> >Out in ruralia, it's indeed the old parish churchyard, though of course
> >it's not exactly the parish system over here. But considering how fast the
> >Sprawl has deployed hereabouts, places that were quaint little hamlets in
> >1930 are Deep City nowadays. For instance, I don't have image for you, but
> >right at the intersection of Georgia Avenue and 16th Street, just outside
> >the District Line in Silver Spring MD, is what would otherwise be a quiet
> >little hamlet's churchyard and church.
>
> I've seen such juxtapositions, though not perhaps that one. I find such
> growth odd. My neighbourhood is young, and dates to 1912 or therabouts. I
> frequent a two year old coffeehaus in a hundred year old building, and a
> hundredplus year old union in a forty year old eyesore. The reuse of space.
Right. That's also been going on in downtown DC, with the "brownfields
reclamation" and the acquisition and consequent rebuilding of deteriorating
properties, etc. The "U Street NW" reclaimation and transformation is
particularly astounding. Keep in mind that reclaimation of urban core is a
novel concept in the US.
>
> >Downtown, there are such places as the Old Soldiers' Home, and the
> >associated huge grounds, the "R" Street cemetery, Brightwood/Trinity,
> >yeesh. Lotsa cemeteries, wide variety depending on your tastes. And in
> >someplaces, one finds a patch of suburbia with a hole in one of the
> >streetfronts and one wonders why there isn't a house there... and then you
> >get up the the property and see that the people who live there um don't
> >actually _live_ there.
>
> Brains...
>
> It seems odd that there'd be people comfortable with such proximity to the
> dead.
Remember, I have mentioned a few times that after due reflection I have
decided that my home is quite insufficiently zombi-proofed. There are
_thousands_ buried not a mile from here.
<snips>
--
Be kind to your neighbors, even | "Global domination, of course!"
though they be transgenic chimerae. | -- The Brain
"People that are really very weird can get into sensitive
positions and have a tremendous impact on history." -- Dan Quayle
Jennie
> It seems odd that there'd be people comfortable with such proximity to the
> dead.
Some of the churches I've looked at buying, here in Glasgow,
have been much reduced in price because there are gravetards in the
grounds, which apparently deters most prospective buyers. They really
ought to be marketed after the fashion of that church conversion in
Whitby, the estate agents for which have been sending out prospecti with
the notice 'calling all goths' stamped over them to everyone in black who
has ever rented a holiday cottage from them.
Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
> what I am - well, two out of nine, anyway. I wear polonecks in winter. I am
> wearing my only nonblack one now. It is blood red, and therefore like
Eep! I have never seen you wearing anything red, not in all
the four and half years we've known each other. I find it hard to
visualise.
Nyx
news:slrnb0c5ac...@triffid.demon.co.uk:
> gravetards
Heh. Makes me think of retarded zombies, or manson fans.
Nyx
--
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Jennie <jen...@triffid.demon.co.uk> wrote in
> news:slrnb0c5ac...@triffid.demon.co.uk:
>
> > gravetards
>
> Heh. Makes me think of retarded zombies, or manson fans.
Gothic fucktards.
--
Peter H. Coffin
> Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
> graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
> neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
drawback being a very local source of potential zombies....
--
50. My main computers will have their own special operating system that will
be completely incompatible with standard IBM and Macintosh powerbooks.
--Peter Anspach's list of things to do as an Evil Overlord
erithromycin
>erith:
>>>I swear, I may just go out with the USB webcam and the laptop and start
>>>snapping (probably crappy, at 640x480) piccies of them, and making
>>>little notations as to when-and-where.
>>Tara, my digital camera, travels with me chronicling the interesting
>>things I see. I have an almost endless folder of graffiti that I have
>>found intriguing.
>Heh, a digital camera was to be one of my next purchases, but then I ran
>out of savings...
Tara cost about $60. She's a SiPix Blink. Not great in the dark, or with
motion, otherwise a solid purchase.
--
erith - sitting quietly is the new killing people with knives
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>It seems odd that there'd be people comfortable with such proximity to
>>the dead.
> Some of the churches I've looked at buying, here in Glasgow,
>have been much reduced in price because there are gravetards in the
>grounds, which apparently deters most prospective buyers. They really
>ought to be marketed after the fashion of that church conversion in
>Whitby, the estate agents for which have been sending out prospecti with
>the notice 'calling all goths' stamped over them to everyone in black who
>has ever rented a holiday cottage from them.
Well, yes. Or to those who want a venue with decent acoustics.
> Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
>graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
>neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
Unless they're incapable of recognising it.
>>what I am - well, two out of nine, anyway. I wear polonecks in winter. I
>>am wearing my only nonblack one now. It is blood red, and therefore like
>Eep! I have never seen you wearing anything red, not in all
>the four and half years we've known each other. I find it hard to
>visualise.
Verifiably not true, dear, if you think about it. You've seen me in red,
green, blue, grey, purple, navy, and white, with a variety of other colours
lending a hand. Hell, I'm wearing a grey jumper right now. I might well be
wearing a yellow shirt tomorrow.
--
erith - shilling
Tiny Human Ferret
Eh?
BTW -- for the forseeable future, $60.00 / month is my total "discretionary
income".
I shall just have to make-do with what I have already in hand.
Jennie
> jennie:
>> Some of the churches I've looked at buying, here in Glasgow,
>>have been much reduced in price because there are gravetards in the
>>grounds, which apparently deters most prospective buyers. They really
>>ought to be marketed after the fashion of that church conversion in
>>Whitby, the estate agents for which have been sending out prospecti with
>>the notice 'calling all goths' stamped over them to everyone in black who
>>has ever rented a holiday cottage from them.
> Well, yes. Or to those who want a venue with decent acoustics.
Most people convert and reduce the halls of churches which
they buy. I'd hate to do that. If I could get a smallish one, it wouldn't
be much harder to heat than Kadath's living room; I'd maybe put a gallery
in, but I'd like to keep the rest intact. It could be studio space and
living space day to day, then it could be partially emptied to make a
wonderful party venue.
>> Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
>>graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
>>neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
> Unless they're incapable of recognising it.
Hmm... How did they handle these things in 'Scooby Doo'? Glow
in the dark paint and a tape of spooky noises, that's what I'd need.
> Verifiably not true, dear, if you think about it. You've seen me in red,
> green, blue, grey, purple, navy, and white, with a variety of other colours
> lending a hand.
Underwear doesn't count.
> Hell, I'm wearing a grey jumper right now.
When you wear grey, you just look as if you've been left in the
wash for too long.
Bella Anti Matter
In article <slrnb0hlhr...@triffid.demon.co.uk>, Jennie
<jen...@triffid.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
>>>graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
>>>neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
>
>> Unless they're incapable of recognising it.
>
> Hmm... How did they handle these things in 'Scooby Doo'? Glow
> in the dark paint and a tape of spooky noises, that's what I'd need.
Yeah, but then you get a stoner, a jock, his betty and her friend walking
their Great Dane around. No guarantees that any of them are going to pick up
the dog's mess, either.
b.
--
The world is quiet here
VFD
Jennie
I guess I'd also need to surround my church with poisoned
Scooby Snacks. ;)
Tiny Human Ferret
>
> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote:
> > --nightshade-- wrote:
> > > Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
>
> > > > The bus route, not surprisingly, has a Mall at either end.
>
> > > there's any other reason to leave the house?
>
Oh, sorry, I've been dropping messages right and left... and responses, and
brain cells, and...
>
> > Well, for me, at present, there's always Gardening,
>
> i've no intention of gardening. and our immigration policy will see to it
> that i never shall. *needle* *needle*
I've been trying to pull them, the needles, out of my neck, my back, my ass,
every damn where. No such luck. And I'm not having any better luck with the
illegals, either.
Dammit, I _like_ to do yard work. It's the Amish in me or something. Dirt
between the fingers feels very very sensuous. Cutting the lawn is no fun...
well, not much. Having the best lawn on the block, simply because I know what
works and take the time to do the work, that's worth a lot more to me than a
little bit of time saved by hiring a "service" which in my experience mostly
spreads a lot of chemical crap that kills the damned lawn.
>
> > As for now, I'd generally rather be dragged through a cactus patch rather than
> > actually enter an enclosed Mall. Ewww.
>
> i deplore malls. i joke that the air in the malls is drugged, but i'm this
> close --> <-- to believing it, because i seem to become ill shortly after
> entering them.
I came to that conclusion maybe 20 years ago. My contention is that they pump
some crap into the air that makes most people cheerful, un-annoyable, and
suggestibly responsive to the ads everywhere. My further contention is that I
am allergic to it and get exactly the opposite of the intended reaction. For
most people, Mall == Comaraderie and Good Times. For me, Mall == Horrible
Hellish Excursions Into Alien Atmospheres Sans Spacesuit. I won't even go into
the mental effects, which at the most innocuous generally amount to "why do I
put this much strain on myself to stand orderly in line when I really most
want to drop everything and run screaming from people that actually _like_ to
do this".
> it could be psychosomatic, but the stale are and plethora of
> artificial chemical fragrance almost certainly have a real hand in it.
Pheromones. Endless mindless pheromones. Or maybe something intended to
suppress it, and only eliminating the sense of smell to the point where you
can't tell the fresh meat from the outdated stock.
I'm of a divided mind which is worse, the packs of ovulating gals wandering in
search of cute deals and good guys or anything approximating either that will
notice them or is afordable, or the packs of testosterating guys on the prowl
probably more for a good fight than for the cute girls.
When do I feel like a human being? When I'm on the far corner of the back yard
with my hands elbow deep in the rich black earth. When do I feel most like
some sort of alien -- or the last man on earth, surrounded by incomprehensible
space creatures from Hell? standing in line at the godforsaken Mall.
Bah. I mope therefor I am or at least pretend to be.
--klaatu, gotta stop doing internet drunk, which means stop drinking, or stop
doing internet.
--
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>jennie:
>>> Some of the churches I've looked at buying, here in Glasgow,
>>>have been much reduced in price because there are gravetards in the
>>>grounds, which apparently deters most prospective buyers. They really
>>>ought to be marketed after the fashion of that church conversion in
>>>Whitby, the estate agents for which have been sending out prospecti with
>>>the notice 'calling all goths' stamped over them to everyone in black
>>>who has ever rented a holiday cottage from them.
>>Well, yes. Or to those who want a venue with decent acoustics.
>Most people convert and reduce the halls of churches which
>they buy. I'd hate to do that. If I could get a smallish one, it wouldn't
>be much harder to heat than Kadath's living room; I'd maybe put a gallery
>in, but I'd like to keep the rest intact. It could be studio space and
>living space day to day, then it could be partially emptied to make a
>wonderful party venue.
Any number of people convert and reduce the houses that they buy. The West
End's full of dropped ceilings. As for heating, it would probably be easier,
with your big boiler to do the work. You'd have to be careful of the
radiators though.
>>>Of course, the other great thing about having a home with a
>>>graveyard around it would be that one could expect far less hassle from
>>>neds, who are notoriously superstitious about such things.
>>Unless they're incapable of recognising it.
>Hmm... How did they handle these things in 'Scooby Doo'? Glow
>in the dark paint and a tape of spooky noises, that's what I'd need.
Or a machine gun.
>>Verifiably not true, dear, if you think about it. You've seen me in red,
>>green, blue, grey, purple, navy, and white, with a variety of other
>>colours lending a hand.
>Underwear doesn't count.
Fine - discount three of those.
>>Hell, I'm wearing a grey jumper right now.
>When you wear grey, you just look as if you've been left in the wash for
>too long.
My grey jumper has a pocket in the sleeve, which makes it great. My new grey
jumper is really warm, which makes it useful. Utility takes precedence over
fashion, most of the time.
--
erith - or something
erithromycin
>Bella Anti Matter:
>>jennie:
>>>Hmm... How did they handle these things in 'Scooby Doo'? Glow
>>>in the dark paint and a tape of spooky noises, that's what I'd need.
>>Yeah, but then you get a stoner, a jock, his betty and her friend walking
>>their Great Dane around. No guarantees that any of them are going to pick
>>up the dog's mess, either.
>I guess I'd also need to surround my church with poisoned
>Scooby Snacks. ;)
There isn't an abandoned church in Glasgow that isn't within walking
distance of The Maggie, which has been supplying poisoned Scooby Snacks for
years.
--
erith - clarith?
Jennie
> --nightshade-- wrote:
>> i deplore malls. i joke that the air in the malls is drugged, but i'm this
>> close --> <-- to believing it, because i seem to become ill shortly after
>> entering them.
> I came to that conclusion maybe 20 years ago. My contention is that they pump
> some crap into the air that makes most people cheerful, un-annoyable, and
> suggestibly responsive to the ads everywhere. My further contention is that I
> am allergic to it and get exactly the opposite of the intended reaction.
If lots of people go to the mall feeling cheerful in
anticipation of making exciting purchases or enjoying hanging about,
they'll smell of that, which will, in turn, make others like them
cheerful. This reminds me rather of animals like pigs, which will herd
together happily when there is an abundance of food, forgetting the
personal tensions and so forth which can make them aggressive toward one
another at other times. It dismays the outliers who are always more wary
of crowds, who feel vulnerable perhaps because they are the likeliest
victims should the crowd's mood turn.
> most people, Mall == Comaraderie and Good Times. For me, Mall == Horrible
> Hellish Excursions Into Alien Atmospheres Sans Spacesuit. I won't even go into
> the mental effects, which at the most innocuous generally amount to "why do I
> put this much strain on myself to stand orderly in line when I really most
> want to drop everything and run screaming from people that actually _like_ to
> do this".
One stands there patiently and politely because anything else
might provoke the mood of the crowd to turn. Even allowing oneself to feel
stressed, at a conscious level, has its effects on others, increasing
their hostility just a fraction.
I only venture into malls at Christmas and just before my
loved ones' birthdays, if I've run out of other places to find potential
presents. Of course, everything is worse at Christmas, more intense, with
more people primed to explode. The young often still revel in ignorance,
being as careless as ever, but among other shoppers good manners are
exaggerated; everyone is very, very careful not to trigger explosions of
stress in those around them. Rare jolly types seem to mistake this unusual
atmosphere for 'Christmas cheer'.
I saw a man selling Santa hats in the middle of Sauchiehall
Street. Parents standing by the shops at the edges sent their small
children (some of them under five) through eight lanes of frantic human
traffic to buy them. I wondered why they were not terrified. The children
looked likely to be trampled or borne away by the flow. I can only
conclude that there is something psychologically different about such
creatures, some mechanism whereby they adjust to the difference in their
surroundings and so remain oblivious of the danger.
>> it could be psychosomatic, but the stale are and plethora of
>> artificial chemical fragrance almost certainly have a real hand in it.
It's illegal now to spray perfumes directly at people entering
stores in the UK (my mother campaigned against it in the 'seventies), but,
nevertheless, the predominance of overstocked perfume counters in malls at
Christmastime, together with the number of giddy teenaged girls,
competitive middle aged women and brash young men who have chosen to soak
themselves in whatever is the latest commercial stench, makes for an
atmosphere to which I'm quite allergic. I eat sugary sweets directly
before entering malls, to reduce the risk of fainting, and I have water
ready to drink as soon as I'm out again; I also need to wash any exposed
skin as quickly as possible. The heat is unpleasant, and makes me dizzy,
but I have less problems overall if I keep my gloves and hat on, and keep
my stole folded up close beneath my chin.
> Pheromones. Endless mindless pheromones. Or maybe something intended to
> suppress it, and only eliminating the sense of smell to the point where you
> can't tell the fresh meat from the outdated stock.
I think that's what a lot of those middle aged women intend [1].
> I'm of a divided mind which is worse, the packs of ovulating gals wandering in
> search of cute deals and good guys or anything approximating either that will
> notice them or is afordable, or the packs of testosterating guys on the prowl
> probably more for a good fight than for the cute girls.
Mindless submission versus mindless aggression, eh?
Jennie
[1] Which is not to say I can't find women of that age attractive - in
fact, I much prefer them to giddy teenagers - but when they try to present
themselves as teenagers, it does nobody any favours.
Jennie
newsguy.com>, --nightshade-- wrote:
> In article <slrnb0c5ac...@triffid.demon.co.uk>,
> Jennie <jen...@triffid.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Some of the churches I've looked at buying, here in Glasgow,
>> have been much reduced in price because there are gravetards in the
>> grounds, which apparently deters most prospective buyers.
> well, i don't know your laws, but there could be some maintenance costs
> associated therewith. for example, what are your responsibilities if heavy
> rains cause the soil to settle, and the wood to rise to the top?
I've never heard of that happening in Glasgow. There are flood
plains around the city, but most of the untunnelled land here is pretty
solid, and all coffins have had to be at least six feet under for at
least a couple of centuries. I suppose it would be sensible to look into
it, when I have money.
Tiny Human Ferret
> In article <3E07CBCB...@earthops.net>,
>>income".
>
>
> allotment is $50. that's alcohol, music, magazines, and books. how much
> money does one actually need to blow on incidentals?
Well, let's see:
I have not been to a bar, or a live show -- not that I can recall, at any
rate -- within about the last year.
My InterNet is costing me out the ass, but I'm calling it a business loss.
If I were to forego all actual InterNet and go to dynamic-IP dial-up, I'd
have about $300/month more to hand.
Alcohol and smokes -- and remember I am a hardcore smoke and drinker -- are
something I consider as non-discretionary; if I were to quit smoking and
drinking I would save about $200 a month.
So, if I were to think of InterNet and smokes-and-beer as "discretionary",
if I could give all of that up, I'd have lots more to spend on things like
seeing shows or (gak) dating or similar social activities, or clothes,
whatever. Probably I'd spend it restoring my old vehicles.
All of the rest is bills bills bills, recurrent charges for subscription
services such as insurance, etc., since outside of a $400.00 personal loan
getting paid off at $100.00 a month, I have no debt whatsoever and haven't
had any for a decade.
Jennie
newsguy.com>, --nightshade-- wrote:
> nothing wrong with that. after expenses &etc, my monthly discressionary
> allotment is $50. that's alcohol, music, magazines, and books. how much
> money does one actually need to blow on incidentals?
What consumes my extra money is nice food and wanting to treat
my loved ones. That, and saving towards holidays in Whitby, and paying for
my annual cinema pass. I don't drink nearly as much nor as often as I used
to, partly because I suffer more badly from dehydration (as much a result
of my advancing illness as anything else), and partly because the bar
where I spend my Thursday evenings seems not to have invented heating, yet
chills its beer. Brrrr. Not good in January.
Matthew King
> When do I feel like a human being? When I'm on the far corner of the back yard
> with my hands elbow deep in the rich black earth. When do I feel most like
> some sort of alien -- or the last man on earth, surrounded by incomprehensible
> space creatures from Hell? standing in line at the godforsaken Mall.
Once when I was in highschool (this is not the phrase you were least
likely to hear today) I went on a trip to Washington and the group of kids
I was stuck with spent several hours wandering around the big lawn in the
middle of city looking for the mall before determining that the big lawn
in the middle of the city *is* the mall.
Matthew
Matthew-King---Toronto---Canada---Have-you-come-here-to-play-Jesus-
----------------------------------to-the-lepers-in-your-head?--U2--
Tiny Human Ferret
> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote:
>
>>When do I feel like a human being? When I'm on the far corner of the back yard
>>with my hands elbow deep in the rich black earth. When do I feel most like
>>some sort of alien -- or the last man on earth, surrounded by incomprehensible
>>space creatures from Hell? standing in line at the godforsaken Mall.
>
>
> Once when I was in highschool (this is not the phrase you were least
> likely to hear today) I went on a trip to Washington and the group of kids
> I was stuck with spent several hours wandering around the big lawn in the
> middle of city looking for the mall before determining that the big lawn
> in the middle of the city *is* the mall.
ROFL! Seriously.
I didn't mean _that_ Mall... *snerk*
I hope the Mayor never hears about this or he'll start thinking that
obviously this situation needs to be rectified, and starts trying to offer
tax breaks to Big Box Stores, Inc., to place a location there, um I dunno,
maybe next to the National Museum of the American Indian.
Hatter
> --nightshade-- wrote:
> >
> Pheromones. Endless mindless pheromones. Or maybe something intended to
> suppress it, and only eliminating the sense of smell to the point where you
> can't tell the fresh meat from the outdated stock.
>
> I'm of a divided mind which is worse, the packs of ovulating gals wandering in
> search of cute deals and good guys or anything approximating either that will
> notice them or is afordable, or the packs of testosterating guys on the prowl
> probably more for a good fight than for the cute girls.
>
> When do I feel like a human being? When I'm on the far corner of the back yard
> with my hands elbow deep in the rich black earth. When do I feel most like
> some sort of alien -- or the last man on earth, surrounded by incomprehensible
> space creatures from Hell? standing in line at the godforsaken Mall.
>
> Bah. I mope therefor I am or at least pretend to be.
>
> --klaatu, gotta stop doing internet drunk, which means stop drinking, or stop
> doing internet.
Funny, I just detested yard work, very most loathed chore as a child,
but when I raised by own tomatoes, it felt good. However, I never
feel quite as alive as with a piece of sandpaper in my pocket, yellow
glue on my shoes, the echoing din of the tablesaw dying down, and the
smell of sawdust in the air.
Hatter
Marcus Pan
<mak...@crushed.velvet.net> wrote:
>Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote:
>> When do I feel like a human being? When I'm on the far corner of the back yard
>> with my hands elbow deep in the rich black earth. When do I feel most like
>> some sort of alien -- or the last man on earth, surrounded by incomprehensible
>> space creatures from Hell? standing in line at the godforsaken Mall.
I'm not quite sure how I did it, but I am actually able to say that I
haven't been to a mall or any form of department store the entire
"holiday" season. It was kind of nice. I'm hoping to keep up that
good work.
PAN
Tiny Human Ferret
Heh, damn sure better than being at the mall, eh?
There's yard work that's not much fun. See
http://www.earthops.net/now/then/archive/klaatu-cuts-lawn1.jpg for details.
However, I really don't mind playing with shovels and shrubbery.
Nor do I mind putting with minor car repairs. Whee, I got a new-style Jensen
stereo into the dashboard of an older car which originally had a knobbed
radio. Fun with electric jigsaws! Looks professional, sounds great. And it
was actually fun.
Jennie
> What I'm talking about is those situations where a group of friends loses a
> member. Postulate a network of friendships where some people know someone as
> a friend, others as an acquaintance, the steps in the relationship map that
> you tend to get. You know, my mate Dave's mate Dave, and all that.
> What happens to the network when that friend dies? What about hir friend's
> friends of a friend? The one's that go through hir, anyway?
I find myself in a situation of this sort just now.
Monique died in November. I wasn't informed until a couple of
days ago, but I'd had a strong feeling it had happened; at that time, my
dreams had been full of images of her, and she'd often entered my waking
thoughts, despite the fact I hadn't seen her for two years. It wasn't a
surprise; nobody had expected her to survive her illness. She made such an
intense impression on the world that I don't feel her absence the way I
have that of other lost friends - I still think of so many things as _her_
things - her ideas, her attitudes and opinions, her music and books.
Although she's gone, the fire which she started is still burning.
A friend of Monique's contacted me to tell me about her death
and to make an overture of friendship, because it was strange to her that,
with Monique's death, the link between us (we had met only briefly, and we
live in different countries) had been severed. She'd heard so many stories
about those of us in Glasgow; Monique had often told me stories about her,
and their mutual friends in Luxembourg. I felt it was very brave of her to
write. I once had to write to a German friend to inform her of the death
of a mutual friend (in that case, unexpected), and it can be a very
difficult thing to do. I don't know how, in this case, things are going to
develop, nor whether we might establish some sort of friendship across the
gap which Monique left; but I think I'd like that, because I do still feel
a strong connection to those other people, and a concern for them.
> Do those who knew hir as a close friend make a new one? Do those who
> knew hir as an acquaintance make new ones to replace them? Do they find
> someone else who knows about Finnish cinema?
I don't think anybody could replace Monique; not because I'm
being sentimental, but simply because she was such a loud, vivid, unusual
person. While she was away, I never tried to find other people with whom
to do the things I'd done with her. They remained her things. I am so sure
of what she'd think about most things that she remains an active force.
> Do they find someone else to go to that
> Mongolian place with? Do they find someone else to tell them stories about
> their kooky indie-credible adventures that always start in a record shop?
Sometimes, when I have parted company with longstanding
friends in less drastic circumstances, I have found myself looking around
for new people with whom to pursue shared activities from which I derived
much personal enjoyment. I like to have people to go to small cafes with,
people with whom I can have a quiet drink and talk for hours; people with
whom to discuss literature and films; people with whom I can be very camp
and bitch about others' clothing. ;) I am hapier if I have those things
in my life, but not anybody is suitable for them - if there's a gap, I
guess I am more open to new friendships, or to changes in the pattern of
existing friendships, until it is filled.
> Postulate two groups of friends of friends with one common link, two trees
> that share a trunk, if you will. What happens when the common link is
> removed? Do those trees grow back together? Do the traces of acquaintance
> flourish? Do they die without the nutrition of cross-pollination
If this current situation does not develop now, I think it will
remain a possibility; I shouldn't be surprised if, in ten years time, I
were to run into some of that other group of friends in Leipzig or
somewhere, and we were to identify one another and still feel close. But
I've always been quite good at dealing with drifting, occasional
friendships (usually a result of geography); I know not everyone finds
such things either possible or comfortable.
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>What I'm talking about is those situations where a group of friends loses
>>a
>>member. Postulate a network of friendships where some people know someone
>>as a friend, others as an acquaintance, the steps in the relationship map
>>that you tend to get. You know, my mate Dave's mate Dave, and all that.
>>What happens to the network when that friend dies? What about hir friend's
>>friends of a friend? The one's that go through hir, anyway?
>I find myself in a situation of this sort just now.
> A friend of Monique's contacted me to tell me about her death
>and to make an overture of friendship, because it was strange to her that,
>with Monique's death, the link between us (we had met only briefly, and we
>live in different countries) had been severed. She'd heard so many stories
>about those of us in Glasgow; Monique had often told me stories about her,
>and their mutual friends in Luxembourg. I felt it was very brave of her to
>write.
Indeed. In those circumstances it can be very difficult to determine what to
do, I'd imagine. There's the risk of being the first to inform, or to
mispeak, or something. Around death we tread gingerly, I mean, and the
factor of distance weighs heavily.
>I once had to write to a German friend to inform her of the death
>of a mutual friend (in that case, unexpected), and it can be a very
>difficult thing to do. I don't know how, in this case, things are going to
>develop, nor whether we might establish some sort of friendship across the
>gap which Monique left; but I think I'd like that, because I do still feel
>a strong connection to those other people, and a concern for them.
Hence the title - the dead still live in memory. The thing about connections
through people is that sometimes they're strong enough to survive their
absence, and sometimes they're not. Bits of my networks fall in and out of
place depending on where I am, and how well various people I know. I have a
dialup social connection...
>>Do those who knew hir as a close friend make a new one? Do those who
>>knew hir as an acquaintance make new ones to replace them? Do they find
>>someone else who knows about Finnish cinema?
> I don't think anybody could replace Monique; not because I'm
>being sentimental, but simply because she was such a loud, vivid, unusual
>person. While she was away, I never tried to find other people with whom
>to do the things I'd done with her. They remained her things. I am so sure
>of what she'd think about most things that she remains an active force.
I suppose this is where the gap between friends as entities in their own
right and the common notion of friends as functions falls into place - some
people believe it when they are told that they should collect folk of
various types to make their network viable - a pokemon generation
phenomenon, you might say, though I last saw it in the Daily Express.
>>Do they find someone else to go to that
>>Mongolian place with? Do they find someone else to tell them stories about
>>their kooky indie-credible adventures that always start in a record shop?
> Sometimes, when I have parted company with longstanding
>friends in less drastic circumstances, I have found myself looking around
>for new people with whom to pursue shared activities from which I derived
>much personal enjoyment. I like to have people to go to small cafes with,
>people with whom I can have a quiet drink and talk for hours; people with
>whom to discuss literature and films; people with whom I can be very camp
>and bitch about others' clothing. ;) I am hapier if I have those things
>in my life, but not anybody is suitable for them - if there's a gap, I
>guess I am more open to new friendships, or to changes in the pattern of
>existing friendships, until it is filled.
Though you don't _shop_ for those people, do you? I suppose that's the other
part of the question - if you're not trying to replace someone, do you still
try to find someone to do the things you did with them? Which is where we
enter an odd little function of networks I guess: Are they a node, or the
signals from those nodes?
>>Postulate two groups of friends of friends with one common link, two
>>trees
>>that share a trunk, if you will. What happens when the common link is
>>removed? Do those trees grow back together? Do the traces of
>>acquaintance
>>flourish? Do they die without the nutrition of cross-pollination
> If this current situation does not develop now, I think it will
>remain a possibility; I shouldn't be surprised if, in ten years time, I
>were to run into some of that other group of friends in Leipzig or
>somewhere, and we were to identify one another and still feel close. But
>I've always been quite good at dealing with drifting, occasional
>friendships (usually a result of geography); I know not everyone finds
>such things either possible or comfortable.
Shared associations, then, or a friendship in hibernation? As for the
business of occasional friendships, such is the peril of activity online,
no?
--
erith - frozen lasagna and helicopter parts
Jennie
> Indeed. In those circumstances it can be very difficult to determine what to
> do, I'd imagine. There's the risk of being the first to inform, or to
> mispeak, or something. Around death we tread gingerly, I mean, and the
> factor of distance weighs heavily.
I was glad that this mutual friend contacted me partly because
the only contact I had for Monique was her mother, whom I didn't wish to
put through any further stress by enquiring about the situation.
I've been thinking about the way that things must be for the
families of the Columbia crew; how strange it must feel to have to begin
the mourning process with a rational certainty of death, yet without a
body or any other absolute physical evidence of the transition which has
occurred. I'm sure the funerals will help, but in the meantime, those
disaster victims are more liminal than most of the dead. They spent
fortysomething years on this Earth, then left and never came back. But
perhaps that brief light in the sky, terrible though it was, also
constitutes a sort of memorial.
Not knowing about Monique, but being fairly sure what must by
now have happened, I felt as if she were in some state between life and
death; perhaps I still feel something of that now. When my Achmed went
away, and the bombs fell, I spent a long time trying to deal with similar
feelings, eventually resigning myself to the notion that I might as well
consider him dead. Sometimes I think now that if he were to turn up alive
on my doorstep I would be terrified of him. Does that make sense? There is
a physiological line between life and death, for the individual, and there
is also a psychological one, for those who loved that person.
On that topic, I never know whether or not to use the past
tense - 'loved' - when the love is still there but the person is not. I
suppose the same goes for the living, when they have changed so much that
one cannot truly say one loves who they are, yet one continues to love who
they were.
> Hence the title - the dead still live in memory.
What happens when love of the dead comes to outweigh love of
the living? Perhaps Joyce knew. I think it's one of the reasons why I have
always felt such a strong need to have somebody to love - not necessarily
to be loved by, but to love - because it keeps me away from that morbid
place, keeps me... more alive. There have been times in my life when I
have felt as if all that remained of any value were stories; as if, then,
I must be approaching the end of my own story.
> I suppose this is where the gap between friends as entities in their own
> right and the common notion of friends as functions falls into place - some
> people believe it when they are told that they should collect folk of
> various types to make their network viable - a pokemon generation
> phenomenon, you might say, though I last saw it in the Daily Express.
It has certainly been fashionable among the youthful upper
classes, since the Renaissance, I suppose. It has often been considered
the sensible and respectable thing to do.
> Though you don't _shop_ for those people, do you? I suppose that's the other
> part of the question - if you're not trying to replace someone, do you still
> try to find someone to do the things you did with them?
Usually I find such a person sooner or later, maybe after a
year or two; or I just drift away from those former favourite things,
gradually forgetting that I ever cared so much about them.
Trizia
wrote:
<snip>
> On that topic, I never know whether or not to use the past
>tense - 'loved' - when the love is still there but the person is not. I
>suppose the same goes for the living, when they have changed so much that
>one cannot truly say one loves who they are, yet one continues to love who
>they were.
>
If you still carry that love, for the dead or the changed, then it is
still in the present. It will stay there, with you, until you stop
feeling it. Sometimes that makes it very tough.
-----
Trizia
Everything ends in failure, we all die.
Tiny Human Ferret
<snips>
> I've been thinking about the way that things must be for the
> families of the Columbia crew; how strange it must feel to have to begin
> the mourning process with a rational certainty of death, yet without a
> body or any other absolute physical evidence of the transition which has
> occurred. I'm sure the funerals will help, but in the meantime, those
> disaster victims are more liminal than most of the dead. They spent
> fortysomething years on this Earth, then left and never came back. But
> perhaps that brief light in the sky, terrible though it was, also
> constitutes a sort of memorial.
Until someone somewhere establishes a more specific tradition, probably one
of the best ways to settle your own soul is to leave a bouquet at the
Sailors' Memorial; though this is more settled a case of "lost at sea" than
are many. As it were, their ship foundered within sight of shore, but none
there was who could rescue these.
http://www.cs.rice.edu/~ssiyer/minstrels/poems/241.html
<quote in-part>
We've tried each spinning space mote
And reckoned its true worth:
Take us back again to the homes of men
On the cool, green hills of Earth.
The arching sky is calling
Spacemen back to their trade.
ALL HANDS! STAND BY! FREE FALLING!
And the lights below us fade.
Out ride the sons of Terra,
Far drives the thundering jet,
Up leaps a race of Earthmen,
Out, far, and onward yet ---
We pray for one last landing
On the globe that gave us birth;
Let us rest our eyes on the friendly skies
And the cool, green hills of Earth.
-- Robert A. Heinlein
</quote>
Trizia
<ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Until someone somewhere establishes a more specific tradition, probably one
>of the best ways to settle your own soul is to leave a bouquet at the
>Sailors' Memorial; though this is more settled a case of "lost at sea" than
>are many. As it were, their ship foundered within sight of shore, but none
>there was who could rescue these.
>
That is a good point.
I was so tempted today to leave flowers at the Cathedral, but didn't
because I was afraid of seeming silly. I've never felt the urge to do
that sort of thing before - infact I'm usually fairly dismisive of
those who do, but .... this feels different.
><quote in-part>
>
>We've tried each spinning space mote
>And reckoned its true worth:
>Take us back again to the homes of men
>On the cool, green hills of Earth.
>
<snip>
>We pray for one last landing
>On the globe that gave us birth;
>Let us rest our eyes on the friendly skies
>And the cool, green hills of Earth.
>
> -- Robert A. Heinlein
Heh, Heinlein has never made me cry before. Now I'm going to have to
go and reread his stuff.
I wanted to watch the memorial service, but missed it.
-----
Trizia
I have devils fighting inside.
Tiny Human Ferret
> Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
>
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
> thank you. i'd been avoiding the Columbia incident because most of the
> coverage has been media circus. this is a much better perspective.
Yeah, I think so too. I feel really badly for the families of the lost
astronauts, and NASA is squirming in the hot-seat but they might actually
get some money to deal with safety issues that have been well known for a
long time.
I predict that one day we'll be dozing and drooling in the old age home and
some newsdrone in the holo set will be heard to utter "today, yet another
tragic spacecraft crash took the lives of all 300 aboard" and we'll all
mutter about how we remember the first ones ever[1], and everyone will tell
us to quit talking trash, ain't nobody that damn old.
Ref:
1. I really do remember[2]. Some poor Russiyan cosmonaut.
2. I was momentarily tempted to p*ll and ask "how old were you when men from
the planet earth first set foot upon the moon?" but after reconsidering,
probably half of the people here would answer "I wasn't even born yet" if I
asked "how old were you for the first successful landing of the STS".
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>Indeed. In those circumstances it can be very difficult to determine what
>>to do, I'd imagine. There's the risk of being the first to inform, or to
>>mispeak, or something. Around death we tread gingerly, I mean, and the
>>factor of distance weighs heavily.
<snip>
>Not knowing about Monique, but being fairly sure what must by
>now have happened, I felt as if she were in some state between life and
>death; perhaps I still feel something of that now. When my Achmed went
>away, and the bombs fell, I spent a long time trying to deal with similar
>feelings, eventually resigning myself to the notion that I might as well
>consider him dead. Sometimes I think now that if he were to turn up alive
>on my doorstep I would be terrified of him. Does that make sense? There is
>a physiological line between life and death, for the individual, and there
>is also a psychological one, for those who loved that person.
That makes sense, yes. I have different sensations - I sometimes forget that
people are dead, and the realisation can be a little startling. They remain
active enough in my mind that I'll consider their interests. At the same
time I found myself in the odd situation of meeting people who I went to
school with - I remember them, just, though not their names. They remember
me, but clearly not the hassle I got from them. It's been five years, and I
look at them and I don't see any difference, and I think that there's
something horrible in that - a smaller death. They've vanished from memory,
and I have no space for them. Yet to them, I haven't and they do. I wonder
about that - about what lack of stimulus could produce such a void.
>On that topic, I never know whether or not to use the past
>tense - 'loved' - when the love is still there but the person is not. I
>suppose the same goes for the living, when they have changed so much that
>one cannot truly say one loves who they are, yet one continues to love who
>they were.
I think either's appropriate. Though I'm never sure if love can fade, it
seems to transmute or remain.
>>Hence the title - the dead still live in memory.
>What happens when love of the dead comes to outweigh love of
>the living? Perhaps Joyce knew. I think it's one of the reasons why I have
>always felt such a strong need to have somebody to love - not necessarily
>to be loved by, but to love - because it keeps me away from that morbid
>place, keeps me... more alive. There have been times in my life when I
>have felt as if all that remained of any value were stories; as if, then,
>I must be approaching the end of my own story.
Love has a tendency to become a background thing, like breathing or tea, to
me. It's only when it's missing or wrong that I notice it. Does _that_ make
sense?
>>I suppose this is where the gap between friends as entities in their own
>>right and the common notion of friends as functions falls into place -
some
>>people believe it when they are told that they should collect folk of
>>various types to make their network viable - a pokemon generation
>>phenomenon, you might say, though I last saw it in the Daily Express.
>It has certainly been fashionable among the youthful upper
>classes, since the Renaissance, I suppose. It has often been considered
>the sensible and respectable thing to do.
Well, I suppose so then. Such things always struck me as foolish, given how
shallow those categories were, and, indeed, how light the membership
requirements were. That said, I've been 'token single friend' for a long
time, to many, though more so than most.
>>Though you don't _shop_ for those people, do you? I suppose that's the
>>other part of the question - if you're not trying to replace someone, do
>>you still try to find someone to do the things you did with them?
>Usually I find such a person sooner or later, maybe after a
>year or two; or I just drift away from those former favourite things,
>gradually forgetting that I ever cared so much about them.
Maybe I just enjoy doing things on my own too much.
--
erith - the life of a loner led
Jennie
> That makes sense, yes. I have different sensations - I sometimes forget that
> people are dead, and the realisation can be a little startling. They remain
> active enough in my mind that I'll consider their interests.
Do the dead cease to have relevant interests? There are a
number of dead people who still have a strong influence in my life, partly
because the memory of them still influences others whom I'm close to.
Although they're dead, I still wouldn't break their confidences; I still
refer to them, by way of considering what their opinions would have been
likely to be, when I have difficult decisions to make. I still learn from
them, thinking about things which they said and did. This is especially
true of Monique, without whose tutelage it would have taken me years
longer to become this competent at working around my disability. When I
lose confidence, I think of her toughness in the face of adversity, and I
feel as if she's still there to support me.
> At the same time I found myself in the odd situation of meeting people
> who I went to school with - I remember them, just, though not their
> names. They remember me, but clearly not the hassle I got from them.
I have observed that a lot of people who bully and harrass
others at school later write the whole thing off as having been some sort
of affectionate game, that they might reminisce fondly about a beating to
the person who suffered it, because, after all, they were mates, weren't
they? If the bullied person is more successful, this gets twisted further
through sycophancy. Everybody wants to be able to say sie was best
friends with that person.
This sometimes happens with the dead.
> It's been five years, and I
> look at them and I don't see any difference, and I think that there's
> something horrible in that - a smaller death. They've vanished from memory,
> and I have no space for them. Yet to them, I haven't and they do. I wonder
> about that - about what lack of stimulus could produce such a void.
They might just remember things differently. <shrug> I think
you're most likely right, though. From what my mother says, the people
with whom I was at school still make a fuss about me, though it seems to
me that they never knew much about me. They ceased to have any relevance
to my life some fifteen years ago, which, for the most part, was a relief;
what I found most suffocating about that time was the mundanity of it all.
I was frantically busy when I escaped, so short term memory stuff quickly
got overwritten.
Sometimes, though, these things sadden me, because there are
also times when I struggle to remember the names and details of people
whom I really liked; I remember I liked them, but the rest is faded, I
guess because my life is always so busy. When they remember me well, I
feel that I've let them down.
> I think either's appropriate. Though I'm never sure if love can fade, it
> seems to transmute or remain.
It demands less attention, over time, whether that's excitement
or pain. [1] If the loved one is lost, it becomes less relevant to the
continuing events in one's life, so is less often called to mind.
> Love has a tendency to become a background thing, like breathing or tea, to
> me. It's only when it's missing or wrong that I notice it. Does _that_ make
> sense?
In a way. Provided it still brings pleasure, as, indeed,
breathing and tea do. Otherwise there wouldn't seem to be much point in
it. For me, initial giddiness generally gives way to an increased level of
general happiness which is less urgent in its demands.
> Maybe I just enjoy doing things on my own too much.
There are many things which I enjoy doing on my own, but
conversation is not highly placed among them. ;)
Jennie
[1] Usually, anyway; Erith, you still confuse me.
Jennie
> I was so tempted today to leave flowers at the Cathedral, but didn't
> because I was afraid of seeming silly. I've never felt the urge to do
> that sort of thing before - infact I'm usually fairly dismisive of
> those who do, but .... this feels different.
That feeling is part of the ages old tradition of giving grave
goods, and I think it's often stronger when there cannot be the sense of
finality provided by a body and a traditional funeral. It might seem silly
when the person giving is one who has no apparent connection to the dead
person(s) being provided for. We are then faced with trying to comprehend
the logic of other people's emotional associations. I find it hard to
understand how so many people provided grave goods for the Queen Mother,
whom scarcely any of them knew or had benefited from. I feel a stronger
personal connection to the dead Columbia crew because I'd read and admired
their work, and because some of the experiments which they did during the
last days of their lives may directly benefit me, even increasing my own
life expectancy. They made a sacrifice partly for people like me, so it
feels appropriate for me to make a sacrifice for them; and that leaves me
feeling empty, unable now to directly express my gratitude.
What does giving grave goods mean? Few of us believe, any
longer, that they will be of direct use to the deceased in the afterlife.
An increasing number of us don't believe in an afterlife at all, yet still
feel inclined to make such gestures. I think that they function partly as
a sacrifice, the giving of something beautiful to do penance for the
universe whose sin of untimely death has destroyed their own mortal
beauty. They are partly about providing closure for the mourners, and the
sense of being able to do something in the face of death. They are
sometimes a public gesture, to send a message to the world about what we
think the dead were worth.
Jennie
--
Jennie Kermode jen...@innocent.com
http://www.triffid.demon.co.uk/jennie
"please put some flowers on algernon's grave for me"
erithromycin
>erith:
>>That makes sense, yes. I have different sensations - I sometimes forget
>>that people are dead, and the realisation can be a little startling. They
>>remain active enough in my mind that I'll consider their interests.
> Do the dead cease to have relevant interests? There are a
>number of dead people who still have a strong influence in my life, partly
>because the memory of them still influences others whom I'm close to.
>Although they're dead, I still wouldn't break their confidences; I still
>refer to them, by way of considering what their opinions would have been
>likely to be, when I have difficult decisions to make.
Well, yes, but that sort of persistence of awareness seems rare. People are
often all to willing to forget that people exist where we can't see them
while they're alive, so I'd imagine that the situation gets worse when there
isn't the chance of them popping back into life to remind them.
>>At the same time I found myself in the odd situation of meeting people
>>who I went to school with - I remember them, just, though not their
>>names. They remember me, but clearly not the hassle I got from them.
>I have observed that a lot of people who bully and harrass
>others at school later write the whole thing off as having been some sort
>of affectionate game, that they might reminisce fondly about a beating to
>the person who suffered it, because, after all, they were mates, weren't
>they? If the bullied person is more successful, this gets twisted further
>through sycophancy. Everybody wants to be able to say sie was best
>friends with that person.
True enough. In part I'm amazed it matters. I tried to explain it to one of
them, in conversation - it's been five years, and I've moved on. I didn't
see them outwith the school gates except for field trips, I didn't watch the
television they watched, I read the books they didn't, and, as far as they
should have been concerned, I didn't go to the same pubs and clubs as they
did while we were all underage. High school isn't a font of fond memories,
so I'm glad to leave it all behind. I've been back six or seven times since
I left, and two of those were in the last _week_, to pick up my little
sister. I think I'm rambling. Enough to say that I wasn't the same as them
then, and since they haven't changed, what are the chances now?
>This sometimes happens with the dead.
Ah, who'd speak ill of the dead?
>>It's been five years, and I
>>look at them and I don't see any difference, and I think that there's
>>something horrible in that - a smaller death. They've vanished from
memory,
>>and I have no space for them. Yet to them, I haven't and they do. I wonder
>>about that - about what lack of stimulus could produce such a void.
>They might just remember things differently. <shrug> I think
>you're most likely right, though. From what my mother says, the people
>with whom I was at school still make a fuss about me, though it seems to
>me that they never knew much about me. They ceased to have any relevance
>to my life some fifteen years ago, which, for the most part, was a relief;
>what I found most suffocating about that time was the mundanity of it all.
>I was frantically busy when I escaped, so short term memory stuff quickly
>got overwritten.
I think a lot of it came down to exposure to people who thought. Once you've
drunk that draught there's no going back. Not without depression and madness
in attendance, anyway.
>Sometimes, though, these things sadden me, because there are
>also times when I struggle to remember the names and details of people
>whom I really liked; I remember I liked them, but the rest is faded, I
>guess because my life is always so busy. When they remember me well, I
>feel that I've let them down.
I'd worry about that sort of thing, but I suspect I may be heartless. There
are some that I might have liked to have seen four years ago, but really I'm
just waiting for the inevitable reunion. Gazing out over a see of balding
supermarket managers and 'IT professionals', wondering what happened to them
all. A little island of conscious-gloom in a sea of tedium.
>>I think either's appropriate. Though I'm never sure if love can fade, it
>>seems to transmute or remain.
>It demands less attention, over time, whether that's excitement
>or pain. [1] If the loved one is lost, it becomes less relevant to the
>continuing events in one's life, so is less often called to mind.
We were talking this morning about the similarity between love and faith,
that sense of constant comfort, or at least the knowledge that there's
something there. I think a sufficiently strong memory of a loved one is
enough to do the same.
>>Maybe I just enjoy doing things on my own too much.
>There are many things which I enjoy doing on my own, but
>conversation is not highly placed among them. ;)
Huh. We talk to ourselves a lot.
--
erith - what was I saying?
Jennie
> jennie:
>>Although they're dead, I still wouldn't break their confidences; I still
>>refer to them, by way of considering what their opinions would have been
>>likely to be, when I have difficult decisions to make.
> Well, yes, but that sort of persistence of awareness seems rare. People are
> often all to willing to forget that people exist where we can't see them
> while they're alive, so I'd imagine that the situation gets worse when there
> isn't the chance of them popping back into life to remind them.
Maybe it's been reinforced for me by the time I've spent with
strong emotional attachments to liminal people. When Donald was in
hospital, and his chances were slim, I had still to consider his interests
in nearly every important decision I made, and I think I would have
continued to do so for a long time, out of habit, if he'd died. He'd have
gone from not being around to, um, not being around, the only real
differences being that I would no longer be able to pay him visits (though
I'm sure I'd dream about him), and that there'd be no chance of the
situation changing. He still acted as a psychological support for me,
while he was away, and I expect something of that feeling would have
lingered if he'd died.
I prefer to have the people I care about with me in the flesh,
but being apart from them doesn't lessen their relevance; that happens
only after some emotional separation has already taken place. Perhaps this
helps me to connect to my fictional characters, who never have a physical
presence, but whom I must be aware of just as if they were real people, if
I'm to write about them well. To me, there is an aspect of every person
which is purely an idea, or a series of ideas: a psychological impression.
People carve out their spaces in the world, and when they're gone, the
shape of those spaces can remain visible for some time.
> True enough. In part I'm amazed it matters. I tried to explain it to one of
> them, in conversation - it's been five years, and I've moved on. I didn't
> see them outwith the school gates except for field trips, I didn't watch the
> television they watched, I read the books they didn't, and, as far as they
> should have been concerned, I didn't go to the same pubs and clubs as they
> did while we were all underage.
I could never get it through the heads of people at my school
that the fact I didn't socialise with them didn't mean I didn't have a
social life; that the fact I didn't date schoolchildren didn't mean I had
no sex life (of course, my willingness to acknowledge sex itself shocked
them, though at least half of them did it, and a good number of those got
knocked up as a result); that the fact I didn't drink cheap vinegary cider
on street corners didn't mean I was unable to appreciate good alcohol. I
think that's what bothered me most of all about the whole thing - the fact
that, so far as they were aware, there was only one world, only one way of
life, and no further possibilities.
> High school isn't a font of fond memories, so I'm glad to leave it all
> behind.
Most people's fond memories seem to be delusional, anyway, or
at any rate severely edited; else they resemble those of squaddies looking
back on basic training and remembering the thrill of having made it
through, forgetting the way they actually felt at the time when cold and
wet and crawling through dirt. I'm sure there are some people who
genuinely enjoy(ed) school, but I didn't witness much of that sort of
thing, and my extensive diaries from the time make it easier for me to be
sure of my own memories. Otoh, there's the argument that people remember
school fondly when their subsequent lives are shite.
> I've been back six or seven times since I left, and two of those were
> in the last _week_, to pick up my little sister.
I occasionally walked through the grounds of my school on the
way back from college, whilst I was still living in that town, but that
was the extent of my lingering connection to it, and I haven't even seen
the place for some twelve years now.
> Ah, who'd speak ill of the dead?
Perhaps people who respected them.
When my Gran died, and I said I considered it inappropriate
for me to attend her funeral, my Dad asked what the problem was, given I
got on fine with the attending relatives. It was difficult to explain to
him that I still cared about avoiding disrespect to the deceased, and must
therefore continue to acknowledge the differences which I'd had with her.
Dead people are still people to me. I can't relate to the popular tendency
to objectify them.
> I think a lot of it came down to exposure to people who thought. Once you've
> drunk that draught there's no going back. Not without depression and madness
> in attendance, anyway.
Thus the addiction to books which a lot of us had before we
found people worth talking to, I suppose. Books staved off the madness and
depression during my school days, but I could never quite get enough of them.
> I'd worry about that sort of thing, but I suspect I may be heartless. There
> are some that I might have liked to have seen four years ago, but really I'm
> just waiting for the inevitable reunion. Gazing out over a see of balding
> supermarket managers and 'IT professionals', wondering what happened to them
> all. A little island of conscious-gloom in a sea of tedium.
Can I go with you, dear? I promise to behave (as you deem
appropriate). Though, were it my own, I should never attend such a
dishonourable function.
Heartlessness can be another survival tool.
Jennie
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>jennie:
>>>Although they're dead, I still wouldn't break their confidences; I still
>>>refer to them, by way of considering what their opinions would have been
>>>likely to be, when I have difficult decisions to make.
>>Well, yes, but that sort of persistence of awareness seems rare. People
are
>>often all to willing to forget that people exist where we can't see them
>>while they're alive, so I'd imagine that the situation gets worse when
there
>>isn't the chance of them popping back into life to remind them.
> Maybe it's been reinforced for me by the time I've spent with
>strong emotional attachments to liminal people. [snip]
Of course, now that Donald's a little more well you just have to cope with
two people with wildly divergent sleep schedules. Oh well.
> I prefer to have the people I care about with me in the flesh,
>but being apart from them doesn't lessen their relevance; that happens
>only after some emotional separation has already taken place. Perhaps this
>helps me to connect to my fictional characters, who never have a physical
>presence, but whom I must be aware of just as if they were real people, if
>I'm to write about them well. To me, there is an aspect of every person
>which is purely an idea, or a series of ideas: a psychological impression.
>People carve out their spaces in the world, and when they're gone, the
>shape of those spaces can remain visible for some time.
Well, yes. Isn't that the basis of all sorts of philosophical noodling? That
we exist as we are aware of ourselves, and as a series of awareness of the
projection of our self? The only black box we can see inside is our head?
>>True enough. In part I'm amazed it matters. I tried to explain it to one
of
>>them, in conversation - it's been five years, and I've moved on. I didn't
>>see them outwith the school gates except for field trips, I didn't watch
the
>>television they watched, I read the books they didn't, and, as far as they
>>should have been concerned, I didn't go to the same pubs and clubs as they
>>did while we were all underage.
>I could never get it through the heads of people at my school
>that the fact I didn't socialise with them didn't mean I didn't have a
>social life;
Oh. The fact that I didn't socialise with people at school was, in fact, an
indicator that I did not have a social life.
>>High school isn't a font of fond memories, so I'm glad to leave it all
>>behind.
>Most people's fond memories seem to be delusional, anyway, or
>at any rate severely edited; else they resemble those of squaddies looking
>back on basic training and remembering the thrill of having made it
>through, forgetting the way they actually felt at the time when cold and
>wet and crawling through dirt. I'm sure there are some people who
>genuinely enjoy(ed) school, but I didn't witness much of that sort of
>thing, and my extensive diaries from the time make it easier for me to be
>sure of my own memories. Otoh, there's the argument that people remember
>school fondly when their subsequent lives are shite.
True enough. I remember some parts of school as fun, but in general there
was tedium. Lots and lots of it.
>>I've been back six or seven times since I left, and two of those were
>>in the last _week_, to pick up my little sister.
> I occasionally walked through the grounds of my school on the
>way back from college, whilst I was still living in that town, but that
>was the extent of my lingering connection to it, and I haven't even seen
>the place for some twelve years now.
I was back there again on Sunday, and driving to it is actually quite weird.
There's a seperation from the usual morning weariness, sore bones and a
headache, waiting for registration. I'm just not the -same- as I was then,
at a basic chemical level. I think it may simply be that most people don't
change as drastically as I have, or aren't changed as much, which might be
more accurate.
>>Ah, who'd speak ill of the dead?
>Perhaps people who respected them.
[snip]
>Dead people are still people to me. I can't relate to the popular tendency
>to objectify them.
I think it's got something to do with fear of death. So they build a
conspiracy of silence to forget those who have, so that they can be afraid
of being forgotten themselves.
>>I think a lot of it came down to exposure to people who thought. Once
you've
>>drunk that draught there's no going back. Not without depression and
madness
>>in attendance, anyway.
>Thus the addiction to books which a lot of us had before we
>found people worth talking to, I suppose. Books staved off the madness and
>depression during my school days, but I could never quite get enough of
them.
What we really need is some sort of PDA, with a little keyboard, that gets
newsgroups, and costs about as much as a gameboy. Airdrop them to troubled
young people in need of intellectual stimulus.
>>I'd worry about that sort of thing, but I suspect I may be heartless.
There
>>are some that I might have liked to have seen four years ago, but really
I'm
>>just waiting for the inevitable reunion. Gazing out over a see of balding
>>supermarket managers and 'IT professionals', wondering what happened to
them
>>all. A little island of conscious-gloom in a sea of tedium.
>Can I go with you, dear? I promise to behave (as you deem
>appropriate). Though, were it my own, I should never attend such a
>dishonourable function.
Of course you can come - I may need someone to help me gnaw my limbs off in
order to escape.
>Heartlessness can be another survival tool.
The original, and the best!
--
erith - blackened twisted