Within living memory

[occam]

I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
definition of this appears to be:

"If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered by
some people who are still alive."

However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?

If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.

If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the universe?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

White Lives Matter?

> ever expanding, like the universe?

So many people talked about the First World War as a recent event when
I were a lad that it still _seems like_ being within in living memory
(as it was, of course, during the 1950s). I suspect that in practice
"within living memory" means within the memories of people alive today
or their parents.


--
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[occam]

I have a feeling it is going beyond just
'people-alive-today-or-their-parents'. It will extend to include
within-recorded-memory, with such things as documentary films, videos
and other *visuals* e.g. photographs.

[Peter Moylan]

I wouldn't count much of that as "living memory". Our "memories" of the
Great War are not personal memories, they are only memories of having
seen that documentary evidence.

We also have lots of documented detail about the life of Jesus of
Nazareth, and a significant number of people [1] believe in the literal
truth of that detail. Not even the most ardent believer would describe
that as "living memory".

That has nothing to do with religion. I could say the same about the
life of Isaac Newton.

[1] I know the language is changing, but I still refuse to say "amount
of people".

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I'm not sure of that:

https://blog.biblesforamerica.org/8-verses-showing-jesus-lives/

>
> That has nothing to do with religion. I could say the same about the
> life of Isaac Newton.
>
> [1] I know the language is changing, but I still refuse to say "amount
> of people".


--

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 3:20:02 AM UTC-4, occam wrote:

> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
> definition of this appears to be:
>
> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered by
> some people who are still alive."
>
> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
> who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?

No.

> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
> 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.

??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII.
A few will remember the blitz.

Last year, various news outlets interviewed some of the very few
people who remembered the 1918 flu pandemic, for their memories
(formed at the age of 4 or so) of that era. A couple of them had
survived both infections. (Unless, of course, what they "remembered"
was what their parents told them a few years later about what they'd
gone through.)

> If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the universe?

No.

[charles]

In article <ir03ov...@mid.individual.net>,

to some (I assume young) newspaper reporters it means "within my lifetime".

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[charles]

In article <a69cf108-00ba-490f...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 3:20:02 AM UTC-4, occam wrote:

> > I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
> > definition of this appears to be:
> >
> > "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered
> > by some people who are still alive."
> >
> > However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
> > who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?

> No.
>
> > If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
> > 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.

> ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII. A few will
> remember the blitz.

at the end of this deecade, I will be 90. I can remember being taken to an
air-raid shelter. I must have been about 2 since my younger brother hadn't
been born.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I don't remember the war, but I think my older sister probably does,
and she should certainly see the decade out.

Nowadays plenty of people reach 100 (or close to it) and so there will
be many who remember the war at the end of the decade. People who go
beyond 100 are not common, but they exist. Jeanne Calment was 111 when
I arrived in Marseilles, and lived to be 122. She lived in Arles (about
80 minutes drive from here) and was said to have had met Van Gogh. She
was well into adulthood when the First World War took place, and
certainly remembered it. PTD needs to brush up on his history and
simple arithmetic, probably both.

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 15:16:10 +0100, charles <cha...@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

I think we are still several years away from WWII not being in living
memory.

"Living memory" simply means "in the memory of those still living".

I definitely have memories of living in WWII times. Nothing so
dramatic as being sent to an air raid shelter or surviving a bombing,
but memories of being affected by a war in progress.

I was aware that my tasks in saving string and tinfoil was because of
the war...that the newsreels at the movies were scenes of combat...and
that rationing (automobile tires*, in my case) was part of the war
effort. I remember the excitement and cars blowing horns when VE Day
was announced. I was walking home from school.

*My family was stranded in moving from Coral Gables FL back to
Indianapolis because a tire on the trailer blew out, and no
replacement tire was available because my father didn't have rationing
stamps. We sat by the highway for hours next to the disable trailer
until my mother - who had gone to a police station and refused to
leave until a tire was provided - was given a used tire that the
police chief had scrounged up just to get her out.

One does not have to have been in combat to have WWII memories.


--

Tony Cooper Orlando Florida

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 1:20:02 AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
> definition of this appears to be:
>
> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered by
> some people who are still alive."

That's what it means to me.

> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
> who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?

I don't see why.

> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
> 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.

...

Why not? Except that it's not dismissing. In a few decades, there
will be no one left who remembers WW II, and I'll be perfectly
comfortable saying it's no longer in living memory, if I'm capable
of saying anything.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Sam Plusnet]

That would be "Within Living Colour".

That must be why there has been such effort put into colorising film
from the First and Second World Wars. Most people under a certain age
seem to reject anything in B&W.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 12:13:12 PM UTC-4, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2021-09-22 14:16:10 +0000, charles said:
> > In article <a69cf108-00ba-490f...@googlegroups.com>, Peter
> > T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 3:20:02 AM UTC-4, occam wrote:

> >>> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
> >>> definition of this appears to be:
> >>> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered
> >>> by some people who are still alive."
> >>> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
> >>> who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?
> >> No.
> >>> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
> >>> 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.
> >> ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII. A few will
> >> remember the blitz.
> > at the end of this deecade, I will be 90. I can remember being taken to an
> > air-raid shelter. I must have been about 2 since my younger brother hadn't
> > been born.
>
> I don't remember the war, but I think my older sister probably does,
> and she should certainly see the decade out.

"Remember the war" in this context normally means 'remember seeing
combat or other military service'. As was clear by my separating out
memory of the blitz.

> Nowadays plenty of people reach 100 (or close to it) and so there will
> be many who remember the war at the end of the decade. People who go
> beyond 100 are not common, but they exist. Jeanne Calment was 111 when
> I arrived in Marseilles, and lived to be 122. She lived in Arles (about
> 80 minutes drive from here) and was said to have had met Van Gogh. She
> was well into adulthood when the First World War took place, and
> certainly remembered it. PTD needs to brush up on his history and
> simple arithmetic, probably both.
> --
> Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

Mister Nasty needs to brush up on his English Usage.

[Peter T. Daniels]

That is not "remembering the War." That is "remembering living
during wartime." I would certainly not claim that I remember the
Vietnam War, or the Grenada Whatever, or the Iraq War, or the
Afghan War, all of which happened, and were well reported, during
my lifetime.

[Ken Blake]

I'm over that "certain age," so many of my favorite photographs (by
Edward Weston, Ansel Adams, etc.) as well as many of my favorite films
are B&W.


--
Ken

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:09:42 -0700, Ken Blake <k...@invalidemail.com>
wrote:

I have been known to process a photograph in black and white. At
least one has been controversial, though.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I seem to recall that happening here once or twice. There is someone
here who scrutinizes each of your pictures to search for evidence of
antisemitism, racism, homophobia, etc.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 2:28:35 AM UTC-4, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2021-09-22 22:37:25 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
> > On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:09:42 -0700, Ken Blake <k...@invalidemail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On 9/22/2021 1:07 PM, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >>> On 22/09/2021 10:51, occam wrote:
> >>>> On 22/09/2021 10:15, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> >>>>> I suspect that in practice "within
> >>>>> living memory" means within the memories of people alive today or their
> >>>>> parents.
> >>>> I have a feeling it is going beyond just
> >>>> 'people-alive-today-or-their-parents'. It will extend to include
> >>>> within-recorded-memory, with such things as documentary films, videos
> >>>> and other *visuals* e.g. photographs.
> >>> That would be "Within Living Colour".
> >>> That must be why there has been such effort put into colorising film
> >>> from the First and Second World Wars. Most people under a certain age
> >>> seem to reject anything in B&W.
> >> I'm over that "certain age," so many of my favorite photographs (by
> >> Edward Weston, Ansel Adams, etc.) as well as many of my favorite films
> >> are B&W.
> > I have been known to process a photograph in black and white. At
> > least one has been controversial, though.
>
> I seem to recall that happening here once or twice. There is someone

Ah, the stoogemaster's "someone."

> here who scrutinizes each of your pictures to search for evidence of
> antisemitism, racism, homophobia, etc.

That, of course, is a damnable lie. The "someone" almost never looks
at the linked photographs, but in the case alluded to, the photographs
were announced as having been made at a Gay Pride event.

[Tony Cooper]

Ah, so announcing the subject matter determines whether or not you
view the photograph. This one is a photograph of a person who might
appear at a Pride event.

It is rendered in black and white because I think it reveals them's
character more, but it doesn't "bleach" any defining accessories.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-zRKKVWv/0/O/i-zRKKVWv.jpg

[Mack A. Damia]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 13:44:11 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

I remember the Vietnam War, Tootsie. Very clearly.

Tan Son Nhut Air base, Saigon, RVN
1968 - 1969

Lecture I put together in graduate school:

>Let me begin by giving you a short, cultural vignette of the French
>colonization of Indochina in the 19th Century. This area was a
>veritable melting pot of nationalities when the French arrived in 1885
>- the Vietnamese, Chinese, Cambodians (or the Khmer) and a variety of
>mountain tribes. The French, then, rapidly colonized the area under
>the name of French Indochina.
>
>Reports tell us that the French administration of Indochina was as
>well run and as efficient as the best of the colonial governments, but
>the truth is that the French kept the colony for more prestige than
>economic logic. The colonial budgets for not only Indochina but other
>French colonies show that they were expensive and costly to operate.
>
>The French built a system of roads, bridges, canals, railways, and
>communication facilities. Another thing they did throughout their
>colonial empire was to encourage first-born native sons to pack their
>bags and attend the finest French academies and schools. The only
>problem with this plan was that these well-educated young men
>eventually returned to Indochina only to find themselves unemployed or
>at best, underemployed. French colonial administration refused to
>employ nationals in their civil service positions as a matter of
>foreign policy.
>
>As a result, of course, there was a growing pool of discontented and
>disillusioned young men, and we can imagine that the first
>anti-French, pro-Vietnamese independence nationalist groups arose.
>These clandestine organizations operated in the 1920s and into the
>1930s engaging in hit-and-run activities and sabotage. One of these
>groups was a little more successful than the others - The
>Revolutionary League for the Independence of Vietnam, popularly called
>the "Viet Minh". Its leader was a young, passionate revolutionary with
>the birth name of Nguyen Sinh Cung, also known as Nguyen Tat Thành and
>"Nguyen Ái Quoc".
>
>Ai Quoc came from a fairly well-to-do family; he attended schools in
>both Vietnam and France. He reported lived in the Soho section of
>London, and Harlem in New York City where he witnessed first-hand the
>urban squalor of the industrialized world. We might appreciate why
>this disillusioned Vietnamese son turned to the writings of Karl Marx
>and other radicals for some answers. Ai Quoc's discontent was
>compounded by America's refusal to give anything but lip service to
>the frantic pleas of Vietnamese nationals following World War I.
>President Wilson had espoused on several occasions support for
>Vietnamese independence from France, but the problems he encountered
>following the war focused his attention elsewhere.
>
>So Nguyen Ái Quoc was leading his band of rebels on various
>clandestine activities against the French in the 1920s and 1930s. At
>various periods throughout this time, he was imprisoned, and at one
>point he was sentenced to death in absentia by a French colonial
>court. Apparently, he would have been extradited from Hong Kong to
>probable execution in Vietnam had a young British lawyer not pleaded
>his case and won. At various times throughout his early life, Ai Quoc
>was forced to use various aliases and assumed names, but in 1941, he
>secretly traveled from China to Vietnam and began to use the name, "Ho
>Chi Minh", meaning "He Who Enlightens".
>
>(A word about China: China had been organized under the leadership of
>Sun Yat Sen, The Father of Modern China and founder of the
>Nationalist Chinese Movement, the Kuomintang (various spellings). Sun
>Yat Sen died in 1925 and was replaced by his chief disciple, Chang
>Kai Sheck. In the late 1930s, Chang watched and supported any
>anti-French group operating in southern China, an area that provided
>excellent "hit and run" activities for the various indigenous groups
>who were in conflict with the French.)
>
>With the defeat of the French in 1940, Indochina was left virtually
>helpless without any support at all from the Allies. In 1942, Japan
>over-ran Southeast Asia and quickly occupied the country.
>
>Now, unlike the French, the Japanese chose to staff its civil service
>with Vietnamese nationals who pledged cooperation. There were a
>number of political organizations in operation at that time, as well,
>the largest of which was the "Viet Minh" headed by the Marxist
>revolutionary, Nuguyen Ai Quoc, who was now known popularly as "Ho Chi
>Minh". The brutality of the Japanese in occupying the region is
>well-documented, and in 1943, the Viet Minh promised to aid the Allied
>war effort; thus, they created the first "anti-Japanese guerrilla
>force in Vietnam that was responsible for rescuing American flyers
>shot down in Indochina. The Viet Minh supplied valuable intelligence
>and helped spread propaganda, too. It was the American view that any
>anti-Japanese group operating in Southeast Asia would be actively
>aided and supported. At various times throughout the conflict,
>American OSS agents were parachuted into Southeast Asia to collaborate
>with the Viet Minh in anti-Japanese activities.
>
>TBC.....

The Viet Minh were at this time operating as "double agents. On the
one hand, they assisted the Japanese in the administration of Vietnam;
on the other hand, they were subversively sabotaging the Japanese war
effort in any way possible. From this situation we can perhaps
understand why President Roosevelt sent messages to both Charles De
Gaulle, head of the French free government, and to the leaders of the
anti-Japanese subversive groups operating in Southeast Asia stating
unequivocally that France would have to divest herself Indochina at
the conclusion of the war. At the earlier conferences of Tehran and
Yalta, all parties generally agreed, though some with reluctance, that
France had mismanaged and misruled Indochina over the years, and a
kind of trustee arrangement leading to self-rule was thought to be the
best solution.

In the Spring of 1945, Germany capitulated, and most of the attention
was focused on the Pacific Theater where an early end to the
hostilities did not seem promising. A study by the Joint Chiefs of
Staff concluded that a satisfactory conclusion of the war would not
take place for a minimum of two years. Of course, this would change
with the detonation of the two atomic devices at Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. Americans were flabbergasted and totally unprepared for the
swift Japanese surrender in August, 1945.

There is little doubt in my mind from the diplomatic reports I am
familiar with that had President Roosevelt lived, the French would not
have returned to Indochina , but unfortunately, FDR died in April,
1945 and was replaced by his vice-president, Harry S. Truman. Much
has been said about Truman's "straight-talking", "no-nonsense", "the
buck stops here" type of personality, but Truman just didn't have the
background and sensitivity that Roosevelt possessed, and as a result,
Truman overlooked Indochina; he was more interested in winning the war
against Japan. Furthermore, FDR had kept him largely in the dark
about war matters. By the time Truman went to Pottsdam in the summer
of 1945, the free French under De Gaulle had already decided to return
to Indochina. De Gaulle even threatened an invasion, but one product
of the Pottsdam conference was the introduction of the 17th Parallel
that split the nation into two zones to facilitate administration -
North and South Vietnam.

The Burma Campaign under Stillwell and Mountbatten never really got
off the ground, and when VJ Day came on September 1, 1945, another
problem was created by thousands of Japanese troops who all had to be
repatriated. Under the agreement at Pottsdam, General Chang Kai Sheck
sent an army from southern China to police the area north of the 17th
Parallel; a combined force of British, Indian and Gurka troops
occupied the southern zone where they took care of administration and
re-organization. Also, on this day, General Charles De Gaulle let it
be known to the world by announcing that France was returning to
Indochina. About the same time, an American general and Ho Chi Minh
were standing on the balcony of the Presidential Palace in Hanoi
toasting "a free and independent Vietnam!"

But Ho smelled a "sell-out" and ordered his fighters into Hanoi; the
French had returned en-masse in early 1946, and the "old life" began
to return. General Chang Kai Sheck was only too glad to relinquish
control of the north to the French; he wanted to return to China where
there was worsening instability. Eventually, all of the Japanese
troops, both in the north and south, were successfully repatriated
during this period.

TBC.....

[Adam Funk]

WHY DO YOU HATE IGGY POP?!?

>>> here who scrutinizes each of your pictures to search for evidence of
>>> antisemitism, racism, homophobia, etc.
>>
>>That, of course, is a damnable lie. The "someone" almost never looks
>>at the linked photographs, but in the case alluded to, the photographs
>>were announced as having been made at a Gay Pride event.
>
> Ah, so announcing the subject matter determines whether or not you
> view the photograph. This one is a photograph of a person who might
> appear at a Pride event.
>
> It is rendered in black and white because I think it reveals them's
> character more, but it doesn't "bleach" any defining accessories.
>
> https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-zRKKVWv/0/O/i-zRKKVWv.jpg

That's a satisfactory explanation to anyone who doesn't have a
personal grudge against you.


--
But the government always tries to coax well-known writers into the
Establishment; it makes them feel educated. ---Robert Graves

[occam]

Thank you for raising your hand and identifying yourself as the culprit,
Daniels. It makes everyone else's guessing job so much easier.

[occam]

It does not, and it should not. 'Living memory' for me is as much an
experience gleaned from another living being (who had the experience)
as experiencing it first hand myself. Yes, it may not be direct, but it
'living'.

[Peter T. Daniels]

"I find it rather hard to believe" that anyone was "fooled" by C**p*r's
attempts at "cuteness."

[Peter T. Daniels]

Do you remember landing on the moon in July 1969? Do you remember
being murdered in the office of *Charlie Hebdo*? Do you remember being
attacked in the Tube on 7/7?

That interpretation removes the meaning of "remember." What you
remember is hearing about it. (It also invokes the notion of "false
memories," which were a factor in the rash of persecutions for
"witchcraft" some decades ago in the US.)

The history teacher doesn't ask, "Who remembers V-E Day?" They
ask, "Who remembers what V-E Day was?"

[CDB]

On 9/24/2021 8:24 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> occam wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

You can remember V-E Day if you were old ennough to be aware of it. You
certainly don't have to have been in Europe. I don't, because I was two
years old at the time.

[Tony Cooper]

As posted before, I *do* remember V-E day. I was walking home from
school and people in cars were honking. Evidently, they had heard
about it on their car radio. Walkers, who didn't know what was being
celebrated found out when the people in the cars shouted out that the
Germans had surrendered.

Those who think this might be a false memory on my part should
consider that V-E day was on a Tuesday (May 8) in 1945, three days
before my 7th birthday. I would have been at school that day. PS 60,
as a matter of fact.

PTD's statement is his usual silliness. A "history teacher", today,
would be teaching a class of people too young to remember. A "history
teacher" in 1950 (Yes, we had them then) would be teaching a class of
people who were very likely to remember the day. How the teacher
phrased the question would depend on when the teacher was teaching or
what he/she wanted to know.

I don't remember V-J day. I don't remember any event - as I do that
walk home from school - that is imbedded in memory.

[Peter T. Daniels]

It's unlikely that someone who's 78 has a "history teacher."

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, September 24, 2021 at 10:47:03 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:

> PTD's statement is his usual silliness. A "history teacher", today,
> would be teaching a class of people too young to remember. A "history

So you managed to understand, but made an asinine comment anyway?

Why do you do that?

[charles]

In article <0be22388-0af2-4f5e...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

on VE+1, there were fireworks for my birthday which was the day after.

[Anders D. Nygaard]

Disagree. See below.

>> It does not, and it should not. 'Living memory' for me is as much an
>> experience gleaned from another living being (who had the experience)
>> as experiencing it first hand myself. Yes, it may not be direct, but it
>> 'living'.
>
> Do you remember landing on the moon in July 1969?

No, but I remember the moon landing in July 1969. I was awake until 4 am
(thereabouts) to watch it in some other family's summer cottage, as our
own did not have a TV. I feigned falling asleep afterwards, and was
carried home in bed.

> Do you remember
> being murdered in the office of *Charlie Hebdo*?

No, but I remember the contemporary news coverage. "Je suis Charlie"

> Do you remember being
> attacked in the Tube on 7/7?

No, but again I remember the news coverage.

All of which put the respective events squarely within my "living memory".

/Anders, Denmark

[occam]

On 24/09/2021 14:24, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> The history teacher doesn't ask, "Who remembers V-E Day?" They
> ask, "Who remembers what V-E Day was?"

What a load of bullshit, from the slithy tove that is Daniels.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

When Buzz Aldrin dies we will no longer be able to say that that
happened within living memory, if we accept PTD's absurd
misunderstanding of what "within living memory" means. Just for
interest, does anyone at all agree that that is what "within living
memory" means?

>
>> Do you remember
>> being murdered in the office of *Charlie Hebdo*?
>
> No, but I remember the contemporary news coverage. "Je suis Charlie"
>
>> Do you remember being
>> attacked in the Tube on 7/7?
>
> No, but again I remember the news coverage.
>
> All of which put the respective events squarely within my "living memory".

[Richard Heathfield]

On 25/09/2021 08:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

<snip>

> When Buzz Aldrin dies we will no longer be able to say that that
> happened within living memory, if we accept PTD's absurd
> misunderstanding of what "within living memory" means. Just for
> interest, does anyone at all agree that that is what "within living
> memory" means?

Long live Buzz! But if that is what the committee decides, I am poised
ready to forget.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[CDB]

On 9/24/2021 12:32 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

The history teacher was rung in at the last minute, by you. They is not
integral to the discussion.

Anyway, I could be auditing.

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:19:58 +0200, occam wrote:

> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
> definition of this appears to be:
>
> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered by
> some people who are still alive."
>
> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
> who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?

It counts if you can find someone now alive who was born in 1847 or
earlier.

> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
> 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.

Well, I'm alive, and I remember it, to the extent of remembering adults
talking about it as a present reality. I also remember seeing my uncle
coming home from the war, in a flying boat which landed on Durban bay.
/
But world War 1 is not within living memory for anyone who actually
fought in it. I do remember one of our history professors, who fount in
it, speaking about it when it was 50 years after the the beginning of WW
1 and 25 years after the beginning of WW 2. But that is not living
memory, that is oral history.


> If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the universe?

No, when the last person who experienced an event dies, it passes beyond
living memory, and becomes history.






--
Steve Hayes http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Peter T. Daniels]

You agree that you do not remember the events. You remember hearing
of them, in at least the first case while it was happening.

I didn't include 9/11 in my list, because I do not remember it.
I could see the top of the Empire State Building from my then-
apartment, but fortunately not the tops of the Twin Towers
(too far south, so over the horizon).

My main memory of the event is from five days earlier. I had gone to
a concert at Trinity Church where Messiaen's Quartet for the End of
Time was played. The experience was so overwhelming that I couldn't
just get on the subway and go home, so I walked the few blocks to
the World Trade Center and over to the bank of the river and took
in the scenery for a while. I didn't even go into the Borders bookstore
(in 5 WTC) as I usually did when I was there. Then I went home.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Never been a teacher, I see.

What, exactly, do you think a slithy tove is, and why?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Maybe Mister Nasty has been talking French and/or Chilean Spanish too long.

But then, one doesn't expect an "enzyme kineticist" to be familiar with
the psychology of memory.

[Peter T. Daniels]

:-)

Who else would ask that question in those words?

"occam" asked what "within living memory" means. I answered
the question. The "usual gang of idiots" (allusion) seized on
the opportunity to launch yet another unwarranted gang attack.
Including even "occam," who QUOTED THE STANDARD DEFINITION
and went on to note that the Irish potato famine did not happen
within living memory.

The "usual gang of idiots" (allusion) seized on the very marginal
case of individuals very close to the end of the life of their memory,
and borderline cases are where discussions take place. "Hard cases
make bad law" -- but the Supreme Court only gets the hard cases.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Thank you.

Will the "usual gang of idiots" (allusion) now pile on to Steve Hayes?

[CDB]

On 9/25/2021 8:36 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> occam wrote:

>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>>> The history teacher doesn't ask, "Who remembers V-E Day?" They
>>> ask, "Who remembers what V-E Day was?"

>> What a load of bullshit, from the slithy tove that is Daniels.

A literary insult is still bad manners, although here perhaps On Topic.

> Never been a teacher, I see.

> What, exactly, do you think a slithy tove is, and why?

It is a slippery, wriggly hybrid of badger, lizard, and corkscrew.

Because Lutwidge said so.

[David Kleinecke]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 6:17:49 AM UTC-7, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII.

I am not so sure. I remember WWII so well I am a veteran.
And providing I survive my oncoming hernia surgery I feel
nine more years will be easy.

Suppose you must have been born by 1940 to remember
the war. The last man that old will die around 2045 and
the last woman ten years later.

[Ken Blake]

I was born in 1937 and I remember WWII very well. It's highly unlikely
that I will survive until 2045.


--
Ken

[Anders D. Nygaard]

No, I do not.

> You remember hearing of them,

Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.

> in at least the first case while it was happening.

More to the point, I remember witnessing the event.

I somewhat get your point that remembering contemporary news coverage
may be a step too far to be included in "living memory", but I firmly
contend that the moon landing *is* within my living memory.

> I didn't include 9/11 in my list, because I do not remember it.

But you do remember the others?

> I could see the top of the Empire State Building from my then-
> apartment, but fortunately not the tops of the Twin Towers
> (too far south, so over the horizon).
>
> My main memory of the event is from five days earlier.

Does not compute.

My main memory of 9/11 is of my wife asking "How big is a Boeing 737?
One has just flown into WTC"
I was ill at the time, and barely managed to go downstairs and see
the second plane fly in as well.

Again: Within my living memory.

/Anders, Denmark

[Anders D. Nygaard]

Den 25-09-2021 kl. 14:33 skrev Steve Hayes:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:19:58 +0200, occam wrote:
>
>> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'. The standard
>> definition of this appears to be:
>>
>> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be remembered by
>> some people who are still alive."
>>
>> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) because someone
>> who remembered it told them about it, and so on. Does it count?
>
> It counts if you can find someone now alive who was born in 1847 or
> earlier.

You can't. The last person born in the 19th century died a couple of
years ago.
(Hmm. That is not exactly precisely stated - I trust the meaning is clear)

>> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing WWII to
>> 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem right.
>
> Well, I'm alive, and I remember it, to the extent of remembering adults
> talking about it as a present reality. I also remember seeing my uncle
> coming home from the war, in a flying boat which landed on Durban bay.
> /
> But world War 1 is not within living memory for anyone who actually
> fought in it. I do remember one of our history professors, who fount in
> it, speaking about it when it was 50 years after the the beginning of WW
> 1 and 25 years after the beginning of WW 2. But that is not living
> memory, that is oral history.
>
>> If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the universe?
>
> No, when the last person who experienced an event dies, it passes beyond
> living memory, and becomes history.

Exactly right.

The present disagreement in a different sub-thread turns on the meaning
of "experienced". As witnessed by the necessity of your inclusion of
the restriction "for anyone who actually fought in it" above.

/Anders, Denmark

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, September 25, 2021 at 5:58:15 PM UTC-4, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 6:17:49 AM UTC-7, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII.
>
> I am not so sure. I remember WWII so well I am a veteran.
> And providing I survive my oncoming hernia surgery I feel
> nine more years will be easy.

From your mouth to God's ears!

> Suppose you must have been born by 1940 to remember
> the war. The last man that old will die around 2045 and
> the last woman ten years later.

I believe you could enlist at 17 with parental permission, and
probably some 16-year-olds managed to slip in. Remembering
the Home Front isn't remembering the War (just as I noted in
the original statement, remembering the blitz isn't having the
War "in living memory."

[Peter T. Daniels]

Wow. How did he manage to enlist at the age of 4?

Since he has refused to read the discussion, he has no idea what
we are talking about.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Is.

> > in at least the first case while it was happening.
>
> More to the point, I remember witnessing the event.

You were in the capsule orbiting with Collins?

> I somewhat get your point that remembering contemporary news coverage
> may be a step too far to be included in "living memory", but I firmly
> contend that the moon landing *is* within my living memory.

I already distinguished "knowing" from "knowing about."

> > I didn't include 9/11 in my list, because I do not remember it.
>
> But you do remember the others?

They happened far away from me. Hundreds of thousands,
if not millions, of New Yorkers experienced 9/11 because
the landmarks were visible from such a distance and the
clouds of smoke were so enormous and the fallout was
blown far into Brooklyn.

> > I could see the top of the Empire State Building from my then-
> > apartment, but fortunately not the tops of the Twin Towers
> > (too far south, so over the horizon).
> > My main memory of the event is from five days earlier.
>
> Does not compute.
>
> My main memory of 9/11 is of my wife asking "How big is a Boeing 737?
> One has just flown into WTC"
> I was ill at the time, and barely managed to go downstairs and see
> the second plane fly in as well.
>
> Again: Within my living memory.

That feeds the "they faked the moon landing" approach. You
saw pictures of the second impact, and it's unlikely that you
saw them live. Surveillance camera footage (what you call
CCTV) soon became available, but such equipment was far
from as pervasive then as it was in parts of Europe or as it
is, of course, now.

"9/11," obviously, means far more than the six moments that are
commemorated during the observations each September 11th.
Many more people have died from complications contracted while
working on "the pile" to recover remains and to clear the site
than were killed in the original attack. The fund for treatment of
those ailments was recently prolonged until 2090.

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
<news2...@gmail.com> wrote:


>
>Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.

I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
children. My wife did all the participating.

I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

That's how it was for my first daughter (in California). For second and
third (in England) I was there watching, but not otherwise
participating. I suspect that PTD has no experience of these things
(but is an expert nonetheless).

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 10:03:54 AM UTC-4, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
> > On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
> > <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
> > I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
> > children. My wife did all the participating.
> > I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.

Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
a father.

> That's how it was for my first daughter (in California). For second and
> third (in England) I was there watching, but not otherwise
> participating. I suspect that PTD has no experience of these things
> (but is an expert nonetheless).
> --
> Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

Yes, Mister Nasty, you seem to have had direct experience of the
event. (Did you do any of the things taught in Lamaze classes?)

The homophobic slur is noted

[Sam Plusnet]

I don't think anyone here agrees with your "you can only remember WWII
if you served in it" stance, but if you added some clarification it
might help.

If, say, someone in the US or Canada served in the armed forces during
WWII but never went overseas, would they 'remember WWII' in your
understanding of the words?

[Ken Blake]

On 9/26/2021 6:40 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
>
> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
> children. My wife did all the participating.

Not your two children?


--
Ken

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 11:05:46 -0700, Ken Blake <k...@invalidemail.com>
wrote:

I'm not sure if they were active participants or really wanted out.
Isn't considered to be a successful delivery if the delivered is
kicking and screaming immediately after?

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

>> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
>>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
>>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
>>> children. My wife did all the participating.
>>> I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.
>
> Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
> a father.

I hope holding my wife's hands throughout her C-section counts. I didn't
know hands could be that cold in a living, breathing person. Then I got
to hold the baby for 30 minutes while the mother was getting sown up.

--
The Eskimoes had fifty-two names for snow because it was
important to them, there ought to be as many for love.
-- Margaret Atwood, Surfacing (novel), p.106

[Quinn C]

* Sam Plusnet:

> On 26/09/2021 13:46, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 25, 2021 at 5:58:15 PM UTC-4, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> Suppose you must have been born by 1940 to remember
>>> the war. The last man that old will die around 2045 and
>>> the last woman ten years later.
>>
>> I believe you could enlist at 17 with parental permission, and
>> probably some 16-year-olds managed to slip in. Remembering
>> the Home Front isn't remembering the War (just as I noted in
>> the original statement, remembering the blitz isn't having the
>> War "in living memory."
>>
> I don't think anyone here agrees with your "you can only remember WWII
> if you served in it" stance, but if you added some clarification it
> might help.

Even less if you were in a place where the war happened around you. My
mother was only 5 when the war ended, but she did remember having to
rush into the basement at all times, including the middle of the night,
and she got uneasy at the sound of propeller planes all her life.

--
Never trust ale from a god-fearing people.
-- Quark

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 1:47:12 PM UTC-4, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 26/09/2021 13:46, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 25, 2021 at 5:58:15 PM UTC-4, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 6:17:49 AM UTC-7, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >>> ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII.
> >> I am not so sure. I remember WWII so well I am a veteran.
> >> And providing I survive my oncoming hernia surgery I feel
> >> nine more years will be easy.
> > From your mouth to God's ears!
> >> Suppose you must have been born by 1940 to remember
> >> the war. The last man that old will die around 2045 and
> >> the last woman ten years later.
> > I believe you could enlist at 17 with parental permission, and
> > probably some 16-year-olds managed to slip in. Remembering
> > the Home Front isn't remembering the War (just as I noted in
> > the original statement, remembering the blitz isn't having the
> > War "in living memory."
>
> I don't think anyone here agrees with your "you can only remember WWII
> if you served in it" stance, but if you added some clarification it
> might help.

Did I say "served in it"? Or did I say "experienced it"?

The whole foofaraw is probably, once again, due to some individual's
willful misinterpretation of something I said that was perfectly clear.

> If, say, someone in the US or Canada served in the armed forces during
> WWII but never went overseas, would they 'remember WWII' in your
> understanding of the words?

Of course. I explicitly said so somewhere upthread.

Some people prefer to believe what people say I said rather than
what I actually said. Yogi Berra might understand.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 4:05:43 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
> >>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
> >>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
> >>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
> >>> children. My wife did all the participating.
> >>> I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.
> > Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
> > a father.
>
> I hope holding my wife's hands throughout her C-section counts. I didn't

Obviously.

Did that somehow help her (since she was presumably unconscious
and not aware of your presence), or just yourself?

> know hands could be that cold in a living, breathing person. Then I got
> to hold the baby for 30 minutes while the mother was getting sown up.

sewn!

> --
> The Eskimoes had fifty-two names for snow because it was
> important to them, there ought to be as many for love.
> -- Margaret Atwood, Surfacing (novel), p.106

I never previously noticed that Dan Quayle was her spelling teacher.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I wonder who managed to change "experienced" (vel sim.) to "served in."
I'm surprised you fell for the distortion.

I went back looking for what I said. it was

""Remember the war" in this context normally means 'remember seeing
combat or other military service'. As was clear by my separating out
memory of the blitz."

I see at least four words of conditionality: "in this context normally."

That includes, say, the residents of Dresden.

[Peter Moylan]

On 27/09/21 07:18, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 4:05:43 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
>>>>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for
>>>>>> remembering them.
>>>>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our
>>>>> two children. My wife did all the participating. I was in the
>>>>> expectant father's waiting room for both.
>>> Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
>>> a father.
>>
>> I hope holding my wife's hands throughout her C-section counts. I
>> didn't
>
> Obviously.
>
> Did that somehow help her (since she was presumably unconscious and
> not aware of your presence), or just yourself?

My twin children were born by caesarian section. I was present, and my
wife was fully conscious.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

[Peter Moylan]

Their memories of the event don't count as living memory.

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 4:05:43 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
>>>>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
>>>>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
>>>>> children. My wife did all the participating.
>>>>> I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.
>>> Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
>>> a father.
>>
>> I hope holding my wife's hands throughout her C-section counts. I didn't
>
> Obviously.
>
> Did that somehow help her (since she was presumably unconscious
> and not aware of your presence), or just yourself?

It's not full anesthesia. We never talked about it, but her hands
weren't limp, so I assumed that she was at least aware of my presence,
dazed as she was after an exhausting 12h+ of trying to give birth
naturally.

I was actually surprised that I was let in for the procedure, but it's
not that I had to ask for it - they asked me, and it seemed to be their
preference that I be there. Of course provided I don't turn into an
additional person that needs taking care of; my brother-in-law was sent
out of the delivery room once for that reason, but I'm not that
squeamish.

>> know hands could be that cold in a living, breathing person. Then I got
>> to hold the baby for 30 minutes while the mother was getting sown up.
>
> sewn!

Ah yes. I was unsure, but didn't feel like taking more time to clarify.

>> --
>> The Eskimoes had fifty-two names for snow because it was
>> important to them, there ought to be as many for love.
>> -- Margaret Atwood, Surfacing (novel), p.106
>
> I never previously noticed that Dan Quayle was her spelling teacher.

Weren't those forms just more common before?

--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

[Janet]

In article <irbr3q...@mid.individual.net>, k...@invalidemail.com
says...

If children don't recall the occasion, does that mean they didn't get
born?

Janet

[Richard Heathfield]

Well, it's a thought! But no, any more than WW2 has to remember itself
to have happened.

I think most children have the basic good manners to forget their own
birth quite quickly.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[Janet]

In article <f355dac8-146c-4905...@googlegroups.com>,
gram...@verizon.net says...

>
> On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 4:05:43 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> > * Peter T. Daniels:
> > >> On 2021-09-26 13:40:52 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
> > >>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
> > >>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
> > >>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
> > >>> children. My wife did all the participating.
> > >>> I was in the expectant father's waiting room for both.
> > > Then, alas, you don't remember the births. You remember becoming
> > > a father.
> >
> > I hope holding my wife's hands throughout her C-section counts. I didn't
>
> Obviously.
>
> Did that somehow help her (since she was presumably unconscious
> and not aware of your presence), or just yourself?

For the past 50 years, most women having a C-section are fully
conscious throughout, with just a spinal block or an epidural
anaesthesia. Both are safer for the baby than a GA. If their partner
isn't present, a nurse holds her hand as reassurance.

If the mother required a general anaesthetic CS,(full anaesthesia), the
father would not be present.

Janet

[Quinn C]

* Janet:

They did, but it was wasted on them.

--
The seeds of new thought, sown in a ground that isn't prepared
to receive them, don't bear fruit.
-- Hedwig Dohm (1874), my translation

[Sam Plusnet]

On 27/09/2021 11:57, Janet wrote:

That sounds like a more extreme version of "Pics or it didn't happen."

[Paul Wolff]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2021, at 12:09:54, Peter Moylan posted:

>On 27/09/21 05:05, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 9/26/2021 6:40 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 10:56:34 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
>>> <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes. Participating in events is not a prerequisite for remembering them.
>>>
>>> I guess PTD does not accept that I remember the birth of our two
>>> children. My wife did all the participating.
>>
>> Not your two children?
>
>Their memories of the event don't count as living memory.
>

Compton Mackenzie (Whisky Galore, The Lunatic Republic, and other works)
claimed to remember his own birth. And who could prove him wrong?

Unless, that is, I don't remember accurately his claim.
--
Paul

[Anders D. Nygaard]

So Dresden counts, but not London. Strange.

/Anders, Denmark.

[Paul Wolff]

On Sat, 25 Sep 2021, at 14:58:12, David Kleinecke posted:

>On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 6:17:49 AM UTC-7, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> ??? Within this decade, no one alive will remember WWII.
>
>I am not so sure. I remember WWII so well I am a veteran.
>And providing I survive my oncoming hernia surgery I feel
>nine more years will be easy.
>

>Suppose you must have been born by 1940 to remember
>the war. The last man that old will die around 2045 and
>the last woman ten years later.

If I remember my father coming back from the war - that is, a man who my
mother was excited to show me - does that mean I remember the war?

I remember being taken on to the roof outside my grandparents' bathroom
and being shown some sky which had something to do with bombing. I
remember that fathers were away (ours was a large family concentrated in
a large house at that time). You can't call those events 'war', but it
was still wartime.

I think that WWII is present within my memory - and I still live.
--
Paul

[Tony Cooper]

I am still mystified about how there can be a "normal" context in
which "Remember the war" can only mean remembering "seeing combat or
other military service". (His actual wording)

Context is what surrounds the part in question, and those three words
can be surrounded by context from a number of different perspectives.

I remember the war when the Germans were shooting at me.

I remember the war when nylons weren't available.

What makes the first above normal context but the second not?

[Ken Blake]

I don't know the name Compton MacKenzie, but I remember the file "Whisky
Galore" very well. I've seen it several times, and like it a lot.

Much better than a film with Pussy Galore.


--
Ken

[Ken Blake]

I remember the war when I was a young child and I heard the latest about
it on the radio every day. I also remember the newsreels about it that I
saw whenever I went to a movie theater,


--
Ken

[Jerry Friedman]

I think it is too. The bombing was part of the war, as were missing fathers.

I'm getting strange search results. Yesterday I Googled "within living memory"
"World War I" and saw a lot of pages from around the time the last WW I
veterans died (2011) and from the centennial that said the war had receded from
living memory and no one still remembered it. They specifically meant
people who had been in combat.

Today, at a different computer, I can't find those and am getting pages
after the last veteran died that say WW I was still in living memory.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/02/frank-w-buckles-1901-2011-ot.html

Well, I did find one that says it passed out of living memory in 1980, but
that's just silly.

https://www.qmul.ac.uk/busman/media/sbm/documents/aaec-conference-2021/Read-and-Miley-Their-name-liveth-for-evermore---Alt-Accounts-2021-Queen-Mary.pdf

I'd say my mother remembers WW II because she remembers following
the news on the radio and in newspapers. Even more so for people who
remember hearing gunfire, being injured when a city was bombed, being
told by an escaped French POW that they had blue eyes (sorry, back to
WW I).

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

...

Here's one:

"Earlier this year, World War I passed from living memory into the pages of
history.

"British-born Claude Choules, known to his comrades as Chuckles, died in
his sleep aged 110 in his adopted city of Perth, Australia.

"He was the world's last-known combat veteran of the Great War."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-15645345

--
Jerry Friedman

[bil...@shaw.ca]

What's to prove? He was a social commentator and spinner of tales. If he claims
the impossible, of course he was telling the truth.

>
> Unless, that is, I don't remember accurately his claim.

Yes, there is that.

bill

[bil...@shaw.ca]

Same here. I was born two years after the war ended, in a country
with a shattered economy and bombed-out cities. Not all the cities,
but some. Everyone I knew had family members who died in the war,
as did I. Once my parents considered their children to be old enough,
they willingly talked about their experiences in the war years. They were
not as horrible as the ones of people whose cities were fought over.
Still, my mother and all of her siblings -- except for the one who died
during the war -- eventually emigrated to Canada. It was a war that cast
long and wide shadows.

bill

[charles]

In article <sitg3d$q9f$1...@dont-email.me>,

Anders D. Nygaard <news2...@gmail.com> wrote:

A few years ago we visited Dresden while on a cruise down the Elbe. We
visited a museum of transport. In the aviation section, there we
photographs of the damage done to the city and also photos of London,
Coventry and another British city. A brave curator.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[charles]

In article <irf1o5...@mid.individual.net>,

The last time we watched "Whisky Galore" was just after we'd returned from
a holiday on the island of Barra. It was fun spotting the locations used
for the film.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

In 1989, just after the wall came down, we had a couple of hours to
kill in Dresden after arriving by train and waiting for the bus to take
us to a meeting in Holzhau (close to the Czech border). I thought it
was the most depressing place I had ever seen -- not primarily the
blackened building his by bombing, but the typical East German
development all around.

> We
> visited a museum of transport. In the aviation section, there we
> photographs of the damage done to the city and also photos of London,
> Coventry and another British city. A brave curator.


--

Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Distorting, as usual. I quoted the _actual_ "actual wording" myself.
Directly above, in fact.

> Context is what surrounds the part in question, and those three words
> can be surrounded by context from a number of different perspectives.
>
> I remember the war when the Germans were shooting at me.
>
> I remember the war when nylons weren't available.
>
> What makes the first above normal context but the second not?

Paul provided the answer just above. "Wartime" is not "war."

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

It seems that to me, the normal interpretation of "war" in "I remember
the war" is your "wartime". If the strong separation of the two
experiences ever made sense, it didn't any more in the 20th century.

I wonder if you'll accept me saying "I remember the pandemic" in the
future, if I never had COVID myself nor took care of anyone who did.

[Peter T. Daniels]

You are affected by it, perhaps profoundly. It isn't over.

[Snidely]

Peter T. Daniels suggested that ...

But how is that different from Tony and Charles being affected by WWII?
It wasn't over for them for a period longer than we've been dealing
with COVID.

/dps

--
"I am not given to exaggeration, and when I say a thing I mean it"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

[Peter Moylan]

I was more profoundly affected by the Vietnam war, even though in the
end my conscription didn't happen.

[Stoat]

Stephen Fry also claims to remember his birth.
He says that the first thing he did was to look back at his mother and
decide never to go up one of those again.

--brian


--
Wellington
New Zealand

[charles]

In article <sj0fpb$s8d$1...@dont-email.me>,

I was certainly affected by WW2: One uncle never really recoverd from being
a PoW in Singapore and his brother had what is now known as PTSD after the
ship he was in was torpedoed. And my elder daughter's mother in law was
brought up in a Japanese concentration camp.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I don't know where charles was (evacuated to North Wales, perhaps,
as in the Narnia books?), but Tony was safely ensconced in the
domestic bliss of Indianapolis. My ancestors in NYC came closer
to having memories. There were allegedly U-boats lurking just offshore
and the city was blacked out for 3 1/2 years. (It wasn't attacked.)

Every one of us, everywhere, is in danger of acquiring the virus, even
if the vaccines protect us from serious symptoms.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I wonder whether one can get PTSD from serious anxiety.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 3:49:04 AM UTC-4, charles wrote:
> In article <sj0fpb$s8d$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> > On 29/09/21 01:39, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, September 28, 2021 at 10:13:37 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> > >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > >>> On Monday, September 27, 2021 at 6:41:29 PM UTC-4, Tony Cooper
> > >>> wrote:

> > >>>> I remember the war when the Germans were shooting at me. I
> > >>>> remember the war when nylons weren't available. What makes the
> > >>>> first above normal context but the second not?
> > >>> Paul provided the answer just above. "Wartime" is not "war."
> > >> It seems that to me, the normal interpretation of "war" in "I
> > >> remember the war" is your "wartime". If the strong separation of
> > >> the two experiences ever made sense, it didn't any more in the 20th
> > >> century.
> > >> I wonder if you'll accept me saying "I remember the pandemic" in
> > >> the future, if I never had COVID myself nor took care of anyone who
> > >> did.
> > > You are affected by it, perhaps profoundly. It isn't over.

"experiencing it" would have been better.

> > I was more profoundly affected by the Vietnam war, even though in the
> > end my conscription didn't happen.
>
> I was certainly affected by WW2: One uncle never really recoverd from being
> a PoW in Singapore and his brother had what is now known as PTSD after the
> ship he was in was torpedoed. And my elder daughter's mother in law was
> brought up in a Japanese concentration camp.

But that's not the question at hand. (So were we all, even though
I wasn't born until the Korean one was well under way.) The War
itself isn't "within (your) living memory."

[charles]

In article <86e5f567-cfb5-41a2...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 28, 2021 at 6:45:03 PM UTC-4, Snidely wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels suggested that ...
> > > On Tuesday, September 28, 2021 at 10:13:37 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> > >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > >>> On Monday, September 27, 2021 at 6:41:29 PM UTC-4, Tony Cooper
> > >>> wrote:
>
> > >>>> I remember the war when the Germans were shooting at me. I
> > >>>> remember the war when nylons weren't available. What makes the
> > >>>> first above normal context but the second not?
> > >>> Paul provided the answer just above. "Wartime" is not "war."
> > >> It seems that to me, the normal interpretation of "war" in "I
> > >> remember the war" is your "wartime". If the strong separation of
> > >> the two experiences ever made sense, it didn't any more in the 20th
> > >> century. I wonder if you'll accept me saying "I remember the
> > >> pandemic" in the future, if I never had COVID myself nor took care
> > >> of anyone who did.
> > > You are affected by it, perhaps profoundly. It isn't over.
> >
> > But how is that different from Tony and Charles being affected by WWII?
> > It wasn't over for them for a period longer than we've been dealing
> > with COVID.

> I don't know where charles was (evacuated to North Wales, perhaps, as in
> the Narnia books?),

No, I was in Scotland - yes to "evacuated". My mother took me out of the
city of Edinburgh to the countyside some 50 miles north. My memory of the
air-raid shelter was back in Edinburgh - possibly because my father was on
leave.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I had my first flight, and first visit to Scotland, in 1943, in utero,
about three weeks before I was born. I don't remember either of those
stepping stones in my life. It was quite a few years before I repeated
either of them (about 1959 for Scotland; about 1961 for flying).

[Sam Plusnet]

On 29/09/2021 14:48, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> But that's not the question at hand. (So were we all, even though
> I wasn't born until the Korean one was well under way.) The War
> itself isn't "within (your) living memory."

We seem to be back in "what does this word mean?" territory.

PTD's meaning of "war" seems tightly focused on combat & matters
immediately adjacent.
Many here take a broader meaning - especially when talking of a "World War".

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 1:57:19 PM UTC-4, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 29/09/2021 14:48, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > But that's not the question at hand. (So were we all, even though
> > I wasn't born until the Korean one was well under way.) The War
> > itself isn't "within (your) living memory."

"So" there references "affected by WWII." Why do people continually
delete what makes it apparent what is being talked about?

> We seem to be back in "what does this word mean?" territory.

When did we ever leave it?

> PTD's meaning of "war" seems tightly focused on combat & matters
> immediately adjacent.

Yes.

> Many here take a broader meaning - especially when talking of a "World War".

We had a thing called "the Home Front." It meant "going without, so that
Our Boys overseas could have meat and butter and bullets and such."

[Jerry Friedman]

And for quite a few people, going without one or more of Our Boys,
temporarily or permanently.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Stoat]

I was born in London at the beginning of the WW2. My early years were
marked by frequent bombing raids. Our house suffered some damage.
I remember some of this, so I do remember the war.
The idea that one has to be in the armed forces to "remember the war" is
quite wrong, but understandable when expressed by Americans. For them,
"war" meant sending young men overseas, while civilians remained safely
at home.
It was very different in Europe. Far more civilians than military were
killed in the wars of the 20th century. The war came to us, we did not
need to go to it.

[Anton Shepelev]

occam:

> I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'.
> The standard definition of this appears to be:
>
> "If something has happened within living memory, it can be
> remembered by some people who are still alive."
>
> However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) be-
> cause someone who remembered it told them about it, and so
> on. Does it count?
>
> If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing
> WWII to 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem
> right.
>
> If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the
> universe?

To me, the meaning of WLM does not boil down to so simple a
dichotomy. Rather, it means that memory of the event,
whether direct or vicarious, is perceived very personally
and emotionally, that it is part of a people's mentality and
identity, that they will not have jokes about it, nor make
it a means of making money or petty political propaganda.
WLM is not acquired from historical research (although it
help to conserve it), but descends down generations like a
sacred family heirloom, only on the scale of an entire peo-
ple. "Remember the war" said the famous admiral Makarov
(lest it fade out of living memory).

Alas, but WWII indeed is fading from the living memory of
Russians -- the people that bare the brunt of it, inspite of
the weak, if not half-hearted and two-minded, efforts of the
government, whose ministry of culture manages to sponsor
artists that negate, slander, or denigrate the role of
Joseph Stalin, Soviet Union, and particularly the Russian
people, in defeating the brown plague in an enormous effort
that cost of 27 million lives and left the country emaciated
like none other of the victorious states. The recent
changes to our Consitution, however, include a clause about
the sacred memory of WWII.

The majority of Soviet writers, poets, and actors of the
1940s served on the front. Many had awards for deeds of mar-
tial courage. The memory of WWII lived though their art,
too. Compare the great Soviet movie "Skylark" and a filthy
travesty of it -- impudently called a remake -- named "T-34"
and shot in modern Russia according the worst (and most lu-
crative) canons of Hollywood, with the mandatory sex scene
(in the conentration camp!) and the mandatory happy end:

Skylark: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0314947/
T-34 : https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8820590/

It is one thing to screen the dankest Hollywood block-
busters, and quite another consiously to imitate them in our
own decorations, when it is such popular vehicles as books
and movies that are able to keeps living memory, eradiate it
(as in Men in black), or supplant with a pseudomemory (as in
Total Recall).

Fear ye not that teenages that watch the Miserables TV se-
ries will think that a black man could be chief of Police in
19-th century France? And why the asymmetric inclusive-
ness -- where are white actors playing the iconic heroes of
the black people: Ray Charles, uncle Tom, Garrett Morgan?

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]

[Tony Cooper]

You evidently have some definition in mind of the word "affected" than
I do. When something affects you, it has some effect on your life.
WWII had some effect on my life. Granted, the effect was not because
bullets or bombs were directed in my direction, but the war did affect
me.

You also have some definition in mind of the meaning of "domestic
bliss" that is different than mine. That is generally a reference to
being happily married (unless delivered sarcastically), and that was
certainly not part of my life then.

Also, I was not ensconsed in Indianapolis during entire war. During
part of the war years we lived in Coral Gables FL. There was U-boat
activity off the coasts of Florida, but none attacked Coral Gables.

https://www.visitflorida.com/travel-ideas/articles/arts-history-florida-world-war-ii-u-boat/

--

Tony Cooper Orlando Florida

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 4:22:55 PM UTC-6, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> occam:
>
> > I am puzzling over the expression 'within living memory'.
> > The standard definition of this appears to be:
> >
> > "If something has happened within living memory, it can be
> > remembered by some people who are still alive."
> >
> > However, the Irish remember the Potato Famine (c.1850) be-
> > cause someone who remembered it told them about it, and so
> > on. Does it count?
> >
> > If 'no', we are getting perilously close to dismissing
> > WWII to 'not-within-living-memory', which does not seem
> > right.
> >
> > If 'yes' is the timescale of WLM ever expanding, like the
> > universe?
>
> To me, the meaning of WLM does not boil down to so simple a
> dichotomy. Rather, it means that memory of the event,
> whether direct or vicarious, is perceived very personally
> and emotionally, that it is part of a people's mentality and
> identity, that they will not have jokes about it, nor make
> it a means of making money or petty political propaganda.

If something is perceived very personally and emotionally,
people probably will make jokes about it.

> WLM is not acquired from historical research (although it
> help to conserve it), but descends down generations like a
> sacred family heirloom, only on the scale of an entire peo-
> ple. "Remember the war" said the famous admiral Makarov
> (lest it fade out of living memory).

...

> It is one thing to screen the dankest Hollywood block-
> busters, and quite another consiously to imitate them in our
> own decorations, when it is such popular vehicles as books
> and movies that are able to keeps living memory, eradiate it
> (as in Men in black), or supplant with a pseudomemory (as in
> Total Recall).
>
> Fear ye not that teenages that watch the Miserables TV se-
> ries will think that a black man could be chief of Police in
> 19-th century France?

"Fear ye not" isn't a good way to be taken seriously.

> And why the asymmetric inclusive-
> ness -- where are white actors playing the iconic heroes of
> the black people: Ray Charles, uncle Tom, Garrett Morgan?

So that black actors will have the same chance to get jobs as white
actors. Hollywood has finally achieved representation of minorities in
its casts (but not among directors or writers) around that of the
American population

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/2021-hollywood-diversity-report

but that probably can't be managed if movies with historical settings
have all the white characters played by white people. I agree
that it can seem incongruous and probably misleads some people.

Uncle Tom may be an icon, but not of heroism.

--
Jerry Friedman