"Keen to" vs "keen on"

[Dingbat]

Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
was always keen to cultivate.
https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/

I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Either would be fairly unusual in AmE. We have words like "eager."

Did you overlook "macher"?

[S K]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:42:45 AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:

OPHELIA You are keen, my lord, you are keen.

HAMLET It would cost you a groaning to take off mine
edge

[spains...@gmail.com]

"machers " is a typo I cannot decipher.

"keen to cultivate" and "keen on cultivating" are both normal BrE.

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?

I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
it up from a British show.

> Did you overlook "macher"?

I bet some people in Israel know Yiddish.

--
- There's someone here wanting to audition. - OK, Who is he?
- Well, it's not exactly a he. - OK, Who is she?
- Well, it's not exactly a she. ... it's sort of a they.
- You mean there's more than one? - Not really.
- Good grief, it's a triple-header.
-> <https://muppet.fandom.com/wiki/Tom,_Dick,_and_Harry>

[musika]

It is not a typo

>
> "keen to cultivate" and "keen on cultivating" are both normal BrE.
>

--
Ray
UK

[Jerry Friedman]

Yiddish for important people, "movers and shakers".

> "keen to cultivate" and "keen on cultivating" are both normal BrE.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
<lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>* Peter T. Daniels:
>
>> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:42:45 AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:
>>
>>> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
>>> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
>>> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
>>> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
>>> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
>>> was always keen to cultivate.
>>> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
>>>
>>> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
>>> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?
>>
>> Either would be fairly unusual in AmE. We have words like "eager."
>
>Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?

Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50 set,
but it would pass without notice to anyone.

One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.

>
>I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
>(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
>it up from a British show.
>
>> Did you overlook "macher"?

Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.

>I bet some people in Israel know Yiddish.

--

Tony Cooper Orlando Florida

[Lewis]

In message <188qol4e...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:

>> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:42:45 AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:
>>
>>> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
>>> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
>>> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
>>> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
>>> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
>>> was always keen to cultivate.
>>> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
>>>
>>> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
>>> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?
>>
>> Either would be fairly unusual in AmE. We have words like "eager."

> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?

Somewhat so, yes. Less so in the past, but I can't recall when I heard a
real person say it. That said, "keen to <verb>" was not, as far as I
ever noticed, considered incorrect. It was certainly not unusual.

But I do think of it as a word that peaked in the 1950s.

--
And what group was that, Gail? The Menstrual Cycles.

[Jerry Friedman]

In my childhood in the '60s, some boys used "Keen!" for strong approval.
As the '60s turned into the '70s and my cohort got more familiar with
irony, it often became ironic, "peachy-keen" and "neat-o keen" even more
so. "Keen" meaning "enthusiastic" was more unusual, as I recall.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 2:09:34 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> >* Peter T. Daniels:
> >> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:42:45 AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:

> >>> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
> >>> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
> >>> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
> >>> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
> >>> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
> >>> was always keen to cultivate.
> >>> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
> >>> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
> >>> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?
> >> Either would be fairly unusual in AmE. We have words like "eager."
> >Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>
> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50 set,
> but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>
> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.

Hw old _are_ you? It feels like Andy Hardy, who is earlier than even you.

> >I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
> >(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
> >it up from a British show.

Quite likely.

> >> Did you overlook "macher"?
>
> Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
> Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.

Maybe among those unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage. "Big
macher" would be redundant -- see the definition provided by Jerry.

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 12:48:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 2:09:34 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
>> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>> >* Peter T. Daniels:
>> >> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:42:45 AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:
>
>> >>> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
>> >>> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
>> >>> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
>> >>> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
>> >>> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
>> >>> was always keen to cultivate.
>> >>> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
>> >>> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
>> >>> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?
>> >> Either would be fairly unusual in AmE. We have words like "eager."
>> >Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>>
>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50 set,
>> but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>>
>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>
>Hw old _are_ you? It feels like Andy Hardy, who is earlier than even you.

The word is curent enough that your go-to source for all things
relevant - The Big Bang Theory - used it as a title of an episode:

https://www.facebook.com/E4/videos/the-big-bang-theory-when-a-girl-is-too-keen/10156425309088953/

Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/86fd1a17-749b-4443-9fca-7c52377ec967

>
>> >I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
>> >(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
>> >it up from a British show.
>
>Quite likely.
>
>> >> Did you overlook "macher"?
>>
>> Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
>> Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.
>
>Maybe among those unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage. "Big
>macher" would be redundant -- see the definition provided by Jerry.

Right. People unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage like the _Jewish
English Lexicon_.

https://jel.jewish-languages.org/words/325

"EXAMPLE SENTENCE

He's a big macher in Hollywood; everyone wants to meet with him."

Leo Rosten, who seems to be familiar with Jewish-American usage:

https://religion.fandom.com/wiki/Yinglish

"Now that Golde is the president, she acts like such a big macher."

Redundancy in terms is not uncommon, you big fat liar.

[Peter T. Daniels]

That is not the title of an episode. TBBT episodes are in the form
"The-Modifier-Abstract Noun."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Big_Bang_Theory_episodes

The word "keen" does not occur on that page (are you aware
that you can search for a word on a Wikipedia page by typing
Ctrl-F and typing the search term in the box that appears?).

> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:

You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.

> https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/86fd1a17-749b-4443-9fca-7c52377ec967
>
> >> >I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
> >> >(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
> >> >it up from a British show.
> >Quite likely.
> >> >> Did you overlook "macher"?
> >> Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
> >> Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.
> >Maybe among those unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage. "Big
> >macher" would be redundant -- see the definition provided by Jerry.
>
> Right. People unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage like the _Jewish
> English Lexicon_.

Never heard of it. An offshoot of Urban Dictionary, and as reliable?

> https://jel.jewish-languages.org/words/325
>
> "EXAMPLE SENTENCE
>
> He's a big macher in Hollywood; everyone wants to meet with him."
>
> Leo Rosten, who seems to be familiar with Jewish-American usage:
>
> https://religion.fandom.com/wiki/Yinglish

Wow, you''ll copy-paste _anything_ that you feel you can start a fight
with. Too much trouble to actually find Rosten saying something
about it?

> "Now that Golde is the president, she acts like such a big macher."
>
> Redundancy in terms is not uncommon, you big fat liar.

Yup, you really do have problems with English.

I'll go back to ignoring your windup attempts.

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 14:11:47 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

But it does appear on the page I linked to.

>> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:
>
>You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.

Does he say the word or not?

>
>> https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/86fd1a17-749b-4443-9fca-7c52377ec967
>>
>> >> >I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
>> >> >(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
>> >> >it up from a British show.
>> >Quite likely.
>> >> >> Did you overlook "macher"?
>> >> Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
>> >> Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.
>> >Maybe among those unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage. "Big
>> >macher" would be redundant -- see the definition provided by Jerry.
>>
>> Right. People unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage like the _Jewish
>> English Lexicon_.
>
>Never heard of it. An offshoot of Urban Dictionary, and as reliable?
>
>> https://jel.jewish-languages.org/words/325

No, it is not an offshoot of the Urban Dictionary. What is says is
that "Like other collaborative sites, such as Wikipedia and Urban
Dictionary, the Jewish English Lexicon is made possible by visitor
participation. Please take a few minutes to add a word or two."

You may have to look up "collaborative" to understand.

As for reliability, you could look at the "About Us" page:

JEL was started in 2007 as a class project in Sarah Bunin Benors
course "American Jewish Language and Identity in Historical Context"
at Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion in Los Angeles.
Students were asked to contribute words that they heard from their
friends or read online or in print, as well as definitions, example
sentences, and source languages. Many of the entries already appeared
in one or more of the published Jewish English Dictionaries, but many
appear here for the first time, thanks to the students and visitors
like you'.

>>
>> "EXAMPLE SENTENCE
>>
>> He's a big macher in Hollywood; everyone wants to meet with him."
>>
>> Leo Rosten, who seems to be familiar with Jewish-American usage:
>>
>> https://religion.fandom.com/wiki/Yinglish
>
>Wow, you''ll copy-paste _anything_ that you feel you can start a fight
>with. Too much trouble to actually find Rosten saying something
>about it?
>
>> "Now that Golde is the president, she acts like such a big macher."
>>
>> Redundancy in terms is not uncommon, you big fat liar.
>
>Yup, you really do have problems with English.
>
>I'll go back to ignoring your windup attempts.

Good move. You get shot down every time you attempt to defend your
clangers.

[Peter Moylan]

On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>
> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>
> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.

Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
Mustard sold in other countries?

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

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:09:52 +1100, Peter Moylan
<pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
>> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>>
>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
>> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>>
>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>
>Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
>Mustard sold in other countries?

I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if you
return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.

I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's - but have
never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does with mustard
powder.

Drifting off to something complely unrelated to the adjective "keen",
the word brings "Mr Keen, Tracer of Lost Persons" to mind. That was a
radio show between 1937 and 1955.

[Quinn C]

* Peter Moylan:

> On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
>> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>>
>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
>> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>>
>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>
> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
> Mustard sold in other countries?

According to Wikipedia, it only became a wholly Australian brand in
1998, whereas Keen's curry actually originates from Australia, via a
different family member.

The brand name Keen is also used in Canada. In the UK, mustard from the
same source is sold as Colman, and in the US, French's.

--
Novels and romances ... when habitually indulged in, exert a
disastrous influence on the nervous system, sufficient to explain
that frequency of hysteria and nervous disease which we find
among the highest classes. -- E.J. Tilt

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

I recall with fondness the Commander Keen games from DOS days. Someone else is (/was) keener:

https://www.commanderkeenfans.com/

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[charles]

In article <k6kssglqa145f1178...@4ax.com>,

Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:09:52 +1100, Peter Moylan
> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> >On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> >> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> >
> >>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
> >>
> >> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
> >> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
> >>
> >> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
> >
> >Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
> >Mustard sold in other countries?

> I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if you
> return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.

> I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's - but have
> never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does with mustard
> powder.

Assuming that you really don't know, you add water to make a paste -
English Mustard - or add vinergar to make an english version of French
Mustard. You always make more than you need, it used to be said that
Coleman's made their money from the mustard you left on theside of your
plate.

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

[Paul Wolff]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021, at 19:49:35, Tony Cooper posted:

>On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:09:52 +1100, Peter Moylan

>>On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
>>

>>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>>>
>>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
>>> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>>>
>>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>>
>>Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
>>Mustard sold in other countries?
>
>I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if you
>return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.
>
>I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's - but have
>never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does with mustard
>powder.
>
>Drifting off to something complely unrelated to the adjective "keen",
>the word brings "Mr Keen, Tracer of Lost Persons" to mind. That was a
>radio show between 1937 and 1955.
>

Now I can't decide whether he was a pun on mistaken. Or on the abducted
Miss Taken.
--
Paul

[Tony Cooper]

No, I really didn't know. I thought maybe it's added in cooking as a
spice.

[Lewis]

In message <eddluy9liz1w$.d...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> * Peter Moylan:

>> On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
>>> <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>
>>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
>>>
>>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
>>> set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
>>>
>>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>>
>> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
>> Mustard sold in other countries?

> According to Wikipedia, it only became a wholly Australian brand in
> 1998, whereas Keen's curry actually originates from Australia, via a
> different family member.

Keen as mustard is simply an old-fashioned (mostly British) idiom. It
may have been adopted/exploited by a specific brand in Australia, but
the phrase predates Australia's colonization.

> The brand name Keen is also used in Canada. In the UK, mustard from the
> same source is sold as Colman, and in the US, French's.

Mustard as a spice in the US is Coleman's, we have some in our cupboard
right now.`

--
A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand.

[Lewis]

It is added in cooking as a spice. Of course, that doesn't prevent
someone from making a slurry or paste n their own, though I don't recall
ever doing that myself.

--
Everybody wants a rock to wrap a piece of string around

[charles]

In article <f70usg5djd7fcpb3o...@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper

you could do that, too.

[Janet]

In article <sqlhog$onp$2...@dont-email.me>, pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid
says...

>
> On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> > <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
> >> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
> >
> > Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
> > set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
> >
> > One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>
> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
> Mustard sold in other countries?

Never heard of it :-)

Janet.

[Peter T. Daniels]

So what? It also appears on this page, and this page is not the
title of a YBBT episode either.

> >> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:
> >
> >You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.
>
> Does he say the word or not?

Is he drunk-out-of-character or not?

If you knew anything at all about the series or the character, you
would know that on occasions like that he is channeling his only
reference fr the world outside CalTech (and railfasns), his childhood
in East Texas and various tropes he learned from oldies TV in those days.

One can't say much about it from a 4-second clip.

> >> https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/86fd1a17-749b-4443-9fca-7c52377ec967
> >> >> >I do use it occasionally, mostly in the form "I'm not so keen on ..."
> >> >> >(i.e., meaning "I'm not a fan of ...") but it's always possible I picked
> >> >> >it up from a British show.
> >> >Quite likely.
> >> >> >> Did you overlook "macher"?
> >> >> Not unusual in the US in something written by or about someone Jewish.
> >> >> Often seen/hear combine with "Big" to mean someone important.
> >> >Maybe among those unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage. "Big
> >> >macher" would be redundant -- see the definition provided by Jerry.
> >> Right. People unfamiliar with Jewish-American usage like the _Jewish
> >> English Lexicon_.
> >Never heard of it. An offshoot of Urban Dictionary, and as reliable?
> >> https://jel.jewish-languages.org/words/325
>
> No, it is not an offshoot of the Urban Dictionary. What is says is
> that "Like other collaborative sites, such as Wikipedia and Urban
> Dictionary, the Jewish English Lexicon is made possible by visitor
> participation. Please take a few minutes to add a word or two."
>
> You may have to look up "collaborative" to understand.

You are so wedded to your internets, and attempting to start fights
by attempting to "wind up" certain people, that you cannot understand
that not everything someone on one of those "collaborative" sites puts
up is reliable.

Do you realize that your statement actually confirmed my hunch about
the site?

> As for reliability, you could look at the "About Us" page:
>
> JEL was started in 2007 as a class project in Sarah Bunin Benors
> course "American Jewish Language and Identity in Historical Context"
> at Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion in Los Angeles.

Yes, I know her.

> Students were asked to contribute words that they heard from their
> friends or read online or in print, as well as definitions, example
> sentences, and source languages. Many of the entries already appeared
> in one or more of the published Jewish English Dictionaries, but many
> appear here for the first time, thanks to the students and visitors
> like you'.

In other words, there is no (longer any) control over what appears there.

> >> "EXAMPLE SENTENCE
> >> He's a big macher in Hollywood; everyone wants to meet with him."
> >> Leo Rosten, who seems to be familiar with Jewish-American usage:
> >> https://religion.fandom.com/wiki/Yinglish
> >Wow, you''ll copy-paste _anything_ that you feel you can start a fight
> >with. Too much trouble to actually find Rosten saying something
> >about it?
> >> "Now that Golde is the president, she acts like such a big macher."
> >> Redundancy in terms is not uncommon, you big fat liar.
> >Yup, you really do have problems with English.
> >I'll go back to ignoring your windup attempts.
>
> Good move. You get shot down every time you attempt to defend your
> clangers.

You are about the most self-delusional poster ever to show up here.

[CDB]

On 12/30/2021 2:09 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels:

I was thinking "mach[onn]er le mors". Relevant to "keen", anyway.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:09:57 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> > <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

> >> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
> > Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
> > set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
> > One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
>
> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
> Mustard sold in other countries?

That seems to be playing on the 'sharp' sense, as in "the knife has a keen edge"?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Or you use it in recipes like any other spice.

Remember, TC is utterly hopeless in any kitchen.

Curiously, French's Yellow Mustard here is considered a sort f "starter mustard"
-- what you put a tin y dab of on a hot dog for a youngster. It has little flavor or
bite. More recently, French's has introduced brown mustards to compete with
Gulden's and other brands. The profile of mustard in general must have been
raised by the very long running Grey Poupon ad campaign.

[CDB]

On 12/30/2021 7:49 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>> Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?

>>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the
>>> over-50 set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.

>>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.

>> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is
>> Keen's Mustard sold in other countries?

Keen's prepared English mustard is on store shelves here. A small
bottle goes a long way.

> I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if you
> return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.

> I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's - but
> have never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does with mustard
> powder.

My mother used to make mustard plasters for our chests when we had
colds. No doubt she had learned it from her mother, who hailed from the
Nineteenth Century.

[CDB]

On 12/31/2021 4:43 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>> Tony Cooper wrote:

>>>> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>>>>> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?

>>>> Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the
>>>> over-50 set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.

>>>> One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.

>>> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is
>>> Keen's Mustard sold in other countries?

>> I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if you
>> return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.

>> I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's - but
>> have never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does with
>> mustard powder.

>> Drifting off to something complely unrelated to the adjective
>> "keen", the word brings "Mr Keen, Tracer of Lost Persons" to mind.
>> That was a radio show between 1937 and 1955.

> I recall with fondness the Commander Keen games from DOS days.
> Someone else is (/was) keener:

> https://www.commanderkeenfans.com/

You can tell some keeners by their caribou hats.

https://youtu.be/_WpTYe6V9sk?t=62

Kids will watch anything.

[Quinn C]

* Jerry Friedman:

As I said, I use it mostly in the negative, and that contains a tinge of
irony - or is it understatement? "I'm not keen on it" = "I really don't
like it", similar to "I'm not wild about it", or like, as I increasingly
hear, "I'm not mad about it" meaning "I actually quite like that."

I just came across this usage in a British show and recognized it as
foreign:

- Mind if I sneak in the back? I've got half an hour
before I need to pick Betty up.

- I wouldn't recommend it, John. Lady Empson's not very keen
on outsiders.

- Or anyone else, for that matter.

Then there's the really different meaning as in "he's a keen observer".
Is that old-fashioned, too? That specific combination peaked around
1900, according to Google ngrams.

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

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 06:20:12 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:


Trimming this down to the essentials:

>> >> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:
>> >
>> >You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.
>

>If you knew anything at all about the series or the character, you
>would know that on occasions like that he is channeling his only
>reference fr the world outside CalTech (and railfasns), his childhood
>in East Texas and various tropes he learned from oldies TV in those days.
>

>You are so wedded to your internets, and attempting to start fights
>by attempting to "wind up" certain people, that you cannot understand
>that not everything someone on one of those "collaborative" sites puts
>up is reliable.
>

The "internets" [SIC] provide factual information and examples. "The
Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

You live in a world where what you have not personally seen, or do not
personally use, must not be "reliable". And, a world where a
fictional character has a real backstory that must be understood to
"know" the created character.

Young children sooner or later learn that "Big Bird" or the "Cookie
Monster" are not real beings. Yet, you still think that "Hyacinth
Bucket" is a reliable source for what the British do and say, and that
your knowledge of "Sheldon"'s "backstory" has something to do with
whether or not "keen" would be in his vocabulary.

You reject collaborative sources as reliable, but would instantly
accept that "Big Macher" is an established usage if the fictional
Jewish aerospace engineer "Howard Wolowitz" would utter the phrase.

Rey was often crude in his comments, but his allusion to your "well
frog" mentaltity was brilliantly spot-on.

[charles]

In article <9o4usgdpv757ajth5...@4ax.com>,

Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 06:20:12 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:


> Trimming this down to the essentials:


> >> >> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:
> >> >
> >> >You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.
> >
> >If you knew anything at all about the series or the character, you
> >would know that on occasions like that he is channeling his only
> >reference fr the world outside CalTech (and railfasns), his childhood
> >in East Texas and various tropes he learned from oldies TV in those days.
> >

> >You are so wedded to your internets, and attempting to start fights
> >by attempting to "wind up" certain people, that you cannot understand
> >that not everything someone on one of those "collaborative" sites puts
> >up is reliable.
> >

> The "internets" [SIC] provide factual information and examples. "The
> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

Must be a different "big bang",> The one I know about was proposed by a
group of astronomers; prominent was Sir Martin Ryle, English Astronomer
Royal and Nobel Laureate.

[Quinn C]

* Tony Cooper:

> "The
> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?

--
Certain writers assert very decidedly that no pronouns are
needed beyond those we already possess, but this is simply a
dogmatic opinion, unsupported by the facts.
-- Findlay (OH) Jeffersonian (1875)

[Jerry Friedman]

"Keen-eyed" seems to be making a comeback there. I wouldn't expect
"keen observer" in casual conversation, but it's not as obsolete as
obsolete slang like "Keen!"

--
Jerry Friedman

[Lewis]

In message <wvrf3zba...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> * Tony Cooper:

>> "The
>> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
>> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
> shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?

I remember him from The Muppets, Hidden Figures, and The Big Year.

I would not, however, call him a 'one trick pony' but then again, I
rarely agree with Quinn.

--
He was Igor, son of Igor, nephew of several Igors, brother of Igors
and cousin of more Igors than he could remember without checking
up in his diary. Igors did not change a winning formula.
{Footnote: Especially if it was green, and bubbled.}

[Tony Cooper]

I agree, but all it takes in the US for a couple of TikTokkers to post
something saying "Keen!" and it will be ubiquitous.

The problem is that most of us in this group will not notice that it's
become ubiquitous until it becomes passé. Us old farts aren't exposed
to the current language of the youth.

I'm a bit more exposed because I talk to my teen-age grandsons several
times a week and can pick up (!) on the current youth jargon. I'm
even exposed by talking to my six year-old grandson because he picks
up things from his older brothers.

TikTok, Instagram, and other online apps are where one is most likely
to know about current language usages.

As a test of the above hypothesis, how many here understand the impact
of "Influencers" or would know one from Adam's off ox. The corporate
world is aware of them. They are paying big bucks to teenyboppers to
mention their product.

Today, that's a career that can be more renumerative than a law degree
from Georgetown, Harvard, or Yale. Those schools should consider
offering an MBA-type program in Influencing.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:32:21 -0500, Quinn C
<lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>* Tony Cooper:
>
>> "The
>> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
>> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>
>TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
>Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
>shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?

I saw him in "Hidden Figures" and "Hollywood". Particularly in
"Hollywood" (where his character was a Hollywood agent) he was Sheldon
Cooper in a different occupation.

While it is not an important point in this discussion, the actors in
TBBT are not paid the same. Parsons at $1.2 million, Galecki at $1
million, Cuoco at $850,000, and Nayyar and Helberg at $800,000.
All "per episode".

You may be thinking of "Friends". The six primary characters were all
paid the same in the begining of the run and after the negotiations
led by Lisa Kudrow.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 10:45:41 AM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 06:20:12 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Trimming this down to the essentials:

Omitting, though, the crucial point that anyone with the sense
God gave a goose could see, in that 4-second scene the character
was _drunk_.

> >> >> Even your idol Sheldon Cooper knows the word:
> >> >You really do know nothing about the series or its characters.
> >If you knew anything at all about the series or the character, you
> >would know that on occasions like that he is channeling his only

> >reference for the world outside CalTech (and railfans), his childhood

> >in East Texas and various tropes he learned from oldies TV in those days.
> >
> >You are so wedded to your internets, and attempting to start fights
> >by attempting to "wind up" certain people, that you cannot understand
> >that not everything someone on one of those "collaborative" sites puts
> >up is reliable.
>
> The "internets" [SIC] provide factual information and examples. "The

Jesus H. Fucking Christ. How naive can you be?

Also, you never heard of Alaska senator Ted Stevens, who made
weird statements about "the internets," such that the expression
became a meme to use about clueless surfers like you, who believe
everything you read there?

> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

What do you have against Johnny Galecki? Never in 12 seasons was
he displaced from top billing in the credits.

> You live in a world where what you have not personally seen, or do not
> personally use, must not be "reliable". And, a world where a
> fictional character has a real backstory that must be understood to
> "know" the created character.

Uh, no. Fictional characters would have fictional backstories, if backstories
were called for, but here no backstory is involved.

> Young children sooner or later learn that "Big Bird" or the "Cookie
> Monster" are not real beings. Yet, you still think that "Hyacinth
> Bucket" is a reliable source for what the British do and say, and that

Is it, then, your contention that her writers did not accurately represent
the various dialects of the various classes of characters on the show?

> your knowledge of "Sheldon"'s "backstory" has something to do with
> whether or not "keen" would be in his vocabulary.

Now you're reifying your fantasy -- that "backstory" (YOUR word) is
somehow involved -- into yet another baseless fight attempt.

> You reject collaborative sources as reliable, but would instantly

No, I reject them as unreliable. Do you _ever_ read what you write?

> accept that "Big Macher" is an established usage if the fictional
> Jewish aerospace engineer "Howard Wolowitz" would utter the phrase.

Why do you think he would? His writers, unlike you, know the language
he speaks. (Yinglish rarely if ever figures in it.)

> Rey was often crude in his comments, but his allusion to your "well
> frog" mentaltity was brilliantly spot-on.

You mean, it appealed to your shared level of bigotry?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 11:32:28 AM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Tony Cooper:

> > "The
> > Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
> > group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>
> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
> shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?

He did three Broadway plays (during summer hiatuses) -- two of them
before coming out as gay: The Normal Heart (one of the classic AIDS
plays) and Harvey (James Stewart was in the movie). In both, he was
essentially doing Sheldon Cooper, and on Letterman he danced all
around the "gay thing." Then he was in the 50th-anniversary production
of The Boys in the Band. (I did download a video version of the play but
never got around to watching it.) For that one, he told Letterman "I'm
not a gay actor, I'm an actor who happens to be gay.,"

One of the many problems with *Yong Sheldon* is that young Iain
Armitage in no way resembles Jim Parsons and young Sheldon
rarely prefigures Sheldon Cooper.

[bil...@shaw.ca]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:09:57 PM UTC-8, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 31/12/21 06:09, Tony Cooper wrote:

> > On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 13:05:02 -0500, Quinn C
> > <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
> >> Is "keen" generally unusual in AmE?
> >

> > Not really. You would probably hear/see it more from the over-50
> > set, but it would pass without notice to anyone.
> >
> > One is "keen on" something or "keen to" do something.
> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as mustard". Is Keen's
> Mustard sold in other countries?

It is sold in Canada, and so we need not keen over its absence.

bill

[bil...@shaw.ca]

I have used it in cooking, although rarely. I keep at least six to eight mustards
in the fridge at a given time, including Keen's or Coleman's -- Keen's at the
moment -- and while I also keep a tin of powdered mustard around for
emergencies, they seldom arise.

bill

[bil...@shaw.ca]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:42:45 AM UTC-8, Dingbat wrote:
> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
> was always keen to cultivate.
> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
>
> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?

When it comes to minor variations in a usage, it is plain stupid to claim that one
is wrong and another is right. Usage varies with time and place, which accounts
for "keen" being more common in British than in U.S. English. The only way to be
wrong about such things is to claim that only one variation is right and the rest are wrong.

bill

[Quinn C]

* Lewis:

> In message <wvrf3zba...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>> * Tony Cooper:
>
>>> "The
>>> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
>>> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>
>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
>> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
>> shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?
>
> I remember him from The Muppets, Hidden Figures, and The Big Year.
>
> I would not, however, call him a 'one trick pony' but then again, I
> rarely agree with Quinn.

In this case, you seem to do, though. I was casting doubts on Tony's
characterization as a "one trick pony actor". I don't have the data to
contradict it outright, but I recognize that Parsons is in great danger
of being typecast based on his breakout role.

I also have the impression that you often disagree with a wrong
understanding of what my position is (as possibly in this case). And
that you may see disagreement when standpoints are only 98% the same
instead of 100%. The way I see it, your opinions are often closer to
mine that most here.

[Tony Cooper]

We usually have three to five different mustards on hand, but no
mustard powder. We'll have yellow mustard and two or three different
spicy mustards in the fridge. Currently, there's a fifth: a jar of
Landsberg German Hot Mustard.

I like to try different mustards.

[Snidely]

Tony Cooper was thinking very hard :

Like Big Box Office Draws, Influencer often has a shelf-life on the
short side.

/dps

--
Yes, I have had a cucumber soda. Why do you ask?

[Snidely]

On Thursday, Jerry Friedman yelped out that:
> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 10:50:02 AM UTC-7, spains...@gmail.com
> wrote:

>> On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:42:45 PM UTC, Dingbat wrote:
>>> Netanyahu knew that I was one of the few editors in Israel who fully
>>> endorsed his controversial agenda of tax cuts, privatization, deregulation,
>>> and budgetary discipline. He also knew that while the Post’s influence in
>>> Israel was limited, the paper was widely read by many of the foreign
>>> investors, policymakers, financial analysts, and machers of the sort he
>>> was always keen to cultivate.
>>> https://www.commentary.org/articles/bret-stephens/benjamin-netanyahu-paradoxical-leader/
>>>
>>> I was taught that "keen to" is wrong and that the correct way to end
>>> the above is "keen on cultivating". Who (still) follows that rule?
>

>> "machers " is a typo I cannot decipher.
>
> Yiddish for important people, "movers and shakers".

Er macht alles ....

>
>> "keen to cultivate" and "keen on cultivating" are both normal BrE.

"Mad for farming"

/dps

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

[Sam Plusnet]

On 31-Dec-21 17:48, Tony Cooper wrote:

> As a test of the above hypothesis, how many here understand the impact
> of "Influencers" or would know one from Adam's off ox. The corporate
> world is aware of them. They are paying big bucks to teenyboppers to
> mention their product.
>
> Today, that's a career that can be more renumerative than a law degree
> from Georgetown, Harvard, or Yale. Those schools should consider
> offering an MBA-type program in Influencing.

Perhaps, but how many of those 'Influencers' have a longer shelf-life
than the milk in our fridge?


--
Sam Plusnet

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 17:13:39 -0500, Quinn C

<lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>* Lewis:
>
>> In message <wvrf3zba...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>> * Tony Cooper:
>>
>>>> "The
>>>> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
>>>> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>>
>>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
>>> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
>>> shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?
>>
>> I remember him from The Muppets, Hidden Figures, and The Big Year.
>>
>> I would not, however, call him a 'one trick pony' but then again, I
>> rarely agree with Quinn.
>
>In this case, you seem to do, though. I was casting doubts on Tony's
>characterization as a "one trick pony actor". I don't have the data to
>contradict it outright, but I recognize that Parsons is in great danger
>of being typecast based on his breakout role.

What I expressed was my opinion of Parsons based on what I have seen
of Parsons. He was excellent in TBBT, but seemed to playing Sheldon
Cooper as a Hollywood agent in the movie Hollywood.

The only pertinent data that applies to the opinion I've formed is
what I've seen. Opinions are based on the data the opinion holder has
been exposed to.

My opinion might be different if I would have seen him in other roles,
and may change in the future. Other people may have contradictory
opinions, but I'm just stating mine.

[Peter Moylan]

On 01/01/22 00:33, charles wrote:
> In article <f70usg5djd7fcpb3o...@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper

> <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 09:40:47 +0000 (GMT), charles
>> <cha...@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>> In article <k6kssglqa145f1178...@4ax.com>, Tony
>>> Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:09:52 +1100, Peter Moylan
>>>> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>>> Which brings to mind the AusE expression "as keen as
>>>>> mustard". Is Keen's Mustard sold in other countries?
>>>
>>>> I've never seen it on store shelves, but - rest assured - if
>>>> you return to the US you can order on Amazon for $16.99.
>>>
>>>> I have been aware of the competition's product - Coleman's -
>>>> but have never used it. I'm not exactly sure what one does
>>>> with mustard powder.
>>>
>>> Assuming that you really don't know, you add water to make a
>>> paste - English Mustard - or add vinergar to make an english
>>> version of French Mustard. You always make more than you need,
>>> it used to be said that Coleman's made their money from the
>>> mustard you left on theside of your plate.
>
>> No, I really didn't know. I thought maybe it's added in cooking
>> as a spice.
>

> you could do that, too.

I sometimes add mustard powder to beef stews and the like. It's spicy in
the same way that curry powder is spicy, although the flavour is not the
same.

Is it a herb or a spice? If you use the leaves then it's a herb, but
mustard powder is made mainly from the seeds, so then it's a herb.

When I had a larger garden than I now have I used to grow my own
mustard. The (small) leaves go well in a salad. I grew cress at the same
time; those two go well together.

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

[lar3ryca]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 10:01:05 PM UTC-6, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 01/01/22 00:33, charles wrote:

> > In article <f70usg5djd7fcpb3o...@frax.com>, Tony Cooper

We bought a farm when we moved to Saskatchewan from BC.

We arrived in early October, and the next spring, the fellow that had
been renting the land offered to rent it from us. I agreed, and by
autumn we had about 130 acres of brown mustard on the land.

I thought it was pretty neat that 50% of Dijon mustard is grown id
Saskatchewan.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 5:13:48 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Lewis:
> > In message <wvrf3zba...@mid.crommatograph.info> Quinn C <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> >> * Tony Cooper:
> >
> >>> "The
> >>> Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional creation of a
> >>> group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
> >
> >> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
> >> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what other
> >> shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?
> >
> > I remember him from The Muppets, Hidden Figures, and The Big Year.
> >
> > I would not, however, call him a 'one trick pony' but then again, I
> > rarely agree with Quinn.
>
> In this case, you seem to do, though. I was casting doubts on Tony's
> characterization as a "one trick pony actor". I don't have the data to
> contradict it outright, but I recognize that Parsons is in great danger
> of being typecast based on his breakout role.

But Galecki, Cuoco, Helberg, and Bialik all have diverse careers
both before and after TBBT. The limitation, so far at least, is Parsons's.

[CDB]

Don't forget "attention-whore".

While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".

He wasn't a Regular contributor, but his contributions were very
interesting, and I do not hesitate to call him Respected.

[CDB]

On 12/31/2021 11:32 AM, Quinn C wrote:
> * Tony Cooper:

>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
>> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.

> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what
> other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?

That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call the
character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the writers - one
of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the high intelligence
they claim for their characters, something that other series like
_House_ and _Elementary_ seem to manage, and they allowed their writing
to degenerate into "gang" stories (the gang did what-have-you) when
they ran out of ideas late in the first season. A distressingly boring
show.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, January 1, 2022 at 8:56:35 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
> On 12/31/2021 11:32 AM, Quinn C wrote:
> > * Tony Cooper:
>
> >> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
> >> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>
> > TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
> > Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what
> > other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?
> That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call the
> character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the writers - one
> of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the high intelligence
> they claim for their characters, something that other series like
> _House_ and _Elementary_ seem to manage, and they allowed their writing

Those are not comedies.

I gave up on *House* after about 2 1/2 seasons because it was so
formulaic: House "deduces" that the problem is a parasite and sends
his lackeys to break into a patient's house and look for the source.

(Was turned off of *Elementary* in the first episode because they
called each other "Joan" and "Sherlock" insead of "Watson" and "Holmes."
Occasionally dipping into later episodes, it seemed to have degenerated
into an action-adventure series, absent the ratiocination and little grey
cells (as Agatha put it).

> to degenerate into "gang" stories (the gang did what-have-you) when
> they ran out of ideas late in the first season. A distressingly boring
> show.

You did yourself a disservice. Occasionally they descended to slapstick.
Usually they did not, and if you watch the syndicated reruns from start
to finish, you see impressive character development (even in Sheldon).

[Jerry Friedman]

On Saturday, January 1, 2022 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-7, CDB wrote:
> ...

> While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
> note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
> Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".

I'm sorry to hear that.

> He wasn't a Regular contributor, but his contributions were very
> interesting, and I do not hesitate to call him Respected.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

I have never been involved in the making of a movie, but it is my
impression that it is the Director, not the writers, who define the
characters. The writers produce the lines the actor voices, but the
Director tells them what kind of lines to write. If the lines offered
by the writers don't suit the Director's conception of the character,
they are re-written.

In the movie "Hollywood", I would think it was the Director who
instructed Parsons to deliver those lines in the same style that
Parson's embodied in TBBT. That lack of empathy and insulting way of
dismissing others, was Sheldon's shtick in TBBT and it was carried
into the movie role.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Megan Mullally told of being invited to audition for *Finding Nemo*,
and she prepared a voice that suited the character as written. The
director? or casting director? was disturbed that she didn't give them
Karen From Will & Grace.

Most actors do not repeat their performances from other projects.

[Lewis]

In message <jgs0tg9djq3ofjeof...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 08:56:31 -0500, CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>On 12/31/2021 11:32 AM, Quinn C wrote:
>>> * Tony Cooper:
>>
>>>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
>>>> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>>
>>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you mean
>>> Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom, what
>>> other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your conclusion?
>>
>>That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call the
>>character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the writers - one
>>of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the high intelligence
>>they claim for their characters, something that other series like
>>_House_ and _Elementary_ seem to manage, and they allowed their writing
>> to degenerate into "gang" stories (the gang did what-have-you) when
>>they ran out of ideas late in the first season. A distressingly boring
>>show.
>>

> I have never been involved in the making of a movie, but it is my
> impression that it is the Director, not the writers, who define the
> characters. The writers produce the lines the actor voices, but the
> Director tells them what kind of lines to write. If the lines offered
> by the writers don't suit the Director's conception of the character,
> they are re-written.

Like all generalizations, that is both correct and wildly incorrect. It
very much depends on the film, on the director, on the writer, on the
IP, on the actors, on the studio, on the producers, and a host of other
people and/or variables. In TV, that does not at all describe how most
shows work.

On a TV series there is a "book" that everyone needs to abide by. the
stories must fit within the framework of the book, and the choices the
director makes are limited by the book. A director is often only there
for an epsidoes or two, so they are tasked with making an episode that
fits in with the rest of the epsidoes in style and content and feel.

> In the movie "Hollywood", I would think it was the Director who
> instructed Parsons to deliver those lines in the same style that
> Parson's embodied in TBBT.

Few directors anymore are that controlling over their actors. Being told
how to read the lines is something that will often get actors to quit,
or refuse to work with a director again.

--
If I am running, Zombies are chasing me

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, January 1, 2022 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-5, Lewis wrote:

> On a TV series there is a "book" that everyone needs to abide by. the
> stories must fit within the framework of the book, and the choices the
> director makes are limited by the book. A director is often only there
> for an epsidoes or two, so they are tasked with making an episode that
> fits in with the rest of the epsidoes in style and content and feel.

Almost every episode of TBBT was directed by Mark Cendrowski.

Almost every episode of *How I Met Your Mother* was directed by
Pamela Fryman, who was also an executive producer of the show.

Those are two of the longest-running sitcoms on TV. The consistency
may have contributed to their success.

[Quinn C]

* Tony Cooper:

Of course, but I see now that your opinion rests on a rather thin basis.
As I said, I haven't seen him in any substantial role outside TBBT, and
even if I had seen one other role, I'd be hesitant to form that opinion
yet because, as I implied, a similar performance may be what was ordered
by the makers of the other show. Watching him e.g. in Judging Amy, i.e.
before TBBT, may be more informative.

--
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

[Tony Cooper]

On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 12:44:08 -0500, Quinn C

Most opinions are formed on initial or early exposure.

The early opinion may be reinforced or revised based on later
exposures.

It's a natural human reaction to form an opinion at first exposure
whether it's an actor, a tv show, or anything else.

>As I said, I haven't seen him in any substantial role outside TBBT, and
>even if I had seen one other role, I'd be hesitant to form that opinion

I doubt that. I think you would form an opinion at first exposure, An
opinion can range from strong positive or strong negative to mild
approval or disappoval. You might form the opinion that you would
like to see further examples before you approve or disapprove, but
that's still an opinion.

A mild approval or disapproval may discourage you from even looking
for additional examples. There's not enough interest to view any
additional examples.

>yet because, as I implied, a similar performance may be what was ordered
>by the makers of the other show. Watching him e.g. in Judging Amy, i.e.
>before TBBT, may be more informative.
--

Tony Cooper Orlando Florida

[Quinn C]

* Tony Cooper:

I'll accept that. But, more importantly, I'd be hesitant to air that
opinion in a forum like this one. Just "hesitant", that doesn't mean I
certainly won't. I might on occasion.

But I also believe from experience that I'm slower to form strong
opinions and more ready to reevaluate later on, compared to many others.

As an example, the opinion I carried away from my first conversation
with my later wife was "what a weirdo!"

[Sam Plusnet]

On 01-Jan-22 16:43, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> Megan Mullally told of being invited to audition for *Finding Nemo*,
> and she prepared a voice that suited the character as written. The
> director? or casting director? was disturbed that she didn't give them
> Karen From Will & Grace.
>
> Most actors do not repeat their performances from other projects.

Most actors would _prefer_ to not repeat, because type-casting is
career-limiting.

The people who do the casting might offer an audition, because a repeat
is exactly what _they_ are looking for.

Who wins in that situation can be a toss up.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Peter T. Daniels]

The producer of the earlier series might sue for copyright violation.

[Peter Moylan]

On 02/01/22 00:45, CDB wrote:
>
> While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
> note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
> Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".

One of the valued contributors. Thanks for letting us know.

[Peter Moylan]

On 02/01/22 00:56, CDB wrote:
> On 12/31/2021 11:32 AM, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Tony Cooper:
>
>>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
>>> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony actor.
>
>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you
>> mean Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom,
>> what other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your
>> conclusion?
>
> That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call the
> character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the writers -
> one of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the high

> intelligence they claim for their characters, ...

That's a detail that I failed to detect in my occasional samplings of
the show. Which of the characters was supposed to be intelligent? The
idiot savant?

[Paul Wolff]

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022, at 09:17:02, Peter Moylan posted:

>On 02/01/22 00:45, CDB wrote:
>>
>> While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
>> note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
>> Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".
>
>One of the valued contributors. Thanks for letting us know.
>

Oh dear. 2022 not 24 hours old, and that's the second death I've heard
of this year within my connexion-space. I can't count the one yesterday.
As I often say, change is the only constant.

--
Paul

[Jerry Friedman]

On Saturday, January 1, 2022 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-7, CDB wrote:
> ...

> While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
> note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
> Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".
>
> He wasn't a Regular contributor, but his contributions were very
> interesting, and I do not hesitate to call him Respected.

That was reported on Dec. 22, and I couldn't find an obituary on line.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Quinn C]

* Peter Moylan:

All the ones with a PhD. Whether an engineer qualifies is one of the
eternal questions.

--
This answer was customized to the asker.

[Lewis]

In message <tq41tg5fspaka1rvm...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I doubt that. I think you would form an opinion at first exposure, An
> opinion can range from strong positive or strong negative to mild
> approval or disappoval. You might form the opinion that you would
> like to see further examples before you approve or disapprove, but
> that's still an opinion.

I'd say that the Sheldon character changed considerably, albeit slowly,
over the course of the series. First season Sheldon could never have
been in a relationship, and relied on Leonard to navigate the world for
him. By the end he was mostly a functional adult, while still being
Sheldon.

I think that takes more than "one trick" to pull off as an actor.

--
The facts, though interesting, are irrelevant.

[Tony Cooper]

On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 13:21:22 -0500, Quinn C

I don't think it's possible to be slow in forming opinions. Forming
an opinion is an involuntary and instantaneous mental process. You
have a favorable or infavorable opinion about anything new you are
exposed to.

What you might claim is that you are slower to express your opinon.

> and more ready to reevaluate later on, compared to many others.

I don't think that's done, either. You don't reevaluate what you
already have experienced; you take in more experience and process
that.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Four of the six main characters are Ph.D.s, one is an MIT M.E.

Will that do?

[CDB]

On 1/1/2022 9:09 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> CDB wrote:
>> Quinn C wrote:
>>> * Tony Cooper:

>>>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
>>>> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony
>>>> actor.

>>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you
>>> mean Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom,
>>> what other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your
>>> conclusion?
>> That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call the
>> character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the writers
>> - one of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the high
>> intelligence they claim for their characters, something that other
>> series like _House_ and _Elementary_ seem to manage, and they
>> allowed their writing

> Those are not comedies.

I suppose mileages vary. I laughed more often watching either of them
than I ever did watching TBBT.

> I gave up on *House* after about 2 1/2 seasons because it was so
> formulaic: House "deduces" that the problem is a parasite and sends
> his lackeys to break into a patient's house and look for the source.

Mileages again. I watch dramas of all kinds with more of an eye to
characterisation and dialogue.

> (Was turned off of *Elementary* in the first episode because they
> called each other "Joan" and "Sherlock" insead of "Watson" and
> "Holmes."

As a reason for rejecting the series, that seems fairly trivial.

> Occasionally dipping into later episodes, it seemed to have
> degenerated into an action-adventure series, absent the ratiocination
> and little grey cells (as Agatha put it).

I don't recognise the show from your description, and I have watched
most of the episodes (a channel I get, for the moment, is binge-showing
the series for Christmas).

>> to degenerate into "gang" stories (the gang did what-have-you)
>> when they ran out of ideas late in the first season. A
>> distressingly boring show.

> You did yourself a disservice. Occasionally they descended to
> slapstick. Usually they did not, and if you watch the syndicated
> reruns from start to finish, you see impressive character development
> (even in Sheldon).

There is plenty of comedy in the two series I named, and far more
believable character-development.

My attitude towards your favourite show may be influenced by my unhappy
experiences with narcissists. I keep wanting to beat Sheldon up.

[CDB]

On 1/1/2022 10:40 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:

What you say may well be true. Please take my use of "writers" to mean
"writers (writ large)": whoever determines what the characters will say
and how they will say it.

PeterTD's appeal to slapstick may be a point to consider. Having
claimed high intelligence for many of the characters, the writers (wl)
may have wanted to assuage their audience's eglitarian resentments by
making those characters speak and behave like buffoons.

[CDB]

On 1/1/2022 5:26 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:

> CDB wrote:
>> Quinn C wrote:
>>> * Tony Cooper:

>>>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a fictional
>>>> creation of a group of writers starring a one trick pony
>>>> actor.

>>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If you
>>> mean Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT fandom,
>>> what other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come to your
>>> conclusion?

>> That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call
>> the character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the
>> writers - one of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting the
>> high intelligence they claim for their characters, ...

> That's a detail that I failed to detect in my occasional samplings
> of the show. Which of the characters was supposed to be intelligent?
> The idiot savant?

Sheldon or Koothrapali? The four principal male actors are the ones I
had in mind. They are all, how you say, slow on the uptake.

[CDB]

On 1/1/2022 6:26 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> CDB wrote:
>> ...

>> While we're on the subject of absent fi^W friends, I am sorry to
>> note here that the death of Lars Eighner was announced recently in
>> Another Place, under their customary heading "Umscribe".

>> He wasn't a Regular contributor, but his contributions were very
>> interesting, and I do not hesitate to call him Respected.

> That was reported on Dec. 22, and I couldn't find an obituary on
> line.

That may be good news. WP doesn't give him a closing date either. I
have now searched for "Laurence Vail Eighner" (his birth name) and
"Laurence Eighner Hexamer" (his married name) and found no such news; I
did get a drop-down item in the News category including "death", but
clicking it gave only an announcement that theyhad no item on it.

I apologise for misleading the froup, if that is what I have done. I
don't want to say I'm sorry for having (possibly) been wrong.

[CDB]

On 1/2/2022 8:47 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>> CDB wrote:

>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Tony Cooper:

>>>>> "The Big Bang Theory" (albeit entertaining TV) is a
>>>>> fictional creation of a group of writers starring a one trick
>>>>> pony actor.
>>>> TBBT stars 6 main actors who I believe get the same pay. If
>>>> you mean Sheldon as the best known character outside of TBBT
>>>> fandom, what other shows have you seen Jim Parsons in to come
>>>> to your conclusion?
>>> That is reasonable objection. I think it would be fair to call
>>> the character a "one-trick pony", but that is the fault of the
>>> writers - one of several faults: they fail utterly at depicting
>>> the high intelligence they claim for their characters, ...

>> That's a detail that I failed to detect in my occasional samplings
>> of the show. Which of the characters was supposed to be
>> intelligent? The idiot savant?

> Four of the six main characters are Ph.D.s, one is an MIT M.E.

> Will that do?

That accounts for "supposed".

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, January 2, 2022 at 9:12:03 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
> On 1/1/2022 9:09 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > CDB wrote:

> > (Was turned off of *Elementary* in the first episode because they
> > called each other "Joan" and "Sherlock" insead of "Watson" and
> > "Holmes."
>
> As a reason for rejecting the series, that seems fairly trivial.

It suggested how true to the tradition the series would be. Occasional
look-ins in subsequent years suggested they had also done strange things
with Irene Adler and Professor Moriarty.

[TBBT]

> >> to degenerate into "gang" stories (the gang did what-have-you)
> >> when they ran out of ideas late in the first season. A
> >> distressingly boring show.
> > You did yourself a disservice. Occasionally they descended to
> > slapstick. Usually they did not, and if you watch the syndicated
> > reruns from start to finish, you see impressive character development
> > (even in Sheldon).
>
> There is plenty of comedy in the two series I named, and far more
> believable character-development.

Feh. Did you actually believe the "love affair" with his boss? They may
have felt they had to throw that in to keep whatever female audience
they had, since their weird demographics tell them that's what females
of the age wanted by the advertisers wanted to see.

> My attitude towards your favourite show may be influenced by my unhappy
> experiences with narcissists. I keep wanting to beat Sheldon up.

So do his friends. From time to time they explore why they put up with him.

There was an "It's a Wonderful Life" episode (rerun last week) that got
pretty explicit.

[Quinn C]

And that I remain skeptical of my opinions when I know they're based on
little data.

I've picked up on an LGBT slogan by saying: I'm born this way -
skeptical. That's indeed a useful characterization of the position I
always, even as a child, had towards gender: I'm not convinced that it's
a real thing. But also to many other issues. I wasn't easily accepting
of what adults told me about the world.

>> and more ready to reevaluate later on, compared to many others.
>
> I don't think that's done, either. You don't reevaluate what you
> already have experienced; you take in more experience and process
> that.

A lot of people don't reevaluate in the light of additional information,
but stay with their first impression, because changing opinions would
mean admitting that they were wrong. That's one of the central issues
why science is so hard to bring to "ordinary people".

I don't shy away from admitting I was wrong. I did so in the above.
Maybe it's your turn?

[Quinn C]

* CDB:

> My attitude towards your favourite show may be influenced by my unhappy
> experiences with narcissists. I keep wanting to beat Sheldon up.

Do you also sometimes develop empathy towards people who are
neuroatypical or have mental health issues, or do I have to keep my
friends in the category safe from you?

[Lewis]

They are all caricatures of types of many quiet intelligent people
I've known, but they are caricatures.

I've certainly known people like Sheldon and Howard, at least at first
glance. Most of the people I watched the premiere of Star Trek the Next
Generation with (a large group of computer nerds in the before-GUIs days
of computers) would fit into one of those pretty well.

What did we do for fun on weekends? Mostly we wrote code. Silly code.
Pointless code. Occasionally accidentally useful code. We wrote forum
software, figured out how to hide files and directories in the directory
tree. Hacked finger and nethack and mtrek and rsh. A bunch of us wrote a
version of... damn, what was it called, talk? chat? I forget, that
worked outside the university network so we could chat with users at
Berkeley or Dartmouth. We called it 'rc' so no one would guess what it
did. Other people wrote a program that wa similar to the later SLIP that
allowed you to dial in to the system on a modem line and then appear as
if your computer was a node on the network. It was very cool at the
time, but largely useless, though one of the off campus houses did use
it to maintain a network presence over a 2400 baud modem link that was
kept connected as close to 24/7 as possible. I am not at all sure that
the University was ever aware of this connection.

I wrote a subroutine to do real number percentage calculations using
only integers and integer functions.

Why?

Because I was avoiding doing my "Introduction to C" homework, obviously.

But we all talked obsessively about Trek and comic books and computer
code and made stupid math jokes no one else would ever understand and
watched Buckaroo Bonzai multiple times and would have gotten along with
Sheldon's weirdness and Howard's inferiority complex just fine.

But then most of use adulted out of those years, but not all.

The only really 'normal' person in the show is Penny.



--
Margo: It’s fucking Fox News.
Male centurion: Foxes all lie. No one would ever believe their news.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, January 2, 2022 at 9:20:00 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:

> PeterTD's appeal to slapstick may be a point to consider. Having
> claimed high intelligence for many of the characters, the writers (wl)
> may have wanted to assuage their audience's eglitarian resentments by
> making those characters speak and behave like buffoons.

Frinstance, episodes I won't watch when they come around in the
syndication are: They drive in their ComiCon costumes to the event
but stop to take pictures in a picturesque location, and their car is
stolen;

or, they kidnap one of the guys to party in a cabin in Mexico that
used to belong to Richard Feynman, and manage to set their
vehicle on fire while changing a tire;

and I've had enough of the one where they trespass at George
Lucas's ranch.

[Peter T. Daniels]

They -- and Amy, too -- are all socially awkward, and all except Sheldon
and especially Amy are aware that they are.

[Sam Plusnet]

Do you attribute that to the actor and not the writers?
I would (in general, I haven't watched this programme) attribute long
term character development to the writers & director.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Sam Plusnet]

Is that 'a thing'? Does that happen?

--
Sam Plusnet

[Quinn C]

* Sam Plusnet:

As origin, of course, but if the actor can't embody it, it'll be lost on
the spectators. The audience will pick up character development from how
the character comes across much more easily than from words and actions
alone.

[Tony Cooper]

Perhaps I have not followed the thread diligently enough, but I'm a
bit confused. I did watch all of "TBBT" espisodes. I don't
understand the comment here about which of the characters was
"intelligent".

To the best of my memory, there were no allusions to any male
character not being intelligent. There were numerous refences, mainly
by Sheldon, to Howard's degree not being equal in prestige to the
degrees of the other male characters.

Sheldon did make numerous references to Penny's lack of education (and
to her promiscuousness) but I don't think he outright called her
"stupid".

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 12:17:30 -0500, Quinn C

That seems to be saying that you are insecure in your ability to
formulate what you think is the opinion you should hold.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with formulating an opinion
based on little data. It's normal behavior.

I formed the opinion that okra is vile the first time I tasted it. I
don't feel the urge to try it several more times to see if that
initial opinion was valid. That others say it is tasty does not sway
me.

Where it becomes bad practice to hold opinions based on little data is
when one takes some action based on that opinion that affects others.
It would be bad practice for a grocery manager to refuse to stock okra
because his/her opinion is that okra is vile.

My opinion about Parsons acting ability does not affect others.

An area where I feel that first impression opinions should be subject
to revision is politics. When people are in the news as possible
candidates for election to office, the first impression opinion should
certainly be held in abeyance until further information is available.

>
>I've picked up on an LGBT slogan by saying: I'm born this way -
>skeptical. That's indeed a useful characterization of the position I
>always, even as a child, had towards gender: I'm not convinced that it's
>a real thing. But also to many other issues. I wasn't easily accepting
>of what adults told me about the world.
>
>>> and more ready to reevaluate later on, compared to many others.
>>
>> I don't think that's done, either. You don't reevaluate what you
>> already have experienced; you take in more experience and process
>> that.
>
>A lot of people don't reevaluate in the light of additional information,
>but stay with their first impression, because changing opinions would
>mean admitting that they were wrong.

No need to bring PTD into the conversation.

> That's one of the central issues
>why science is so hard to bring to "ordinary people".
>
>I don't shy away from admitting I was wrong. I did so in the above.
>Maybe it's your turn?

About what? That my opinion of Parsons is that he's a one track pony
actor? An opinion is a personal view. I haven't had a personal view
of Parsons that would offset that opinion.

[Lewis]

In message <H4mAJ.1294690$K5l8.1...@fx07.ams1> Sam Plusnet <n...@home.com> wrote:
> On 02-Jan-22 1:01, Lewis wrote:
>> In message <tq41tg5fspaka1rvm...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I doubt that. I think you would form an opinion at first exposure, An
>>> opinion can range from strong positive or strong negative to mild
>>> approval or disappoval. You might form the opinion that you would
>>> like to see further examples before you approve or disapprove, but
>>> that's still an opinion.
>>
>> I'd say that the Sheldon character changed considerably, albeit slowly,
>> over the course of the series. First season Sheldon could never have
>> been in a relationship, and relied on Leonard to navigate the world for
>> him. By the end he was mostly a functional adult, while still being
>> Sheldon.
>>
>> I think that takes more than "one trick" to pull off as an actor.

> Do you attribute that to the actor and not the writers?

That seems to me to be a very silly question.

> I would (in general, I haven't watched this programme) attribute long
> term character development to the writers & director.

You are aware that the actor is the one that actually performs and
convinces the audience that they ARE the character? Or are you under the
impression that the actor is an empty vessel into which the writer pours
words and the director poses appropriately?

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"I think so, Brain! But shouldn't we let the silk worms finish the
boxer shorts before we put them on?"

[Peter T. Daniels]

Presumably it doesn't get as far as _happening_ too often (perhaps
not since the first time someone successfully tried suing), but certainly
the threat of it is a powerful deterrent.

What do you suppose Disney would do if someone else decided to
make a sequel to *Frozen* without asking for the rights?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Clearly.

> bit confused. I did watch all of "TBBT" espisodes. I don't
> understand the comment here about which of the characters was
> "intelligent".

The comment was PM's, who has _not_ seen the series.

> To the best of my memory, there were no allusions to any male
> character not being intelligent. There were numerous refences, mainly
> by Sheldon, to Howard's degree not being equal in prestige to the
> degrees of the other male characters.

Sheldon doesn't exactly think highly of Leonard's work as an _experimental_
physicist. Nor of Princeton University for awarding him a degree in it.

> Sheldon did make numerous references to Penny's lack of education (and
> to her promiscuousness) but I don't think he outright called her
> "stupid".

He found plenty of ways of doing so without using the word.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, January 2, 2022 at 2:24:43 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:

> I formed the opinion that okra is vile the first time I tasted it. I
> don't feel the urge to try it several more times to see if that
> initial opinion was valid. That others say it is tasty does not sway
> me.

I don't know whether it's "tasty." (I may have had fried okra in a basket
of assorted fried stuff once or twice.) But I know that the stuff it's best
known for use in, gumbo, _is_ "tasty."

If I resolved never to touch something a second time that I didn't like
the first time, I would never eat an olive or mustard.

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 11:53:36 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Sunday, January 2, 2022 at 2:24:43 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> I formed the opinion that okra is vile the first time I tasted it. I
>> don't feel the urge to try it several more times to see if that
>> initial opinion was valid. That others say it is tasty does not sway
>> me.
>
>I don't know whether it's "tasty." (I may have had fried okra in a basket
>of assorted fried stuff once or twice.) But I know that the stuff it's best
>known for use in, gumbo, _is_ "tasty."

You have not swayed me.

Several of the barbeque restaurants in this area serve a very good
gumbo. I often order it, but pick out those vile bits of okra and
remove them before consuming the gumbo.

>
>If I resolved never to touch something a second time that I didn't like
>the first time, I would never eat an olive or mustard.

There is a difference between "didn't like" and "vile". Vile is at
the extreme of didn't like. Anchovies are also in the "vile" range of
my didn't likes.

There are things that I first adjudged to be in the "didn't like"
range that I later came to like. Feta cheese, for example. I didn't
like it at first, but didn't consider it to be in vile range.

[Tony Cooper]

I wouldn't say any actor is an empty vessel, but exposure to some can
lead one to wonder. I watch Stephen Colbert's and Jimmy Kimmel's
shows. (Recorded) They usually have an actor as a guest who is there
to promote his or her latest movie or TV show.

It's not unusual for me to see some actor whose performances in movies
or on TV have impressed me, but find them in person to be incredibly
dull or inantimate. I can't help but think that it was the director
of the movie or show that brought the performance to life.

Sometimes Colbert or Kimmel struggles vainly to do the same.

[Quinn C]

* Tony Cooper:

Quite the opposite - I'm quite secure in my ability to say "I'm not
sure; I have insufficient data". Too much of a scientist. I'm not
surprised that that would be rather alien to you.

> Personally, I don't see anything wrong with formulating an opinion
> based on little data. It's normal behavior.

And the root of a lot of bad things happening in the world.

People being excluded and discriminated against for being different,
hence weird, hence undesirable. Who can wait until you understand where
they're coming from?

>>I don't shy away from admitting I was wrong. I did so in the above.
>>Maybe it's your turn?
>
> About what? That my opinion of Parsons is that he's a one track pony
> actor?

That your opinion in this matter isn't worth much.

That's another scientist thing: to judge whether I should take your
opinion on Parsons into account in forming my own opinion, first, I need
to know how you arrived at it. I've concluded that I'll ignore it.

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

Yes, but it would have to be rather obvious that it is more or less the
*same* character, not just the same type of. Nobody will sue you for
making a show about socially awkward physicists. That's an established
stereotype and not copyrightable.

I've recently played a video game that figured a boy named "Junior", who
ran away to "Christmasland", where he met a fairy named "Belle", and
there's a group called "the boys", and they even have to deal with
Junior's shadow, and with a pirate named "Hook" - I was surprised they
didn't give him a slightly different name, at least. He's a very minor
character in the game. That was close enough that it's conceivable to
sue, if Peter Pan is still under copyright. But a few additional changes
should make it safe.

--
... while there are people who are consecrated, chronic
assholes--like Donald Trump for example, or General Patton--
it's a condition that all of us are liable to.
-- Geoffrey Nunberg, 2012 interview

[Lewis]

In message <r344tgt39ocht8go2...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 19:33:36 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>You are aware that the actor is the one that actually performs and
>>convinces the audience that they ARE the character? Or are you under the
>>impression that the actor is an empty vessel into which the writer pours
>>words and the director poses appropriately?

> It's not unusual for me to see some actor whose performances in movies
> or on TV have impressed me, but find them in person to be incredibly
> dull or inantimate.

Which would indicate that they are VERY GOOD at their jobs.

> I can't help but think that it was the director of the movie or show
> that brought the performance to life.

That is absurd. Is the conductor responsible for the skill of the
soloist? Is the composer? How about the maker of the instrument? When
an author writes, does the credit go to Smith-Corona, Microsoft Word,
the publisher, the editor, or the paper manufacturer? When Hank Aaron
hits 755 home runs is that because of the people who made the bats, or
the third base coach?


--
perfectly ordinary books, printed on commonplace paper in mundane
ink. It would be a mistake to think that they weren't also
dangerous, just because reading them didn't make fireworks go off
in the sky. Reading them sometimes did the more dangerous trick
of making fireworks go off in the privacy of the reader's brain.
--Soul Music

[Sam Plusnet]

In the UK, copyright on Peter Pan will never run out.

--
Sam Plusnet