Circumcision
Rosalind Mitchell
young Joshua for that matter?
I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
Rosie
--
http://www.stwerburgh.freedombird.net icq 152291404
Currently reading: NAIPAUL, V S, "A House for Mr Biswas"
"Witches very often disguise themselves as elders" [Kate Atkinson]
Mike McMillan
Mitchell <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> writes
>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>young Joshua for that matter?
>
>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>
>Rosie
>
Toodle Snip (Shouldn't happen to anyone!)
Mike
--
Mike McMillan, Mike Sounds
Digital Recording, Editing & CD Production.
Tel: 0118 9265450 Fax: 0118 9668167.
http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk
Mike Ruddock
<dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>young Joshua for that matter?
>
>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>
>Rosie
It has never occured to me that she might be.
"Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
(but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
Do we have any Jewish umrats?
Mike Ruddock
Kirsten Procter
I think that's more or less the idea that umra's come up with before.
Similarly, wouldn;t the fact that they'd been baptised have a bearing on
the matter?
--
Kirsten Procter ghoti
UHB UNCEMPT UBBBA
George Middleton
<mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>Do we have any Jewish umrats?
Can a one legged duck swim in circles?
--
George
Rosalind Mitchell
Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish name...
Rosie
--
http://www.stwerburgh.freedombird.net icq 152291404
SMARMY BASTARD, MAME, Curator of Umbeasts
gill spaul
news:acbg4d$o379d$1...@ID-106612.news.dfncis.de...
> Mike Ruddock wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
> > <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
> >>young Joshua for that matter?
> >>
> >>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
> >>
> >>Rosie
> >
> > It has never occured to me that she might be.
> > "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
> > (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
> > not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
> > then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
> > for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>
> Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish
name...
>
Christians, Jewish people, agnostics, atheists and quite possibly buddists,
taoists, muslims etc too. I know at least one Catholic with each of those
names. I also know Jewish people called Josh and Ben (although not Ruth).
--
Gill
Toby: "Can you explain it to me using small words and visual aids?"
Siderius Nuncius
Mike Ruddock wrote in message
>
> Do we have any Jewish umrats?
<raises yamulka[1]>
--
Sid
Shepherds Bush, West London
[1]Yamulka left leg in, yamulka left leg out....
Siderius Nuncius
Rosalind Mitchell wrote in message ...
>>>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a >Jewish
name...
As are David, Joseph, Sharon, Timothy, Adam, Deborah, Simon......
Ambridge is a veritable shtetl.
anon...@firedrake.org
>Mike Ruddock wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>>>young Joshua for that matter?
>>>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>> It has never occured to me that she might be.
>> "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>> (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>> not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>> then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>> for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish name...
David is also a Jewish name.
Pip-short-for-Philippa, on the other hand, is Greek.
Weevil
AttLSM, UBBBA, UNCEMPT BAG, HAHA
Gotta keep rockin' while I still can
Got a two-pack habit and a motel tan.
Chris McMillan
<ro...@stwerburgh.freedombird.net> writes
>Mike Ruddock wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>>>young Joshua for that matter?
>>>
>>>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>>>
>>>Rosie
>>
>> It has never occured to me that she might be.
>> "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>> (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>> not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>> then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>> for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>
>Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish name...
>
days. I think they've lost their faith specific meanings.
Sincerely, Chris
--
Chris McMillan
HeyHeyVk
<< Yamulka left leg in, yamulka left leg out.... >>
Oy!
Robin Stevens
[Jewish names]
> ... Sharon ...
Anyone care to guess what brand of washing powder she uses?
--
---- Robin Stevens <re...@cynic.org.uk> --------- http://www.cynic.org.uk/ ----
------ Communications Programmer, Oxford University Computing Services -------
"Ah, an open mind. The essence of intellect." - Garek
Robert Carnegie
Um, probably.
Pritchard - wow! google.com suddenly now _automatically_
corrects "Ruth Pritcherd" (zero hits) to "Ruth Pritchard" -
may be perhaps a British name acquired by Solly's family
upon immigration to Britain?
Do we know Ruth's parents' background? Solly's accent isn't
anything but English, to my ear.
> Do we have any Jewish umrats?
>
> Mike Ruddock
To comment, for instance, whether family given names stay Jewish
if religious observances in the family go by the wayside.
bernar...@btinternet.com
>for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>
> Do we have any Jewish umrats?
A none Jewish umrats (for exactly that reason) concurs
--
Bernard M. Earp
Still holding the heights of Bromley Cross
Marjorie Clarke
"Chris McMillan" <Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:apVqxKSU...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk...
> >Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish
name...
> >
> And a lot of people who go to 'christian' churches use those names these
> days. I think they've lost their faith specific meanings.
And a lot of atheists, like me, use them too. Our daughter is a Ruth.
I once did voluntary work for the NCT alongside a posh Jewish woman who had
a very Jewish name. Her husband was a director of a big retail firm (which
goes by an anglicised version of his name). While the other NCT Mums in the
area where giving their children names like Daniel and Ruth and Rachel, her
daughters were called something like Tracey and Samantha.
--
Marjorie Clarke
To reply, remove nospam from address
anon...@firedrake.org
Carnegie wrote:
>mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Ruddock) wrote in message
>news:<3ce9158b...@news.freeserve.net>...
>> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>> It has never occured to me that she might be.
>> "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>> (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>> not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>> then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>> for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>Um, probably.
>Pritchard - wow! google.com suddenly now _automatically_
>corrects "Ruth Pritcherd" (zero hits) to "Ruth Pritchard" -
>may be perhaps a British name acquired by Solly's family
>upon immigration to Britain?
Whenever that might have been, any time since Cromwell. Supposing that the
Pritchards are Jewish, for which I have heard no particular evidence. It's
a Welsh name.
>Do we know Ruth's parents' background?
Foreigners, aren't they? Somewhere up north of Watford, they come from.
(Insert irony smiley hereabouts)
>Solly's accent isn't anything but English, to my ear.
Which is a great surprise? It is possible to be Jewish and have a family
that's been living in Britain for over three centuries -- you expect maybe
Solly should speak Aramaic? That's assuming that to be called "Solly"
means he's Jewish anyhow, like being called David or Tim or Mark
or....(insert other Archers'-type names here) does.
>> Do we have any Jewish umrats?
>To comment, for instance, whether family given names stay Jewish
>if religious observances in the family go by the wayside.
Sometimes Jewish patronymics/surnames got changed by Imperial decree. Or
by the whim of some Kaiser or immigration official. Or maybe just because
the family during WWI thought that name sounded a bit German perhaps, and
it was safer to change it rather than be all the time suspected of being a
spy, on arrival here.
One of the most devout Jews I know has the surname "Brown". I think the
family changed it from "Braun" in about 1914. Before that, I think it was
something Russian and was altered without their having much say in the
matter when they moved West a bit.
K Richard W
with the following opinion of recent events:
>Her husband was a director of a big retail firm (which
>goes by an anglicised version of his name).
The one which announced much better trading results today by any chance?
--
Kosmo Richard W
LSS super-numerary
Robert Carnegie
> In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
> Carnegie wrote:
>
> >mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Ruddock) wrote in message
> >news:<3ce9158b...@news.freeserve.net>...
> >> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
> >> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
> >> It has never occured to me that she might be.
> >> "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
> >> (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
> >> not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
> >> then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
> >> for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
> >Um, probably.
> >Pritchard - wow! google.com suddenly now _automatically_
> >corrects "Ruth Pritcherd" (zero hits) to "Ruth Pritchard" -
> >may be perhaps a British name acquired by Solly's family
> >upon immigration to Britain?
>
> Whenever that might have been, any time since Cromwell. Supposing that the
> Pritchards are Jewish, for which I have heard no particular evidence. It's
> a Welsh name.
Hmm. Immigration to Wales is unusual :-) If you want to make
your fortune starting from nothing then you begin in the
metropolis, more opportunities...maybe Solly's father was a
precocious London evacuee in the war, and didn't stay around
long enough to leave a surname ;-)
For some reason, Scotland allegedly has more Italian-owned
ice-cream parlours than the national average...?
> >Do we know Ruth's parents' background?
>
> Foreigners, aren't they? Somewhere up north of Watford, they come from.
> (Insert irony smiley hereabouts)
>
> >Solly's accent isn't anything but English, to my ear.
>
> Which is a great surprise? It is possible to be Jewish and have a family
> that's been living in Britain for over three centuries -- you expect maybe
> Solly should speak Aramaic? That's assuming that to be called "Solly"
> means he's Jewish anyhow, like being called David or Tim or Mark
> or....(insert other Archers'-type names here) does.
On the first point: quite so. I'm not accusing Solly of being
_such_ a recent immigrant like Marks and Spencer! ;-) And Britain
is populated entirely by immigrants anyway, including Angles and
Saxons and Boxgrove Man. This is curiosity, not planning a pogrom.
> > [I would like any Jewish umrats] To comment, for instance,
> > whether family given names stay Jewish if religious
> > observances in the family go by the wayside.
>
> Sometimes Jewish patronymics/surnames got changed by Imperial decree. Or
> by the whim of some Kaiser or immigration official. Or maybe just because
> the family during WWI thought that name sounded a bit German perhaps, and
> it was safer to change it rather than be all the time suspected of being a
> spy, on arrival here.
>
> One of the most devout Jews I know has the surname "Brown". I think the
> family changed it from "Braun" in about 1914. Before that, I think it was
> something Russian and was altered without their having much say in the
> matter when they moved West a bit.
Wow! I didn't know that.
If you make all the Jews change their names then how do you
track them down when the time for the next pogrom comes around...
Might apply to Glasgow comedian Arnold Brown, as well...?
I was (unclearly) thinking about given names, though, which just
happen to run in families because the baby is named after grandpa
or whoever - like Daniel Mark Hebden or Phillipa Rose Archer.
I may be in the act of digging myself an enormous hole here, but
to my ear the names David and Ruth sound possibly but not
particularly Jewish, Benjamin sounds quite Jewish, and Solomon
sounds very Jewish indeed. Arnold...hmm. (Could be his stage name.)
I forget if either David or Ruth has an ancestor or relative named Ben?
Of course the odds at one point were on the latest child being
called Jack or Chloe, but then every Tom, Dick and Harry is called
Jack or Chloe.
Colin Blackburn
@firedrake.org says...
> >Um, probably.
> >Pritchard - wow! google.com suddenly now _automatically_
> >corrects "Ruth Pritcherd" (zero hits) to "Ruth Pritchard" -
> >may be perhaps a British name acquired by Solly's family
> >upon immigration to Britain?
>
> Whenever that might have been, any time since Cromwell. Supposing that the
> Pritchards are Jewish, for which I have heard no particular evidence. It's
> a Welsh name.
Yes, derived from Ap Richard (son of Richard). Most Welsh names
beginning with P have similar derivations.
Powell = Ap Howell
Price = Ap Rees
ect.
Colin
Martin Clark
something about...
>Benjamin sounds quite Jewish,
My friend has a West Highland Terrier named Benjamin. Do you think it
might be Jewish, perchance?
--
Martin
Martin Clark
something about...
--
Martin
Colin Blackburn
mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk says...
> I may be imagining things, but I thought Colin Blackburn muttered
> something about...
> >Yes, derived from Ap Richard (son of Richard). Most Welsh names
> >beginning with P have similar derivations.
> >
> >Powell = Ap Howell
> >Price = Ap Rees
> >
> Pratt = Ap Ratt?
Ap Robably.
Colin
anon...@firedrake.org
Carnegie wrote:
>anon...@firedrake.org wrote in message
>news:<20020521195359....@firedrake.org>...
>> In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
>> Carnegie wrote:
[snip]
>Hmm. Immigration to Wales is unusual :-) If you want to make
>your fortune starting from nothing then you begin in the
>metropolis, more opportunities...maybe Solly's father was a
>precocious London evacuee in the war, and didn't stay around
>long enough to leave a surname ;-)
Good grief, now we're bastardising the poor man? :-)
It's possible (I honestly don't know -- interested question implied here)
that the Welsh didn't chuck all the Jews out, as the English disgracefully
did, in the Middle Ages, and that a Jewish family in Wales might have been
there since _before_ the 1600s. And since surname goes by father, but
Jewish goes by mother, any amount of confusion of names might have happened
in the centuries between.
>For some reason, Scotland allegedly has more Italian-owned
>ice-cream parlours than the national average...?
Inverness has a large expatriate Polish community. And I'm told that Scots
Gaelic is very close to one of the languages from the sub-continent. (More
useless irrelevant but entertaining facts...) I was once told there is an
island off Scotland with a large proportion of its population made up of
Gaelic-speaking, kilt-wearing, bagpipe-playing Pakistani immigrants who
make spectacle-frames for a living. (Working with an optical suppliers'
wrestling with early computer-systems brings strange side-effects, such as
information like that.)
>> Sometimes Jewish patronymics/surnames got changed by Imperial decree. Or
>> by the whim of some Kaiser or immigration official. Or maybe just because
>> the family during WWI thought that name sounded a bit German perhaps, and
>> it was safer to change it rather than be all the time suspected of being a
>> spy, on arrival here.
>> One of the most devout Jews I know has the surname "Brown". I think the
>> family changed it from "Braun" in about 1914. Before that, I think it was
>> something Russian and was altered without their having much say in the
>> matter when they moved West a bit.
>Wow! I didn't know that.
It's hearsayish, because he's not around to ask just at the moment, but
that was roughly how I understood the name to have arisen. Lehmann is a
good German name, but a lot of Jewish immigrants to Germany got given it on
arrival -- that one I know for sure.
>If you make all the Jews change their names then how do you
>track them down when the time for the next pogrom comes around...
Dunno. Check their hats?
>I was (unclearly) thinking about given names, though, which just
>happen to run in families because the baby is named after grandpa
>or whoever - like Daniel Mark Hebden or Phillipa Rose Archer.
>I may be in the act of digging myself an enormous hole here, but
>to my ear the names David and Ruth sound possibly but not
>particularly Jewish, Benjamin sounds quite Jewish, and Solomon
>sounds very Jewish indeed. Arnold...hmm. (Could be his stage name.)
Yes. Isaac is another somewhat Jewish-origin name, like Solomon; and I
know several Negro Isaacs who may or may not have any Jewish ancestry. But
"Ben"... Hmmm. "Simon" is pretty English, like "Peter" and "John" and
"James" and "Thomas", but they are all Jewish originally, aren't they? I
think whether they were adopted by the English may be something to do with
whether they are old- or new-testament, or seen as such. If they turn up
as an apostle, they are more likely to have been chosen by Christian
English folk as names (like Bartholemew used to be quite usual): it might
be as simple as that. So "Mary" and "Elizabeth" and "Anne" are
new-testament, and "Jane" because it's the female form of John. But
"Jacob" and "David" and "Michael" have all been _very_ English, and aren't
particularly new-testament. Hmmm again.
(This is beginning to remind me of Alf Garnett's assertion that Jesus was
an Englishman. His grounds, IIRC, were simple: "Stands to reason, dunnit.
Joseph and Mary, they're English names, of course he was English, like his
parents."
>I forget if either David or Ruth has an ancestor or relative named Ben?
(this was organised when it left here, I have no idea what may happen to it
on the way to umra!)
William Forrest m Lisa John Archer m Phoebe
| |
---------------------- -------------------------------
| | | | | |
Tom m Pru Ted Doris m Dan John ("Ben") m Simone Frank m Laura
is the very top of the "family tree" I have for the Archer clan. It also
explains in passing why he was "Uncle Tom" Forrest to all the Archer
children.
So the sprog was named after Phil's Uncle Ben. (Whether UB became a
rice-farmer I have no idea.)
HTH?
Sarah Kerrison
Has it had the snip? Though if a West Highland Terrier is the beast I
am picturing, you'd need a magnifying glass...
Sarah K
Rosalind Mitchell
Dunno - is it circumcised?
Rosie
--
http://www.stwerburgh.freedombird.net icq 152291404
SMARMY BASTARD, MAME, Curator of Umbeasts
Mark
Has he had the Terrier circumsised?
Marjorie Clarke
"K Richard W" <richard....@whitbread.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:YMj2VsAP...@local.machine...
> Marjorie Clarke posted on Tue, 21 May 2002
> with the following opinion of recent events:
>
> >Her husband was a director of a big retail firm (which
> >goes by an anglicised version of his name).
>
> The one which announced much better trading results today by any chance?
Well, I didn't hear the trading results (or more likely didn't listen) but I
think the firm in question is now part of a bigger corporation, so the
answer is probably no.
Robert Hardwick
sarah.k...@talk21.com says...
Yes. It's called 'ring-barking' - that's what keeps them so small.
Bob H
Robert Hardwick
rja.ca...@excite.com says...
snip
>
> Hmm. Immigration to Wales is unusual :-) If you want to make
> your fortune starting from nothing then you begin in the
> metropolis, more opportunities...maybe Solly's father was a
> precocious London evacuee in the war, and didn't stay around
> long enough to leave a surname ;-)
Oy! I heard that!
It wasn't unusual when I did it 20 odd years back.
Although the suggestion that I won't make my forture has proved uncannily
accurate.
Bob H
BrritSki
Only on the outside. Haven't you seen the enormous t*rds they leave on
the pavement [1] ? You never saw a Westie peeing up against the Tardis
did you ? If one did there would be a collapse of the local space-time
continuum followed by .... (cont. Dimension 94)
[1] This joke courtesy of Ben Elton on last week's Parkie.
Siderius Nuncius
Colin Blackburn wrote in message ...
>Yes, derived from Ap Richard (son of Richard). Most Welsh names
>beginning with P have similar derivations.
>
>Powell = Ap Howell
>Price = Ap Rees
Pwalton = Ap Walton?
Siderius Nuncius
Robert Carnegie wrote in message ...
>
>I may be in the act of digging myself an enormous hole here, but
>to my ear the names David and Ruth sound possibly but not
>particularly Jewish, Benjamin sounds quite Jewish, and Solomon
>sounds very Jewish indeed.
Might I suggest that you put the shovel down and see whether you can borrow
a ladder?
Chris McMillan
Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes
>anon...@firedrake.org wrote in message
>news:<20020521195359....@firedrake.org>...
>> In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
>> Carnegie wrote:
>>
>> >mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Ruddock) wrote in message
>> >news:<3ce9158b...@news.freeserve.net>...
>> >> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> >> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>I forget if either David or Ruth has an ancestor or relative named Ben?
>
Stephen GC Tilley
KRW had said...
>
>Marjorie Clarke posted on Tue, 21 May 2002
>with the following opinion of recent events:
>
>>Her husband was a director of a big retail firm (which
>>goes by an anglicised version of his name).
>
>The one which announced much better trading results today by any chance?
I didn't realise that Bhs was a surname.
--
Stephen Tilley
Ste...@Tilley.net
Fax: 0870 137 2903
Stephen GC Tilley
Robert had said...
This thread has reminded me of something I learned when I started work in the
early 60s.
Q. What do you call a rich Welsmman?
A. A Londoner.
Stephen GC Tilley
>
>Colin Blackburn wrote in message ...
>
>>Yes, derived from Ap Richard (son of Richard). Most Welsh names
>>beginning with P have similar derivations.
>>
>>Powell = Ap Howell
>>Price = Ap Rees
>
>Pwalton = Ap Walton?
Soon will be, around the time that the Pnuncius family come to prominence.
Isn't Probert another one btw.
Siderius Nuncius
Stephen GC Tilley wrote in message ...
>While multitasking somewhere in the multiverse I saw that, on Wed, 22 May
2002,
>Siderius had said...
>>
>>Colin Blackburn wrote in message ...
>>
>>>Yes, derived from Ap Richard (son of Richard). Most Welsh names
>>>beginning with P have similar derivations.
>>>
>>>Powell = Ap Howell
>>>Price = Ap Rees
>>
>>Pwalton = Ap Walton?
>
>Soon will be, around the time that the Pnuncius family come to prominence.
>
>Isn't Probert another one btw.
Yes. And Pugh. And (because it's "ab" before a vowel) Bevan, Beynon and so
on.
Perhaps I shouldn't have been so rude about my Welsh teacher. Look at what
I'd never have known without him.
Robert Carnegie
> While multitasking somewhere in the multiverse I saw that, on Tue, 21 May 2002,
> KRW had said...
> >
> >Marjorie Clarke posted on Tue, 21 May 2002
> >with the following opinion of recent events:
> >
> >>Her husband was a director of a big retail firm (which
> >>goes by an anglicised version of his name).
> >
> >The one which announced much better trading results today by any chance?
>
> I didn't realise that Bhs was a surname.
Originally "Bauhaus". :-)
Robin Fairbairns
>"Rosalind Mitchell" <ro...@stwerburgh.freedombird.net> wrote ...
>> Mike Ruddock wrote:
>> > On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> > <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >>young Joshua for that matter?
>> >>
>> >>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
i'm pretty certain she isn't, myself.
>> > It has never occured to me that she might be.
>> > "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>> > (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>> > not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>> > then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>> > for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
correct.
>> Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish
>>name...
so what? when we registered our son as "samuel" my (alcoholic) uncle
john _joshua_ wilma fairbairns followed a similar ridiculous
syllogism. despite his own (high church-inclined c of e) parents'
choice of second name for him...
>Ruth, Joshua and Benjamin are *biblical* names, frequently used by
>Christians, Jewish people, agnostics, atheists and quite possibly buddists,
>taoists, muslims etc too. I know at least one Catholic with each of those
>names. I also know Jewish people called Josh and Ben (although not Ruth).
there's an occasional jewish umrat (good friend of chris mctoodles)
called ruth morrow.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge -- rf10 at cam dot ac dot uk
Robin Fairbairns
>I didn't realise that Bhs was a surname.
it's gaelic, pronounced "Vs".
Robin Fairbairns
>Isn't Probert another one btw.
yess. come on up, lads, i'm dead.
Linda Fox
>
> In message <3ce9158b...@news.freeserve.net>, Mike Ruddock
> <mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk> writes
> > (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
> >for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
> >
>
> A none Jewish umrats (for exactly that reason) concurs
Sounds like:
Solly's mother was Jewish, but his father was Welsh. So he's Jewish.
Heather isn't. Therefore Ruth isn't. Therefore Ben isn't.
--
Linda ff, Cambridge
Strong men will run for miles and miles
When one from Cherry Hinton smiles
- Rupert Brooke
towers...@btinternet.com
roll factory in Prudhoe - he's probably just works manager. It's a Kleenex
plant (I know, I've seen it)
hizz
"Linda Fox" <li...@fox.freedombird.net> wrote in message
news:3CEF3D60...@fox.freedombird.net...
Alan Craig
<towers...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>I reckon Solly Pritchard's a fraud, anyhow. He doesn't really own that loo
>roll factory in Prudhoe - he's probably just works manager. It's a Kleenex
>plant (I know, I've seen it)
>
Kimberley Clark (we once did some consulting for them)
Martin Clark
about...
Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
think I may have been slightly tempted....
--
Martin
Martin Clark
about...
No - turning over a new leaf.
--
Martin
Marjorie Clarke
Somehow we managed to resist that temptation, although we have 2 girls.
Anyway, we have an "e" so it wouldn't quite work.
Kim Andrews
<mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>think I may have been slightly tempted....
<eyelash flutter> Make me an offer?
--
Cheers, Kimbo
Best of umra archive www.totternhoe.demon.co.uk/umra/
Where don't you want to go today? www.foca.co.uk/drearyplaces/
"May 6,000 strabismic telephone operators prance in your genitals.
oo-er, wrong newsgroup." Charles F Hankel -- Hapless FAQer on the Wirral peninsula. RIP.
Bob E
> Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
> Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
> think I may have been slightly tempted....
No you wouldn't. That would be too cruel !
Mind you I believe there was someone called Orson Cart - or so I'm
told - probably a rural muff.
My middle name is Martin so I did get called Bob Martins (something to
do with dogs) for a while.
My wife chose Lawrence (after D.H.) for our youngest 'cos if it had
ben a girl I would have called her Mirriam (Sons and Lovers). Anyway
he is into cycling - no not a roady, a mountain biker - no not an
XCer(cross country), a DHer (down hiller). Which has turned out quite
well 'cos when he's famous they can call him "DH" Lawrence. Oh well.
Bob (Martins) E - ruff ruff
Neil Hopkins
wrote:
>Martin Clark <mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<O4DeoEHe...@auluk.freeserve.co.uk>...
>
>> Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>> Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>> think I may have been slightly tempted....
>
>No you wouldn't. That would be too cruel !
>
>Mind you I believe there was someone called Orson Cart - or so I'm
>told - probably a rural muff.
There's a girl at Jan's school called "Summer Rouse" ... :-)
>
>My middle name is Martin so I did get called Bob Martins (something to
>do with dogs) for a while.
>
>My wife chose Lawrence (after D.H.) for our youngest 'cos if it had
>ben a girl I would have called her Mirriam (Sons and Lovers). Anyway
>he is into cycling - no not a roady, a mountain biker - no not an
>XCer(cross country), a DHer (down hiller). Which has turned out quite
>well 'cos when he's famous they can call him "DH" Lawrence. Oh well.
>
>Bob (Martins) E - ruff ruff
--
neil h.
Spike : Sodding, blimey, shagging, knickers, bollocks, Oh God - I'm English!
Alan Craig
<mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>think I may have been slightly tempted....
For all you lovers of 1980s American TV, wofe has a girl in one of her
classes called Krystal Colby. Also, I have spotted a Krystal Tipps
serving in a fast food place, but I suspect it might have been a wind
up.
Jeremy Fry
<mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> writes
No, but I went to school with a Rosie Balls.
Wasn't there an MP called John Thomas?
--
Jeremy Fry
just south of slepe
Al Menzies
dashed across the keyboard to create this message:
> "gill spaul" <gill....@btinternet.com> writes:
>>"Rosalind Mitchell" <ro...@stwerburgh.freedombird.net> wrote ...
>>> Mike Ruddock wrote:
>>> > On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>>> > <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>>> >>young Joshua for that matter?
>>> >>
>>> >>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>
>i'm pretty certain she isn't, myself.
Anthony Parkin mentions the Jewish issue in an article plugging his
new novel (Humbridge, an Everyday Tale of Scriptwriters). Apparently
he resigned over some of the Beetles more outlandish ideas. Of
Jewishness, he says "Then someone suggested we have a Jewish person
move into Ambridge. In 50 years I have never seen a Jewish person
involved in agriculture." He doesn't say what happened to this
potential plot line though.
There are some other interesting quotes:
"I didn't agree with plonking Usha in the middle of Ambridge. It was
unrealistic to have her move into an isolated cottage in a village,
where she was the only Asian, and to be so fully integrated that
within three weeks she was taking trays of Indian sweetmeats into the
lambing shed."
"When Kate Aldridge had a baby, no one mentioned that the baby or the
father was black, How ridiculous. Can you imagine the gossip in a
village if that really happened? But Vanessa did not allow any talk of
colour."
--
al
LSM
Licensed to flame
Jo Lonergan
wrote:
>On 24 May 2002 19:24:39 GMT, the nimble fingers of Robin Fairbairns
>dashed across the keyboard to create this message:
>
>> "gill spaul" <gill....@btinternet.com> writes:
>>>"Rosalind Mitchell" <ro...@stwerburgh.freedombird.net> wrote ...
>>>> Mike Ruddock wrote:
>>>> > On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>>>> > <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>>>> >>young Joshua for that matter?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>>
>>i'm pretty certain she isn't, myself.
>
>Anthony Parkin mentions the Jewish issue in an article plugging his
>new novel (Humbridge, an Everyday Tale of Scriptwriters). Apparently
>he resigned over some of the Beetles more outlandish ideas. Of
>Jewishness, he says "Then someone suggested we have a Jewish person
>move into Ambridge. In 50 years I have never seen a Jewish person
>involved in agriculture." He doesn't say what happened to this
>potential plot line though.
>
I read a (USian) detective story once in which the heroine, visiting
London, got whistled at by a gang of Pakistani navvies.
--
Jo
Macula
(Bob E) wrote:
> Mind you I believe there was someone called Orson Cart
*True Story*I once met a Fireman called Bernie Bush. and to get the
subject back on thread, he was Jewish. His mum thought it would be a
good name for if he ever became a Rabbi.
Macula
BrritSki
I was at school with a Mr. Tudor Crum.
bernar...@btinternet.com
<a...@betterwords.co.uk> writes
>. Of
>Jewishness, he says "Then someone suggested we have a Jewish person
>move into Ambridge. In 50 years I have never seen a Jewish person
>involved in agriculture." He doesn't say what happened to this
>potential plot line though.
Well, as I have mentioned before I have worked on farms in my time even
though I only qualify as Jewishish :-)
--
Bernard M. Earp
Still holding the heights of Bromley Cross
Martin Clark
about...
>On Sat, 25 May 2002 23:26:38 +0100, Martin Clark
><mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>
>>Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>>Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>>think I may have been slightly tempted....
>
><eyelash flutter> Make me an offer?
<splutter> <blush>
--
Martin
Martin Clark
about...
>Martin Clark <mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
>message news:<O4DeoEHe...@auluk.freeserve.co.uk>...
>
>> Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>> Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>> think I may have been slightly tempted....
>
>No you wouldn't. That would be too cruel !
>
>Mind you I believe there was someone called Orson Cart - or so I'm
>told - probably a rural muff.
>
And another called Roman Galley.
--
Martin
Martin Clark
about...
>On Sun, 26 May 2002 18:35:23 +0100, BrritSki <Brri...@iname.com>
>wrote:
>> Jeremy Fry wrote:
>> > In article <O4DeoEHe...@auluk.freeserve.co.uk>, Martin Clark
>> > <mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>> > >Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>> > >think I may have been slightly tempted....
>> >
>> > No, but I went to school with a Rosie Balls.
>> >
>> I was at school with a Mr. Tudor Crum.
>
Is there something you're not telling us?
--
Martin
Tony Walton
>
> There are some other interesting quotes:
>
> "I didn't agree with plonking Usha in the middle of Ambridge. It was
> unrealistic to have her move into an isolated cottage in a village,
> where she was the only Asian, and to be so fully integrated that
> within three weeks she was taking trays of Indian sweetmeats into the
> lambing shed."
Hmmm. Its not *that* farfetched. The village in North Yorkshire
where my APs live had a shop. Mr and Mrs Patel (who are Hindus)
bought the shop and moved in with their two young sons, and within a
month Mrs P was giving people her (extremely good) garam masala. The
boys' favourite food was beefburgers and baked beans, BTW!
The Patels are the only Asians for about a five mile radius, AIUI.
--
Tony
Robert Carnegie
But when was Anthony Parkin last professionally involved with TA?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=19961009.225309.10%40cycle.demon.co.uk&output=gplain
1996/97, apparently.
I think that includes Usha moving into the village but certainly
not Kate's second baby - unless Roy is black as well (and Phoebe).
Interesting twist on his involvement in racial violence against
Asians (i.e. Usha) if the whole of that race gang was black
Ugandans...
I believe I've mentioned that it never occurred to me while
Jennifer was flirting with Sean the decorator/pub owner that
Sean was gay.
As for the question of Jewish people getting involved in agriculture,
when did _anyone_ in modern times get involved in agriculture who
didn't have a family background in it, since agricultural employment
has surely been falling pretty steadily for about 200 years...
not counting Dave Lee Travis, of course.
Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
But let's see if I get away with saying "What about Shalom Hathaway?"
Rosalind Mitchell
> I think that includes Usha moving into the village but certainly
> not Kate's second baby - unless Roy is black as well (and Phoebe).
> Interesting twist on his involvement in racial violence against
> Asians (i.e. Usha) if the whole of that race gang was black
> Ugandans...
Racial violence against asians by afro-caribbeans is far from unknown.
Rosie
--
http://www.stwerburgh.freedombird.net icq 152291404
SMARMY BASTARD, MAME, Curator of Umbeasts
Currently reading: NAIPAUL, V S, "A House for Mr Biswas"
"Witches very often disguise themselves as elders" [Kate Atkinson]
badriya
wrote:
>In message <eos1fugbqgfvtq4eg...@4ax.com>, Al Menzies
><a...@betterwords.co.uk> writes
>>. Of
>>Jewishness, he says "Then someone suggested we have a Jewish person
>>move into Ambridge. In 50 years I have never seen a Jewish person
>>involved in agriculture." He doesn't say what happened to this
>>potential plot line though.
>
>Well, as I have mentioned before I have worked on farms in my time even
>though I only qualify as Jewishish :-)
On kibbutzim in Israel they have whole farms full of Jews.
Vicky
--
The universe is not indifferent to intelligence, it is actively hostile to it.
Siderius Nuncius
Robert Carnegie wrote...
>
>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
brilliantly successful.
--
Sid
Shepherds Bush, West London
Helen Brace
"Jeremy Fry" <jere...@jeremyfry.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lKw7IWAX...@jeremyfry.demon.co.uk...
Unoversity with a girl called Henrietta Pod.
Helen B
Kim Andrews
wrote:
>
>On kibbutzim in Israel they have whole farms full of Jews.
It's very early[1], which is my only excuse for thinking you meant as
"crop" there for a moment. Boggled, I'll say I did...
Kimbo
[1] for the value of "early" that means "I haven't been up long and
have barely started this cup of tea, just in case anybody checks the
headers here.
Heather Knowles
Nuncius <siderius...@tesco.net> say
>
>Robert Carnegie wrote...
>>
>>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
>
>Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
>brilliantly successful.
Well put, Sid!
Somewhat unumratic, Robert.
--
luv from the Strumpling Chucklet xxxxxxxxx HAHA, GULP, MAME & TWIT
There's nothing worse than a shy ferret.
Mike McMillan
<hkno...@barwickgreen.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>While I was online ordering a hippo, I thought I heard Siderius
>Nuncius <siderius...@tesco.net> say
>>
>>Robert Carnegie wrote...
>>>
>>>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>>>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
>>
>>Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
>>brilliantly successful.
>
>Well put, Sid!
>
>Somewhat unumratic, Robert.
>
recently (a repeat IIRC M'Lud) on Sunday late lunchtime, R4. A series of
3 programmes about Jews and living in London which was presented by
Andrew Sachs (sp?). A chap related that when out with his father walking
around their home area, his father always carried some change and would
never refuse any beggar some change from his pocket. One day the lad
suggested to his father that perhaps they were not always true beggars
and maybe they could afford it more than his father could. His father
immediately went for him vehemently saying: "If they are begging under
false pretences, then let it be on their heads, not mine!"
I would like to add that I have yet to meet any Jew who fits the
stereotype of scrounger or penny-pincher; all those I have met are very
friendly human beings I would trust.
(Gets down from soapbox and saunters off mumbling...)
Mike
--
Mike McMillan, Mike Sounds
Digital Recording, Editing & CD Production.
Tel: 0118 9265450 Fax: 0118 9668167.
http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk
Robert Carnegie
> While I was online ordering a hippo, I thought I heard Siderius
> Nuncius <siderius...@tesco.net> say
> >
> >Robert Carnegie wrote...
> >>
> >>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
> >>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
> >
> >Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
> >brilliantly successful.
>
> Well put, Sid!
>
> Somewhat unumratic, Robert.
Goodness! I'm not saying that they _are_ all Jewish.
I was just thinking of literary and dramatic precedents with
money-minded Jewish villain stereotypes - Shakespeare, Dickens,
Trollope, someone I may be forgetting, and whoever wrote the
original Aladdin - and _not_ wishing TA to follow that route,
even in our minds. Or, as it may have turned out, just my mind.
Although anyone who would take their accountant out to dinner
of an evening - at least, what Allen or Mason would make of that -
Nick Leverton
Mike McMillan <Mi...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <EVMdSMBw...@barwickgreen.fsnet.co.uk>, Heather Knowles
><hkno...@barwickgreen.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>While I was online ordering a hippo, I thought I heard Siderius
>>Nuncius <siderius...@tesco.net> say
>>>
>>>Robert Carnegie wrote...
>>>>
>>>>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>>>>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
>>>
>>>Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
>>>brilliantly successful.
>>
>>Well put, Sid!
>>
>>Somewhat unumratic, Robert.
>>
>Indeed, very well put.
AIAOU in having read it, in the context of the preceding thread,
as a hope that the SWs would not descend to cheap characterisation ?
The clue was the fact that Borchester Land are, pace the Anarchists,
only a figbox of the SWs' imaginations ...
Nick
Kim Andrews
Leverton) wrote:
>
>AIAOU in having read it, in the context of the preceding thread,
>as a hope that the SWs would not descend to cheap characterisation ?
>The clue was the fact that Borchester Land are, pace the Anarchists,
>only a figbox of the SWs' imaginations ...
From Robert's subsequent post, I think it's *now* clear that was the
intention. If you managed to see that without the extra clue, well
done! I'm afraid it didn't read that way to me, and I obviously
wasn't AOU in that. One does have to be *so* careful in written only
communication. Yeah, I know, it's hackneyed, but it seems to bear the
repitition.
As for the "they're not real" thing. Well, none of it's real. Ever.
But it often triggers interesting and meaningful discussion of real
life issues. We've had some jolly interesting and illuminating chats
over the plight of Jazzer, and nobody's played the "it's only pretend,
so anything goes" card there, and quite right too IMO. Generally we
discuss TA issues as if it were RL, certainly the boundaries blur. If
somerat decides to discuss current plotlines, characters etc from "the
outside" as it were, taking an observational stance, and focussing on
the fictional qualities... well, that's a perfectly valid thing to do,
but it helps if we all understand that's what's happening. ;o)
Jo Lonergan
Leverton) wrote:
>In article <5UgyuHLZ...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk>,
>Mike McMillan <Mi...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <EVMdSMBw...@barwickgreen.fsnet.co.uk>, Heather Knowles
>><hkno...@barwickgreen.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>>While I was online ordering a hippo, I thought I heard Siderius
>>>Nuncius <siderius...@tesco.net> say
>>>>
>>>>Robert Carnegie wrote...
>>>>>
>>>>>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>>>>>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, well done, Robert! A post designed to give gratuitous offence, and
>>>>brilliantly successful.
>>>
>>>Well put, Sid!
>>>
>>>Somewhat unumratic, Robert.
>>>
>>Indeed, very well put.
>
>AIAOU in having read it, in the context of the preceding thread,
>as a hope that the SWs would not descend to cheap characterisation ?
YANO. I understood Robert's point, perhaps too succinctly put, was
that the SWs as we know them [1] are hardly likely to write something
that would offend everybody left of the BNP.
>The clue was the fact that Borchester Land are, pace the Anarchists,
>only a figbox of the SWs' imaginations ...
Next you'll be saying that Borchester isn't a real place!
--
Jo
[1] E.g., so squeamish [2] that, against all probability, they have to
turn the whole village colour-blind when the daughter of a prominent
local family gives birth to a black child.
[2] I *knew* there was a proper English word for P.C., and that if I
didn't try too hard to think of it the Aphasia Fairy would leave it on
my pillow.
Stephen GC Tilley
Carnegie had said...
>
>Although anyone who would take their accountant out to dinner
>of an evening - at least, what Allen or Mason would make of that -
Never let your Accountant pay for a meal. It will be recharged to you with a 30%
on-cost.
--
Stephen Tilley
Ste...@Tilley.net
Fax: 0870 137 2903
gill spaul
"Stephen GC Tilley" <Ste...@Tilley.Net> wrote in message
news:ad2dd...@drn.newsguy.com...
> While multitasking somewhere in the multiverse I saw that, on 28 May 2002,
R
> Carnegie had said...
> >
> >Although anyone who would take their accountant out to dinner
> >of an evening - at least, what Allen or Mason would make of that -
>
> Never let your Accountant pay for a meal. It will be recharged to you with
a 30%
> on-cost.
>
> --
who we will eat with!
--
Gill
Toby: "Can you explain it to me using small words and visual aids?"
Kim Andrews
<gill....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>Fenny - shall we comment? Actually, accountants can be quite picky about
>who we will eat with!
Yeah, but frock-making garden designing entrepreneurs will eat with
just *anybody*.
Fenny
I heard gill spaul say...
> > Never let your Accountant pay for a meal. It will be recharged to you with
> a 30%
> > on-cost.
> >
> > --
> Fenny - shall we comment? Actually, accountants can be quite picky about
> who we will eat with!
>
then, I'm not that sort of accountant. In the audit team, we had to be
very strict on expenses, as we checked that other people stuck to the
rules. IIRC, the last time I was at an all expenses paid by the hosts
meal, I had to sing for my supper :-(
--
Fenny - C-COITUS (co)
Fictitious Facts of the Day - From a list by Andrew Burford
#188 - 2,000,000egg cartons and 3,500,00 washing up liquid bottles went
into the making of Star Wars
Fenny
> On Wed, 29 May 2002 15:13:07 +0000 (UTC), "gill spaul"
> <gill....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >Fenny - shall we comment? Actually, accountants can be quite picky about
> >who we will eat with!
>
> Yeah, but frock-making garden designing entrepreneurs will eat with
> just *anybody*.
>
Robert Carnegie
> On Wed, 29 May 2002 09:33:10 +0000 (UTC), ni...@leverton.org (Nick
> Leverton) wrote:
>
> >
> >AIAOU in having read it, in the context of the preceding thread,
> >as a hope that the SWs would not descend to cheap characterisation ?
> >The clue was the fact that Borchester Land are, pace the Anarchists,
> >only a figbox of the SWs' imaginations ...
>
> From Robert's subsequent post, I think it's *now* clear that was the
> intention. If you managed to see that without the extra clue, well
> done! I'm afraid it didn't read that way to me, and I obviously
> wasn't AOU in that. One does have to be *so* careful in written only
> communication. Yeah, I know, it's hackneyed, but it seems to bear the
> repitition.
And if I misspoke, I apologise for that.
The board of Borchester Land are stereotype greedy unscrupulous
City business types. It would be easy to suppose, if you were
inclined so to suppose, that a number of them are stereotype
Jewish greedy unscrupulous City business types, but I think most
umrats would prefer not to suppose that, and my preference is the
same too.
> As for the "they're not real" thing. Well, none of it's real. Ever.
> But it often triggers interesting and meaningful discussion of real
> life issues. We've had some jolly interesting and illuminating chats
> over the plight of Jazzer, and nobody's played the "it's only pretend,
> so anything goes" card there, and quite right too IMO.
Welll, I like to think some of us were more free in saying "I hope
he dies or is crippled, it's what he deserves" than if we were
considering, e.g., Daniella Westbrook or Paula Yates. Although
AFAIK they weren't ever pushers or joyriders or bad influences
on their easily-led friends(?)
> Generally we
> discuss TA issues as if it were RL, certainly the boundaries blur. If
> somerat decides to discuss current plotlines, characters etc from "the
> outside" as it were, taking an observational stance, and focussing on
> the fictional qualities... well, that's a perfectly valid thing to do,
> but it helps if we all understand that's what's happening. ;o)
Understanding what's happening, _that's_ unumratic :-)
Jane Vernon
Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes
>Kim Andrews <k...@foca.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:<kfa9fu0mha6h3ab5l...@4ax.com>...
>> On Wed, 29 May 2002 09:33:10 +0000 (UTC), ni...@leverton.org (Nick
>> Leverton) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >AIAOU in having read it, in the context of the preceding thread,
>> >as a hope that the SWs would not descend to cheap characterisation ?
>> >The clue was the fact that Borchester Land are, pace the Anarchists,
>> >only a figbox of the SWs' imaginations ...
>>
>> From Robert's subsequent post, I think it's *now* clear that was the
>> intention. If you managed to see that without the extra clue, well
>> done! I'm afraid it didn't read that way to me, and I obviously
>> wasn't AOU in that. One does have to be *so* careful in written only
>> communication. Yeah, I know, it's hackneyed, but it seems to bear the
>> repitition.
>
>And if I misspoke, I apologise for that.
>
>The board of Borchester Land are stereotype greedy unscrupulous
>City business types. It would be easy to suppose, if you were
>inclined so to suppose, that a number of them are stereotype
>Jewish greedy unscrupulous City business types,
This is the bit I have difficulty with, Robert. I read what you say
about not having meant what people thought you meant, but then you make
a comment like this. In doing so, you allow "stereotype Jewish greedy
unscrupulous City business types" as a concept. I find that offensive,
indeed I had difficulty typing the phrase out myself.
>but I think most
>umrats would prefer not to suppose that, and my preference is the
>same too.
>
>> As for the "they're not real" thing. Well, none of it's real. Ever.
>> But it often triggers interesting and meaningful discussion of real
>> life issues. We've had some jolly interesting and illuminating chats
>> over the plight of Jazzer, and nobody's played the "it's only pretend,
>> so anything goes" card there, and quite right too IMO.
>
>Welll, I like to think some of us were more free in saying "I hope
>he dies or is crippled, it's what he deserves" than if we were
>considering, e.g., Daniella Westbrook or Paula Yates. Although
>AFAIK they weren't ever pushers or joyriders or bad influences
>on their easily-led friends(?)
I must disagree with you. I don't think it's any more acceptable to
express an offensive idea about someone fictional as someone real. It's
the *acknowledging the concepts and value systems of discrimination*
part that's offensive, whether you apply them to real people or
fictional.
--
Jane
The potter in the purple socks
http://www.clothandclay.co.uk
http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook/contents.htm
Stephen GC Tilley
Jane had said...
>>City business types. It would be easy to suppose, if you were
>>inclined so to suppose, that a number of them are stereotype
>>Jewish greedy unscrupulous City business types,
>
>This is the bit I have difficulty with, Robert. I read what you say
>about not having meant what people thought you meant, but then you make
>a comment like this. In doing so, you allow "stereotype Jewish greedy
>unscrupulous City business types" as a concept. I find that offensive,
>indeed I had difficulty typing the phrase out myself.
As a City business type, albeit not a stereotype, only 25% Jewish and on the
side of the angels I would observe that that stereotype is many decades out of
date. BLand is more typical of the small-town masonic magic circles that anyone
with experience of local government is familiar with. (Which I why I wondered
why they were having a board meeting in London).
Most City business types are investing money on behalf of others. They owe a
fiduciary - and increasingly statutory - duty to maximise the funds they are
charged with managing. This may seem greedy to outsiders but under-performance
can now result in their employers being sued, so they certainly play "hard
ball". However, nowadays they are well aware of the risk to reputation if any
lack of scruples or dishonesty is encountered. You are much more likely to find
honesty when dealing with a City firm compared against entrepreneurs such as
Matt Crawford and his cronies.
Robert Carnegie
We may be disagreeing on the meaning or the concept of "stereotype".
By me, stereotypes aren't people, they're projections of prejudice
which happen to be shaped like people. They appear in inferior
fiction and in cheap newspapers. Real people are almost always
much better than whichever stereotype you may have mistaken them for.
For about 1900 of the past 2000 years of English Gentile
literature, Jews have been common fictional villains, and
middle class Jews in particular but not exclusively; my
catalogue again: Shylock; Fagin; that bloke in _The Way We
Live Now_. Of course there are plenty of non-Jewish villains
around as well, but there aren't many Jewish protagonists
or positive portrayals. I think _Ivanhoe_ is about it...
John Buchan cheerfully used offensive-list-deleted as villains
in his adventure novels. According to R4 the other night,
the famous Orpington by-election might not have been lost by
the Tories if their candidate hadn't been Jewish: Orpington
didn't like it. Some of the most hated British politicians
today (in all parties) are Jewish. Young British hooligans
scrawl swastikas and slogans across Jewish graves and synagogues.
Many Americans believe that their media and their government
are Jewish conspiracies. And _The Archers_' former agricultural
story editor protests against the idea that a Jew would ever
be allowed to live in Ambridge, political correctness gone mad.
I am not responsible for any of this (except when I neglect
to take a stand against it). And my preference is still that
the villainous board members of Borchester Land should be
non-Jewish villains.
So this may be one more reason to dislike Matt; I certainly
don't think he's a churchgoer. Not to dislike him because
he may (I'm not sure) be Jewish, but because he may be an
unliving monster caricature with nothing much to do with any
real living person.
That isn't good fiction, and it brings the danger that we
will fall into the trap of thinking that real people _are_
like him, if they superficially resemble him.
> >> As for the "they're not real" thing. Well, none of it's real. Ever.
> >> But it often triggers interesting and meaningful discussion of real
> >> life issues. We've had some jolly interesting and illuminating chats
> >> over the plight of Jazzer, and nobody's played the "it's only pretend,
> >> so anything goes" card there, and quite right too IMO.
> >
> >Welll, I like to think some of us were more free in saying "I hope
> >he dies or is crippled, it's what he deserves" than if we were
> >considering, e.g., Daniella Westbrook or Paula Yates. Although
> >AFAIK they weren't ever pushers or joyriders or bad influences
> >on their easily-led friends(?)
>
> I must disagree with you. I don't think it's any more acceptable to
> express an offensive idea about someone fictional as someone real. It's
> the *acknowledging the concepts and value systems of discrimination*
> part that's offensive, whether you apply them to real people or
> fictional.
Well...it surely isn't reasonable to aspire to a standard of never
thinking ill of anyone, or for us to hold each other to such a
standard. This wasn't really the point I was trying to make, but
if fictional characters are the objects of our negative feelings
then no one gets hurt in the first place, and the clear difference
between real and fictional people (notably that real people react
to our attitude to them, and Lynda Snell and Joe and Ed Grundy
just carry on regardless of our shouting at the radio - mind you,
Lynda doesn't even notice when her neighbours get wound up by her)
straightens us out. Fiction lets us experiment mentally with ideas
for dealing with social situations and arrangements; so that we
have ideas for dealing with challenging situations when we meet
them in real life.
The point that I _was_ trying to make is simply that I _hope_
that some of the things which umrats have said here about Jazzer
and Theo - apparently off the cuff, although that's hard to judge
in text - are more than they'd say about a real person in a
similar situation. I may indeed be mistaking considered
judgments, delivered more in sorrow than in anger, for
cheap jibes. But some of us thought it would be comical if
Jazzer became blind, like the actor who portrays the character.
My own feeling is that sympathy for Jazzer is misplaced
/because he isn't a real person/ and there are enough of us
real people to worry about already, and what I'd like the
writers to do with him depends on my desire for justice to
be done to the wicked in fiction as also in real life
(leavened with leftover Christian there-but-for-the-grace-of-God),
a hope that Jazzer's story may teach a lesson to - well, I suppose
to children who switch on the radio early for _Go 4 It_ -
and a distaste for a Scottish accent which, despite the actor
being, as I understand, as much an authentic son of Glasgow
as I am, or more so, still seems to me to have something very
much wrong with it. I wouldn't mind not hearing it again.
But I can live with it. His emotions are genuine even if
it's hard to feel that his accent is.
Kim Andrews
Carnegie) wrote:
>
>My own feeling is that sympathy for Jazzer is misplaced
>/because he isn't a real person/ and there are enough of us
When we discuss our reactions to Jazzer, without using phrases like "I
wish they'd write him out" or similar to indicate a stepping back from
the fiction, are we not simply using him as a metaphor for reality? I
assumed we discussed him as a real life example, because there is
merit and value in doing that. We have our comical cartoony moments,
usually when trying for a last minute entry to the BTA awards, but
they are generally so well sign-posted as not to be mistaken.
I think it usually goes something like:
"Ryan Kelly blah blah" <-- reality.
"Jazzer blah blah" <-- fiction as reality.
"I wish they'd drop a Fergie on him" <-- Tom & Jerry mode.
Sometimes the script-writing or acting is so bad that one's disbelief
becomes unsuspended (so to speak!) and comes crashing down all over
the plot line. When they get it right though, we frequently end up
discussing the issues as if they were real, and the opinions expressed
are just as heartfelt. I don't think that means we can't tell the
difference between fiction and reality, I think it means we know a
good discussion when we see one! If, however, some people think
they're having a "fiction as reality" style discussion, and others are
firmly in Disneyland, confusion is a distinct possibility.
Jane Vernon
don't, but nothing I particularly want to respond to>
>
>So this may be one more reason to dislike Matt; I certainly
>don't think he's a churchgoer. Not to dislike him because
>he may (I'm not sure) be Jewish, but because he may be an
>unliving monster caricature with nothing much to do with any
>real living person.
It's the bringing in of the idea that he may be Jewish, that is a
puzzle. As far as I can remember there is no reference to it whatsoever
in TA. Therefore it has been brought in because his behaviour fits a
stereotype.
>
>That isn't good fiction, and it brings the danger that we
>will fall into the trap of thinking that real people _are_
>like him, if they superficially resemble him.
>
>> >> As for the "they're not real" thing. Well, none of it's real. Ever.
>> >> But it often triggers interesting and meaningful discussion of real
>> >> life issues. We've had some jolly interesting and illuminating chats
>> >> over the plight of Jazzer, and nobody's played the "it's only pretend,
>> >> so anything goes" card there, and quite right too IMO.
>> >
>> >Welll, I like to think some of us were more free in saying "I hope
>> >he dies or is crippled, it's what he deserves" than if we were
>> >considering, e.g., Daniella Westbrook or Paula Yates. Although
>> >AFAIK they weren't ever pushers or joyriders or bad influences
>> >on their easily-led friends(?)
>>
>> I must disagree with you. I don't think it's any more acceptable to
>> express an offensive idea about someone fictional as someone real. It's
>> the *acknowledging the concepts and value systems of discrimination*
>> part that's offensive, whether you apply them to real people or
>> fictional.
>
>Well...it surely isn't reasonable to aspire to a standard of never
>thinking ill of anyone, or for us to hold each other to such a
>standard. This wasn't really the point I was trying to make, but
>if fictional characters are the objects of our negative feelings
>then no one gets hurt in the first place,
Ah now. But they do. That's the whole point. People do get hurt by
remarks made about a group of people to which they belong, even if the
*individuals* being referred to are fictional, because the groups and
the remarks are real.
>and the clear difference
>between real and fictional people (notably that real people react
>to our attitude to them, and Lynda Snell and Joe and Ed Grundy
>just carry on regardless of our shouting at the radio - mind you,
>Lynda doesn't even notice when her neighbours get wound up by her)
>straightens us out. Fiction lets us experiment mentally with ideas
>for dealing with social situations and arrangements; so that we
>have ideas for dealing with challenging situations when we meet
>them in real life.
Yes, and that's a good thing when conducted in the privacy of our own
homes. It can also be a good thing in a public forum but there are
accompanying risks. There are others reading who may be affected by
what we write. Personally I try not to offend others, though I accept
that I probably have inadvertently done so, but you can't expect people
not to let you know when they are offended if you are going to explore
the darker side of your psyche on umra.
>
>The point that I _was_ trying to make is simply that I _hope_
>that some of the things which umrats have said here about Jazzer
>and Theo - apparently off the cuff, although that's hard to judge
>in text - are more than they'd say about a real person in a
>similar situation. I may indeed be mistaking considered
>judgments, delivered more in sorrow than in anger, for
>cheap jibes. But some of us thought it would be comical if
>Jazzer became blind, like the actor who portrays the character.
I must have missed something. I have no recall of anyrat finding such
an idea comical. Ironic, maybe, but that's not the same thing at all.
>
>My own feeling is that sympathy for Jazzer is misplaced
>/because he isn't a real person/ and there are enough of us
>real people to worry about already, and what I'd like the
>writers to do with him depends on my desire for justice to
>be done to the wicked in fiction as also in real life
>(leavened with leftover Christian there-but-for-the-grace-of-God),
>a hope that Jazzer's story may teach a lesson to - well, I suppose
>to children who switch on the radio early for _Go 4 It_ -
>and a distaste for a Scottish accent which, despite the actor
>being, as I understand, as much an authentic son of Glasgow
>as I am, or more so, still seems to me to have something very
>much wrong with it. I wouldn't mind not hearing it again.
>But I can live with it. His emotions are genuine even if
>it's hard to feel that his accent is.
Some of this discussion is interesting, but I can't help feeling you've
missed the point here. Whether or not you intended it, you *have* very
much offended some of us. Some acknowledgement of that would be nice.
an...@nildram.co.uk
wrote:
>While multitasking somewhere in the multiverse I saw that, on Thu, 30 May 2002,
>Jane had said...
>>
>>a comment like this. In doing so, you allow "stereotype Jewish greedy
>>unscrupulous City business types" as a concept. I find that offensive,
>>indeed I had difficulty typing the phrase out myself.
>
>As a City business type, albeit not a stereotype, only 25% Jewish and on the
>side of the angels I would observe that that stereotype is many decades out of
>date. BLand is more typical of the small-town masonic magic circles that anyone
>with experience of local government is familiar with.
Is that supposed to be less offensive?
I'm not a mason myself but the various family, friends, business
aquaintances and, yes, even councillors who are seem to me to have
been exemplorary upright citizens.
--
Regards
Andy Minter
Brenda Selwyn
> "gill spaul" <gill....@btinternet.com> writes:
>>"Rosalind Mitchell" <ro...@stwerburgh.freedombird.net> wrote ...
>>> Mike Ruddock wrote:
>>> > On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>>> > <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Why have we not heard of the circumcision of young Benjamin? Or that of
>>> >>young Joshua for that matter?
>>> >>
>>> >>I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>
>i'm pretty certain she isn't, myself.
>
>>> > It has never occured to me that she might be.
>>> > "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>>> > (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>>> > not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>>> > then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>>> > for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>
>correct.
>
>>> Ruth is a Jewish name; Joshua is a Jewish name; Benjamin is a Jewish
>>>name...
>
>so what? when we registered our son as "samuel" my (alcoholic) uncle
>john _joshua_ wilma fairbairns followed a similar ridiculous
>syllogism. despite his own (high church-inclined c of e) parents'
>choice of second name for him...
>
>>Ruth, Joshua and Benjamin are *biblical* names, frequently used by
>>Christians, Jewish people, agnostics, atheists and quite possibly buddists,
>>taoists, muslims etc too. I know at least one Catholic with each of those
>>names. I also know Jewish people called Josh and Ben (although not Ruth).
>
>there's an occasional jewish umrat (good friend of chris mctoodles)
>called ruth morrow.
--
*************************************************************************
Brenda M Selwyn
Nr Bath, North East Somerset
Brenda Selwyn
>anon...@firedrake.org wrote in message news:<20020521195359....@firedrake.org>...
>> In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
>> Carnegie wrote:
>>
>> >mi...@ruddock50.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Ruddock) wrote in message
>> >news:<3ce9158b...@news.freeserve.net>...
>> >> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:47:22 GMT, Rosalind Mitchell
>> >> <dev...@stwerburgh.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >I mean, Ruth *is* Jewish, isn't she?
>> >> It has never occured to me that she might be.
>> >> "Solly" might make us think that her father could be Jewish
>> >> (but wouldn't the surname Pritchard strike a false note?) "Heather" is
>> >> not notably a Jewish name, and if Ruth's mother is in fact a gentile,
>> >> then so is Ruth (In Jewish law, as I understand it, the requirement
>> >> for Jewishness is to have been born of a Jewish mother.)
>> >Um, probably.
>> >Pritchard - wow! google.com suddenly now _automatically_
>> >corrects "Ruth Pritcherd" (zero hits) to "Ruth Pritchard" -
>> >may be perhaps a British name acquired by Solly's family
>> >upon immigration to Britain?
>>
>> Whenever that might have been, any time since Cromwell. Supposing that the
>> Pritchards are Jewish, for which I have heard no particular evidence. It's
>> a Welsh name.
>
>Hmm. Immigration to Wales is unusual :-) If you want to make
>your fortune starting from nothing then you begin in the
>metropolis, more opportunities...maybe Solly's father was a
>precocious London evacuee in the war, and didn't stay around
>long enough to leave a surname ;-)
>
>For some reason, Scotland allegedly has more Italian-owned
>ice-cream parlours than the national average...?
>
>> >Do we know Ruth's parents' background?
>>
>> Foreigners, aren't they? Somewhere up north of Watford, they come from.
>> (Insert irony smiley hereabouts)
>>
>> >Solly's accent isn't anything but English, to my ear.
>>
>> Which is a great surprise? It is possible to be Jewish and have a family
>> that's been living in Britain for over three centuries -- you expect maybe
>> Solly should speak Aramaic? That's assuming that to be called "Solly"
>> means he's Jewish anyhow, like being called David or Tim or Mark
>> or....(insert other Archers'-type names here) does.
>
>On the first point: quite so. I'm not accusing Solly of being
>_such_ a recent immigrant like Marks and Spencer! ;-) And Britain
>is populated entirely by immigrants anyway, including Angles and
>Saxons and Boxgrove Man. This is curiosity, not planning a pogrom.
>
>> > [I would like any Jewish umrats] To comment, for instance,
>> > whether family given names stay Jewish if religious
>> > observances in the family go by the wayside.
>>
>> Sometimes Jewish patronymics/surnames got changed by Imperial decree. Or
>> by the whim of some Kaiser or immigration official. Or maybe just because
>> the family during WWI thought that name sounded a bit German perhaps, and
>> it was safer to change it rather than be all the time suspected of being a
>> spy, on arrival here.
>>
>> One of the most devout Jews I know has the surname "Brown". I think the
>> family changed it from "Braun" in about 1914. Before that, I think it was
>> something Russian and was altered without their having much say in the
>> matter when they moved West a bit.
>
>Wow! I didn't know that.
>
>If you make all the Jews change their names then how do you
>track them down when the time for the next pogrom comes around...
>
>Might apply to Glasgow comedian Arnold Brown, as well...?
>
>I was (unclearly) thinking about given names, though, which just
>happen to run in families because the baby is named after grandpa
>or whoever - like Daniel Mark Hebden or Phillipa Rose Archer.
>
>I may be in the act of digging myself an enormous hole here, but
>to my ear the names David and Ruth sound possibly but not
>particularly Jewish, Benjamin sounds quite Jewish, and Solomon
>sounds very Jewish indeed. Arnold...hmm. (Could be his stage name.)
>I forget if either David or Ruth has an ancestor or relative named Ben?
>
>Of course the odds at one point were on the latest child being
>called Jack or Chloe, but then every Tom, Dick and Harry is called
>Jack or Chloe.
Brenda Selwyn
>In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
>Carnegie wrote:
>
>>anon...@firedrake.org wrote in message
>>news:<20020521195359....@firedrake.org>...
>>> In message <f3f18bc0.02052...@posting.google.com> Robert
>>> Carnegie wrote:
>[snip]
>>Hmm. Immigration to Wales is unusual :-) If you want to make
>>your fortune starting from nothing then you begin in the
>>metropolis, more opportunities...maybe Solly's father was a
>>precocious London evacuee in the war, and didn't stay around
>>long enough to leave a surname ;-)
>
>Good grief, now we're bastardising the poor man? :-)
>
>It's possible (I honestly don't know -- interested question implied here)
>that the Welsh didn't chuck all the Jews out, as the English disgracefully
>did, in the Middle Ages, and that a Jewish family in Wales might have been
>there since _before_ the 1600s. And since surname goes by father, but
>Jewish goes by mother, any amount of confusion of names might have happened
>in the centuries between.
>
>>For some reason, Scotland allegedly has more Italian-owned
>>ice-cream parlours than the national average...?
>
>Inverness has a large expatriate Polish community. And I'm told that Scots
>Gaelic is very close to one of the languages from the sub-continent. (More
>useless irrelevant but entertaining facts...) I was once told there is an
>island off Scotland with a large proportion of its population made up of
>Gaelic-speaking, kilt-wearing, bagpipe-playing Pakistani immigrants who
>make spectacle-frames for a living. (Working with an optical suppliers'
>wrestling with early computer-systems brings strange side-effects, such as
>information like that.)
>
>>> Sometimes Jewish patronymics/surnames got changed by Imperial decree. Or
>>> by the whim of some Kaiser or immigration official. Or maybe just because
>>> the family during WWI thought that name sounded a bit German perhaps, and
>>> it was safer to change it rather than be all the time suspected of being a
>>> spy, on arrival here.
>>> One of the most devout Jews I know has the surname "Brown". I think the
>>> family changed it from "Braun" in about 1914. Before that, I think it was
>>> something Russian and was altered without their having much say in the
>>> matter when they moved West a bit.
>>Wow! I didn't know that.
>
>It's hearsayish, because he's not around to ask just at the moment, but
>that was roughly how I understood the name to have arisen. Lehmann is a
>good German name, but a lot of Jewish immigrants to Germany got given it on
>arrival -- that one I know for sure.
>
>>If you make all the Jews change their names then how do you
>>track them down when the time for the next pogrom comes around...
>
>Dunno. Check their hats?
>
>>I was (unclearly) thinking about given names, though, which just
>>happen to run in families because the baby is named after grandpa
>>or whoever - like Daniel Mark Hebden or Phillipa Rose Archer.
>>I may be in the act of digging myself an enormous hole here, but
>>to my ear the names David and Ruth sound possibly but not
>>particularly Jewish, Benjamin sounds quite Jewish, and Solomon
>>sounds very Jewish indeed. Arnold...hmm. (Could be his stage name.)
>
>Yes. Isaac is another somewhat Jewish-origin name, like Solomon; and I
>know several Negro Isaacs who may or may not have any Jewish ancestry. But
>"Ben"... Hmmm. "Simon" is pretty English, like "Peter" and "John" and
>"James" and "Thomas", but they are all Jewish originally, aren't they? I
>think whether they were adopted by the English may be something to do with
>whether they are old- or new-testament, or seen as such. If they turn up
>as an apostle, they are more likely to have been chosen by Christian
>English folk as names (like Bartholemew used to be quite usual): it might
>be as simple as that. So "Mary" and "Elizabeth" and "Anne" are
>new-testament, and "Jane" because it's the female form of John. But
>"Jacob" and "David" and "Michael" have all been _very_ English, and aren't
>particularly new-testament. Hmmm again.
>
>(This is beginning to remind me of Alf Garnett's assertion that Jesus was
>an Englishman. His grounds, IIRC, were simple: "Stands to reason, dunnit.
>Joseph and Mary, they're English names, of course he was English, like his
>parents."
>
>>I forget if either David or Ruth has an ancestor or relative named Ben?
>
>(this was organised when it left here, I have no idea what may happen to it
>on the way to umra!)
>
> William Forrest m Lisa John Archer m Phoebe
> | |
> ---------------------- -------------------------------
> | | | | | |
> Tom m Pru Ted Doris m Dan John ("Ben") m Simone Frank m Laura
>
>is the very top of the "family tree" I have for the Archer clan. It also
>explains in passing why he was "Uncle Tom" Forrest to all the Archer
>children.
>
>So the sprog was named after Phil's Uncle Ben. (Whether UB became a
>rice-farmer I have no idea.)
>
>HTH?
>
>Weevil
>
>AttLSM, UBBBA, UNCEMPT BAG, HAHA
>Gotta keep rockin' while I still can
>Got a two-pack habit and a motel tan.
Brenda Selwyn
>I may be imagining things, but I thought Bob E muttered something
>about...
>>Martin Clark <mar...@auluk.nospamplease.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
>>message news:<O4DeoEHe...@auluk.freeserve.co.uk>...
>>
>>> Somewhere out there, there just *has* to be a girl called Kimberley
>>> Clark. Perhaps somerat knows of such a person? If I'd had offspring I
>>> think I may have been slightly tempted....
>>
>>No you wouldn't. That would be too cruel !
>>
>>Mind you I believe there was someone called Orson Cart - or so I'm
>>told - probably a rural muff.
>>
>My friend once taught a boy called Donald Duck.
>
>And another called Roman Galley.
Warwick Bailey
Norman Painting
Brenda Selwyn
Robert Carnegie
Not exactly. It's been brought in because "last time" (an
unfortunate conversation about fifteen years ago) I made a
mistake of assuming that the stranger I was talking to _wasn't_
Jewish, and that, therefore, I could get away with a wisecrack.
He does indeed also seem by accent and background to fit the
stereotype of London barrow-boy made good - I think I'm thinking
of Alan Sugar here.
(I am alarmed to learn by Google, which I didn't previously
realise, that Alan Sugar is Jewish. What alarms me is how
much all we ZX Spectrum owners hated him when he took over
Sinclair, and also the attitude of Tottenham Hotspur fans
which I am not. I cheerfully joined in the friendly hate
without considering that my fellow haters could have this
secret motive alongside the explicit one. This was a long
time ago as well...Is Sir Clive Sinclair the inventor Jewish
as well? The writer Clive Sinclair is, which makes Google
work that much harder.)
Perhaps you didn't closely read the thread "This guy is trying
to steal my mates wife", which drifted onto discussing Jazzer,
although, when I check back, I seem to have been the chief
initiator of speculation as to the extent of Jazzer's condition
in the long term, but by no means the only subscriber. I blush
to be reminded by http://groups.google.com/ that expressed
disappointment that he hadn't actually died, I being fed up
that the writers keep teasing us like that at cliff-hangers
and hardly ever deliver the goods.
Verbal use of irony is so a form of humour, so there,
and so I won't presently retract "comical".
> >My own feeling is that sympathy for Jazzer is misplaced
> >/because he isn't a real person/ and there are enough of us
> >real people to worry about already, and what I'd like the
> >writers to do with him depends on my desire for justice to
> >be done to the wicked in fiction as also in real life
> >(leavened with leftover Christian there-but-for-the-grace-of-God),
> >a hope that Jazzer's story may teach a lesson to - well, I suppose
> >to children who switch on the radio early for _Go 4 It_ -
> >and a distaste for a Scottish accent which, despite the actor
> >being, as I understand, as much an authentic son of Glasgow
> >as I am, or more so, still seems to me to have something very
> >much wrong with it. I wouldn't mind not hearing it again.
> >But I can live with it. His emotions are genuine even if
> >it's hard to feel that his accent is.
>
> Some of this discussion is interesting, but I can't help feeling you've
> missed the point here. Whether or not you intended it, you *have* very
> much offended some of us. Some acknowledgement of that would be nice.
I recognise that offense is taken, but I'm not certain that it is
justly taken. Perhaps umrats who are offended could express
themselves more plainly in private e-mail; I'd appreciate that.
I honestly don't see what I might be doing wrong -
- except for playing the game of "guessing who's Jewish" in the
first place, which could be either as innocent as the Harmony
Hair Spray question or as vicious as the Final Solution, or
somewhere, venial or not, in between. Umra not being a serious
forum, I meant to play the game innocently, but even that may
not be possible in the present day. If that is the (I apparently
misspelt this the other day) consensus, my shots today (see above)
will be my last at the game here.
Mike Ruddock
At last! I was beginning to think my kit had taken against
you.
Somewhere up there ^ there are several postings from you
which reproduce the posting you are replying to in full but add
nothing of your own. What's going on?
Mike Ruddock
George Middleton
>but even that may not be possible in the present day. If that is the
>(I apparently misspelt this the other day) consensus, my shots today
>(see above) will be my last at the game here.
But Robert, we write every time in the almost certainty that there will
be somerat who does not agree with or does not understand what we say.
Even if you smother your posts with smilies and TLAs suspicions of your
motives may arise in some minds.
You can be completely vacuous, but we only have one established post in
that field and it is occupied at the moment.
I heard you apologise to anyone you may have offended, there is no more
that you need to do. Keep posting, you have a right to be here and I for
one would miss you terribly if you left.
And that goes for *every* umrat who leaves without an excuse as good as
Hesky's, Chankel's and Glynn's.
--
George
Siderius Nuncius
Jane Vernon wrote in message ...
>In message <f3f18bc0.02053...@posting.google.com>, Robert
<mighty snippage>
>>
>>So this may be one more reason to dislike Matt; I certainly
>>don't think he's a churchgoer. Not to dislike him because
>>he may (I'm not sure) be Jewish, but because he may be an
>>unliving monster caricature with nothing much to do with any
>>real living person.
>
>It's the bringing in of the idea that he may be Jewish, that is a
>puzzle. As far as I can remember there is no reference to it whatsoever
>in TA. Therefore it has been brought in because his behaviour fits a
>stereotype.
I wasn't going to come back to this thread, but as I was the one who first
said that your post gave offence, Robert, I will just say this in support of
Jane. What she says above about the raising of the matter in relation to BL
at all is the crux.
You assure us that you do not approve of sterotyping Jews as grasping
villains. I accept your assurance. However, you had just been speculating
on whether one could tell whether someone was a Jew by their possession of a
certain name, and I (among others) had suggested that you might like to stop
digging yourself into a hole. (I don't want to go over why I didn't like
all that - just to point out here that it had happened.) Immediately
afterward, you said in the middle of a post which had nothing whatever to do
with Judaism:
>Since Borchester Land are by and large villains, let's not
>speculate whether any of them are Jewish or not.
You then maintain that you weren't suggesting anything by it. It's just
that, quite unrelated to your having been mildly rebuked for some very
recent remaks about Jews, you *happened* to be thinking of Jewish
steroetypes in literature and thought you'd better mention that umrats
shouldn't fall into the same trap by speculating on BL's Jewishness. The
fact that you had been speculating on Ruth Archer's Jewishness and had been
disagreed with on umra just a few hours before had completely slipped your
mind and hadn't prompted you to post a
sarcastic and offensive response at all. It was purely a kind note of
guidance for umrats based upon your literary observations.
Frankly, it is *this* which I find hard to accept. Given what you've said
since, I genuinely do accept that you oppose anti-Semitism. I agree with
you that one should be free to criticise bad behaviour in anyone, no matter
who they are, provided the criticism is genuinely directed at the behaviour.
But I still think that your original was a sideswipe which, given its
context, was offensive. I think it was a mistake rather than some
expression of secretly-held anti-Semitic beliefs, but it was still - in my
view anyway - not the sort of thing which should have been posted in the way
it was and I haven't found your subsequent explanatory spin convincing.
--
Sid
Shepherds Bush, West London
badriya
Carnegie) wrote:
>For about 1900 of the past 2000 years of English Gentile
>literature, Jews have been common fictional villains, and
>middle class Jews in particular but not exclusively; my
>catalogue again: Shylock; Fagin; that bloke in _The Way We
>Live Now_. Of course there are plenty of non-Jewish villains
>around as well, but there aren't many Jewish protagonists
>or positive portrayals. I think _Ivanhoe_ is about it...
Have you read any James Mitchner? The Source? Or Leon Uris? Exodus?
Or The Diary of Anne Frank?
What about Marueen Lipman and many of the characters she portrays?
For me the image of Jews changed in the 60s when Israel won the 6 days
war. Or maybe a bit before that when I saw the film Cast a Giant
Shadow about the birth of the country. Unfortunately I'm less proud
of being Jewish now and worried about some of Israel's actions, but
the image of money-lenders etc seems very out-of-date.
Nobody has mentioned Rachmann, by the way.
Vicky
--
The universe is not indifferent to intelligence, it is actively hostile to it.
Kim Andrews
Carnegie) wrote:
>
>Not exactly. It's been brought in because "last time" (an
>unfortunate conversation about fifteen years ago) I made a
>mistake of assuming that the stranger I was talking to _wasn't_
>Jewish, and that, therefore, I could get away with a wisecrack.
I guess this might be the crucial difference in approach that's
powering this discussion: some people think anti-semitic wisecracks
are unacceptable *whether or not* one's audience is Jewish. To not
make such comments through fear of being caught out, is a different
approach to not making them because one considers them simply wrong
(or even because they never occur to one). If one subscribes to the
former school, then comments will slip out when one is feeling secure
in one's audience; if to the latter, then such comments (however
humorously meant) will cause offence. Clearly we have members of both
schools in umra, and I think there's little chance of anybody changing
camp.
I recognise that the above is rather heavy on the "ones", but I'm sure
umrats will recognise why that is so and let me off just this <ahem>
once. ;o)
BrritSki
> I recognise that offense is taken, but I'm not certain that it is
> justly taken. Perhaps umrats who are offended could express
> themselves more plainly in private e-mail; I'd appreciate that.
> I honestly don't see what I might be doing wrong -
>
That is the heart of the problem. I think that you should apologise to
thoserats who are offended (justifiably or not) and shut up about it.
Jane Vernon
>I recognise that offense is taken, but I'm not certain that it is
>justly taken.
Ah well, if you don't see it then I guess you don't see it. Probably
not much more I can add to what I've already said, however ....
>Perhaps umrats who are offended could express
>themselves more plainly in private e-mail; I'd appreciate that.
.....I think this is probably a good move.
>I meant to play the game innocently, but even that may
>not be possible in the present day. If that is the (I apparently
>misspelt this the other day) consensus, my shots today (see above)
>will be my last at the game here.
There's no need for that. Just because there is disagreement doesn't
mean someone has to leave.
Linda Fox
>
> There's a girl at Jan's school called "Summer Rouse" ... :-)
And we have a Summer Reader. Bit of homework for the holidays?
There was a teacher of singing at the Royal Academy of Music in the 60s
called Olive Groves.
--
Linda ff