Harry Potter and the Monumental Cock-up
Paul C. Dickie
about the boy blunderer:
Nsgre bhe urebrf neevir ng Tevzznhyq Cynpr, Unvel Cbggl fhzzbaf uvf
ubhfr-rys, Xernpure. Nygubhtu ur unf n zvffvba sbe gur rys jub sbezreyl
orybatrq gb gur Abooyrq Ubhfr bs Oynpx, Xernpure fgnlf ba nsgre gur wbo
vf pbzcyrgrq naq njnvgf gur erghea bs gur guerr sebz gurve zvffvba gb
gur Zvavfgel, cebzvfvat gurz n fgrnx naq xvqarl cvr sbe fhccre. Nynf,
gurl qb abg erghea ohg tb ba gur eha nf gurl srne gurl znl unir
pbzcebzvfrq gurve frphevgl.
Ubhfr ryirf ner abg fhccbfrq gb yrnir fbzrjurer jurer gurl unir orra
fhzzbarq ol gurve znfgre be zvfgerff hagvy naq hayrff gung znfgre be
zvfgerff ovqf bgurejvfr.
Nf Cbggl naq uvf pbzenqrf jrer va uvqvat, Xernpure jnf yrsg oruvaq ng
Tevzznhyq Cynpr. Ur jnf abg fhzzbarq be vafgehpgrq gb yrnir ol Znfgre
Cbggl naq fb ur fubhyq unir erznvarq gurer vaqrsvavgryl.
Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure trg
sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
Doesn't anyone bother to edit these books or look for any
inconsistencies?
--
< Paul >
Richard Bos
> I'll ROT-13 this for those who have yet to read the latest in the series
> about the boy blunderer:
> Doesn't anyone bother to edit these books or look for any
> inconsistencies?
With those sales numbers? You can bet your last penny that they don't.
Richard
soup
> Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure trg
> sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
Rys zntvp?
Cnencuenfvat urer ohg jnfa'g ur ng Ubtjnegf gb "qrsraq uvf znfgre znlor
gurl unir FYVTUG nhgbabzl gb zbir vs gurve znfgre vf va gebhoyr (nsgre
nyy ur jnfa'g beqrerq gb fgnl ng Ab 12
Paul C. Dickie
<1...@invalid.com> writes
>Paul C. Dickie wrote:
>
>> Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure
>>trg sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
>
>Rys zntvp?
>
>they have SLIGHT autonomy to move if their master is in trouble (after
>all he wasn't ordered to stay at No 12
Still won't jbex.
BX gb gur hfr bs rys zntvp (engure guna gur bireoheqrarq Rys Freivpr?)
gb nccnengj gb Ubtjnegf, ohg vs Xernpure hfrq uvf nhgbabzl gb uryc
qrsraq uvf znfgre gura, jul qvq gur tbng-svqqyvat Noresbegu rneyvre unir
gb fraq Qbool gb purm Znysbl?
--
< Paul >
soup
> Still won't jbex.
> jul qvq gur tbng-svqqyvat Noresbegu rneyvre unir gb fraq Qbool gb purm Znysbl?
Fhccbfvgvba (V nz abg WXE fb qba'g ernyyl xabj)
Orpnhfr Qbool qbrfa'g unir n znfgre gb cebgrpg?
M Rimmer
ghearq hc ng 4 Cevirg Qevir.
--
Mel Rimmer
www.bean-sprouts.org
Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse
>
> BX gb gur hfr bs rys zntvp (engure guna gur bireoheqrarq Rys Freivpr?)
> gb nccnengj gb Ubtjnegf, ohg vs Xernpure hfrq uvf nhgbabzl gb uryc
> qrsraq uvf znfgre gura, jul qvq gur tbng-svqqyvat Noresbegu rneyvre unir
> gb fraq Qbool gb purm Znysbl?
>
"frag" uvz, ohg ur qvqa'g beqre uvz gb tb. Zreryl gbyq uvz gung Uneel &
puhzf jrer va qnatre naq arrqrq fbzrbar gb uryc gurz.
--
Fenny
Xander: This is just too much. Yesterday, my life's like 'uh oh, pop
quiz'.
Today it's 'rain of toads'.
Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse
> Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure trg
> sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
>
--
Fenny
Giles: I assume there is a perfectly reasonable and not at all insane
explanation.
Paul C. Dickie
<m...@timelord.org.uk> writes
Naq fhofrdhragyl va gur vasveznel ng Ubtjnegf, ohg ur unq gb chavfu
uvzfrys frireryl rnpu gvzr.
Creuncf gung jnf jul Xernpure jnf abg vaibyirq va gur svefg onggyr - ur
jnf gbb ohfl vebavat uvf unaqf?
--
< Paul >
Paul C. Dickie
<1...@invalid.com> writes
>Paul C. Dickie wrote:
>
>> Still won't jbex.
>> jul qvq gur tbng-svqqyvat Noresbegu rneyvre unir gb fraq Qbool gb
>>purm Znysbl?
>
>Fhccbfvgvba (V nz abg WXE fb qba'g ernyyl xabj)
>Orpnhfr Qbool qbrfa'g unir n znfgre gb cebgrpg?
Still doesn't make sense, even by the internal "logic" of the books.
Qbool zvtug unir orra n "serr" rys, nf uvf znexre ng Furyy Pbggntr
pynvzrq, ohg gung fgvyy qbrf abg ortva gb rkcynva jul vg jnf Qbool
engure guna Xernpure jub jnf qrfcngpurq ol Noresbegu gb erfphr
Xernpure'f znfgre sebz Znysbl'f qhaqrba.
Fheryl, qbrf gung abg vzcyl gung Xernpure jnf fgvyy ng Tevzznhyq Cynpr
ng gur cbvag va gur obbx, juvpu fgvyy ortf gur dhrfgvba bs jura ur jnf
gbyq gb yrnir naq ol jubz.
--
< Paulus the Obstinate >
Paul C. Dickie
Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse <um...@onetel.com> writes
>Previously on Studio 60 ^W^W uk.rec.sheds, Paul C. Dickie said ...
>>
>> BX gb gur hfr bs rys zntvp (engure guna gur bireoheqrarq Rys Freivpr?)
>> gb nccnengj gb Ubtjnegf, ohg vs Xernpure hfrq uvf nhgbabzl gb uryc
>> qrsraq uvf znfgre gura, jul qvq gur tbng-svqqyvat Noresbegu rneyvre unir
>> gb fraq Qbool gb purm Znysbl?
>>
>Orpnhfr Qbool vf n Serr Rys, guhf unf ab znfgre. Noresbegu znl unir
>"frag" uvz, ohg ur qvqa'g beqre uvz gb tb. Zreryl gbyq uvz gung Uneel &
>puhzf jrer va qnatre naq arrqrq fbzrbar gb uryc gurz.
Gung zhpu znxrf frafr, gubhtu vg jbhyq unir arrqrq gb or ol n erynlrq
zrffntr be ol nfxvat bar bs gur fghqragf ng Ubtjnegf gb fraq Qbool gb
gur tbng-svqqyref gnirea.
V rkcrpg gung Qbool jbhyq unir engure yvxrq gur ertvzr haqre Faviryyhf,
nf ur'q cebonoyl unir phg Qbool'f cnl.
Ohg vg fgvyy qbrf abg nppbhag sbe Xernpure univat yrsg uvf znfgre'f
ubhfr jvgubhg nal vafgehpgvba sebz uvf znfgre gb qb gung.
Naq nabgure guvat - jung unf unccrarq gb cbbe Jvaxl. sbezreyl va gur
rzcybl bs gur Pebhpu snzvyl? Unq fur qehax urefrys gb qrngu?
--
< Paul >
Paul C. Dickie
>> Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure trg
>> sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
>>
>V', zber obgurerq nobhg gur sngr bs gur F&X cvr!
Whfg nf jryy vg jnfa'g fgrnx naq zhfuebbz be fbzr oevtug fcnex zvtug
unir fnvq gurer jnf fbzr F&Z va gur obbx!
--
< Paulus the naturally perverse >
soup
> Fheryl, qbrf gung abg vzcyl gung Xernpure jnf fgvyy ng Tevzznhyq Cynpr
> ng gur cbvag va gur obbx, juvpu fgvyy ortf gur dhrfgvba bs jura ur jnf
> gbyq gb yrnir naq ol jubz.
The ultimate answer.
Vg vf n zntvp fgbel sbe puvyqera vg qbrfa'g unir gb or ybtvpny nyy gur
gvzr (gubhtu vg fubhyq or).
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
<p...@bozzie.demon.co.uk> wrote and included this (or some of this):
>And another thing - what has happened to poor Winky. formerly in the
>employ of the Crouch family? Had she drunk herself to death?
V'z gehyl fbeel nobhg guvf, Cnhy, ohg qba'g pbashfr zr jvgu fbzrbar
jub tvirf n n fuvg nobhg nyy guvf fuvg.
--
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
Marcus Red
I'm waiting for the film, so keep them spoilers in! - I guess the HP
group should quieten down now that it's all qbar naq qhfgrq?
(safe to unrot, except for nervous sheddies).
Richard Robinson
>>
>>> Still won't jbex.
>
> Still doesn't make sense, even by the internal "logic" of the books.
I haven't been unrotting. But that's it, about the whole thing. It doesn't.
(Having read 2 or 3 of them, and seen no films, and will be having nothing
nothing more to do with it for it is tedious fuvgr) it's just deus ex
machina all the way.
--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem
My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html
soup
> I've never felt the slightest inclination to read any of them.
The only reason I read one was, the third book out, I had heard that the
series was getting darker, and I read it to "vet" it for my son who was
reading the series. I eventually read them all (thought the first one
was *very* childish [very Roald Dahl] all feasts and exaggerated
situations) and sort of wanted to see what happened rather than reading
them because they were great literature.
Indeed JKR has left plot holes all over the place, that don't even
follow the internal logic of the HP universe (it gets rather tiresome
when for the twentieth time a plot hole is explained as "ah but it's
magic").
Richard Robinson
>
> It isn't that I don't want to read about wizards and witches, because I
> love the Pratchett wizardy and witchy books most of all, so I don't know
> *what* it is other than a snobbish aversion to anything the majority of
> the population like. I *do* hope it isn't that.
But Pratchett's taking the ipss out of the wizards and witches that the
other books write so seriously ?
Richard Robinson
> Anything, and I think I really do mean ANYTHING that encourages people
> to read, and not just children either, has to be good. Harry Potter
> won't be to everyone's taste any more than Enid Blyton was/is, but I
> don't think that's the point. The point is that this series of seven
> books has gripped the imagination of a generation of children and their
> parents (and sundry other adults TAAW) and people who have never wanted
> to read a book before have started doing so. Not only that, but people
> are discussing the stories intelligently and excitedly in a way that a
> few years ago might not have been possible for them.
Which gets paradoxical. Given that the plotholes create a situation that
just isn't intelligent, can't be made sense of, because it's "just magic, it
doesn't have to", where does an intelligent discussion end up ? For me, with
feeling cheated.
Richard Robinson
> Richard Robinson said...
>> Sena said:
>> > Anything, and I think I really do mean ANYTHING that encourages people
>> > to read, and not just children either, has to be good. Harry Potter
>> > won't be to everyone's taste any more than Enid Blyton was/is, but I
>> > don't think that's the point.
I think I lost the plot, there. Yes, I daresay. But that would be equally
true if it just happened to be something that _is_ to my taste, and anyway
doesn't stop me saying that HP isn't, which is all I was saying. I'm not
demanding they should all be burnt.
> I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
> lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
> go and I never have.
Getting All Intellectual about Analyzing Literature is not what I meant.
"With one bound, our hero was free ! You ask how, you boring intellectual ?
By _magic_, of course".
I prefer Ursula LeGuin's "Earthsea" magic. The rules make sense.
Richard Robinson
>>Countess-Palatine Blackberry the Perplexed of Divine Intervention said:
>>>
>>> It isn't that I don't want to read about wizards and witches, because I
>>> love the Pratchett wizardy and witchy books most of all, so I don't know
>>> *what* it is other than a snobbish aversion to anything the majority of
>>> the population like. I *do* hope it isn't that.
>>
>>But Pratchett's taking the ipss out of the wizards and witches that the
>>other books write so seriously ?
>
*snort* Ah. A point, yes.
Richard Robinson
>
> When I was about 13 - 14 yrs old I was reading 4 library books every
> day, and sometimes I would be cycling home and find that I had read
> the best part of a book on the way.
I used to do that, till I lost half a tooth by forgetting I had to look up
from time to time.
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
<"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote and included this (or some of
this):
> I know that I am very intelligent,
>but also that intellectually and academically I'm not that bright.
>Maybe this is one of the reasons I've been able to read the HP books
>without noticing anything 'amiss' with them.
Reading should be for pleasure and recreation. It does not profit
from being a duty or an intellectual exercise..
Most of us read for very diverse reasons and none has any claim to
priority or benefit over any of the others. Personally, I am a very
fast reader ( and skimmer, I suppose) Sometimes I read a book and
digest every single word but with other, less worthy oeuvres, or
something which totally fails to ring my tubulars, I am quite liable
to flash thro' it at high velocity, sometimes I find that I am
reading nothing that's not in quotation marks..
When I was about 13 - 14 yrs old I was reading 4 library books every
day, and sometimes I would be cycling home and find that I had read
the best part of a book on the way.
(Until I discovered Titus Groan, of course, and Gormenghast)
I did all my homework on a piano music stand, (whilst I was playing
piano, of course) A strange lad, moi
--
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
Tim Hall
wrote:
>®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³ said:
>>
>> When I was about 13 - 14 yrs old I was reading 4 library books every
>> day, and sometimes I would be cycling home and find that I had read
>> the best part of a book on the way.
>
>I used to do that, till I lost half a tooth by forgetting I had to look up
>from time to time.
I used to walk home for lunh, then walk back. In summer, being a
Small Boy, much time was spent with a magnifying glass burning holes
in twigs, arjspapers ect ect. Mum was not Best Pleased when I
combined walking back to school with burning a hole in a twig. The
twig got held at around chest height, against an arj shirt. The
jumping around of the rays as I walked burnt a series of holes in the
shirt TAAW.
Got mentioned in assembly it did by Mr. Edmondson.
Tim
Guy King
from Countess-Palatine Blackberry the Perplexed of Divine
Intervention.<x{yz}enop...@hotmail.com> contains these words:
> I used to read my library books on the walk home, as it was a couple of
> miles, or maybe more. Sometimes I'd have read an entire book between
> after going to the library after school and bedtime.
I first read LotR while cycling beside the Somme. Propped on the
handlebars, it was. Held down by the straps that were holding my
snoozing bag to the front rack.
--
Skipweasel
We have always been at war with Iran. [George Orwell - almost]
Cerumen
"Sena" <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.2110345de...@news.individual.net...
> soup said...
>> Indeed JKR has left plot holes all over the place, that don't even
>> follow the internal logic of the HP universe (it gets rather tiresome
>> when for the twentieth time a plot hole is explained as "ah but it's
>> magic").
>>
> series of books. It's a made-up story. It doesn't *have* to make
> sense.
I restrained myself from that comment earlier in the week but yes indeed
it's not a text book it's a story book.
--
Chris, West Cork, Ireland.
Festina lente
Cerumen
> I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
> lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
> go and I never have.
Labelling a book as "literature" is a pretty good way of turning me off it
generally.
soup
> it's not a text book it's a story book.
Yes it is "just" a storybook but that doesn't mean it can't be
consistent/logical(even if it has it's own internal logic) to
*constantly* have those who examine such things say "that doesn't
need explained, it is magic" shows lazy writing to my mind.
Richard Robinson
Hear hear.
But all this "analysing it like it's a textbook" stuff is a straw herring.
It's just a, like, a spontaneous feeling, man, can you dig that ? I read a
couple, and my simple straightforward reaction was "but that's cheating, and
it's just not interesting". I could hardly be bothered to finish reading the
second (bulkier) one even once through, I certainly wasn't going to spend
more time going back over things & taking it apart, just take it back to the
library and make a note that I'd learned something worthwhile, namely that I
don't need to read any more.
It's only a question of what sort of magic people like to imagine, if they
do, innit ? 'snot like there's an external reality to bite us on the raes if
we get it wrong. perhaps some people like a "just push the right button and
some incomprehensible madeup thing makes it all come out right" imagined
world. Well, clearly they do, given the way that Znexrg Sbeprf are
producing the things ...
Richard Robinson
>
> "Sena" <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.211059203...@news.individual.net...
>> I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
>> lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
>> go and I never have.
>
> Labelling a book as "literature" is a pretty good way of turning me off it
> generally.
HP isn't.
The analogy with Enid Blyton perhaps to the point
Cerumen
"soup" <1...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:n4Hpi.3863$By5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
the plot hangs for a large part on where people are and who with at any time
hardly as crucial in this case?
soup
> Indeed it can but while unforgiveable in a detective story for example where
> the plot hangs for a large part on where people are and who with at any time
I used to hate Agatha Christie for that right at the end she would have
someone say "ah but unbeknownst to you the Gardener is the great nephew
of the deceased so he stood to gain if he killed her".
Skraedder
> I'll ROT-13 this for those who have yet to read the latest in the series
> about the boy blunderer:
>
> Nsgre bhe urebrf neevir ng Tevzznhyq Cynpr, Unvel Cbggl fhzzbaf uvf
> ubhfr-rys, Xernpure. Nygubhtu ur unf n zvffvba sbe gur rys jub sbezreyl
> orybatrq gb gur Abooyrq Ubhfr bs Oynpx, Xernpure fgnlf ba nsgre gur wbo
> vf pbzcyrgrq naq njnvgf gur erghea bs gur guerr sebz gurve zvffvba gb
> gur Zvavfgel, cebzvfvat gurz n fgrnx naq xvqarl cvr sbe fhccre. Nynf,
> gurl qb abg erghea ohg tb ba gur eha nf gurl srne gurl znl unir
> pbzcebzvfrq gurve frphevgl.
>
> Ubhfr ryirf ner abg fhccbfrq gb yrnir fbzrjurer jurer gurl unir orra
> fhzzbarq ol gurve znfgre be zvfgerff hagvy naq hayrff gung znfgre be
> zvfgerff ovqf bgurejvfr.
>
> Nf Cbggl naq uvf pbzenqrf jrer va uvqvat, Xernpure jnf yrsg oruvaq ng
> Tevzznhyq Cynpr. Ur jnf abg fhzzbarq be vafgehpgrq gb yrnir ol Znfgre
> Cbggl naq fb ur fubhyq unir erznvarq gurer vaqrsvavgryl.
>
> Fb ubj, va gur anzr bs Zreyva'f fnttl yrsg grfgvpyr pbhyq Xernpure trg
> sebz Ybaqba gb Ubtjnegf gb gnxr cneg va gur svany onggyr?
>
> Doesn't anyone bother to edit these books or look for any inconsistencies?
>
It's _only_ a story!
Skraedder
Guy King
from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
> I used to hate Agatha Christie for that right at the end she would have
> someone say "ah but unbeknownst to you the Gardener is the great nephew
> of the deceased so he stood to gain if he killed her".
Yeah, that's just cheating.
Jim S
> The message <9MIpi.3945$By5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
> from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
>
>> I used to hate Agatha Christie for that right at the end she would have
>> someone say "ah but unbeknownst to you the Gardener is the great nephew
>> of the deceased so he stood to gain if he killed her".
>
> Yeah, that's just cheating.
This happens more often than not in 'spy' stories, particularly by best
selling writers who have a converted B52 or an underwater super-sub, a hero
called Tweed (with 'striking' ex-policelady and Jock and Snowy) or an ex-IRA
convert.
The story races along with a formula we have seen before, with the location
changed and all the Nazis, Irish, Russian, or Chinese changed to Arabs.
At this point it is clear that the author has not got a clue how he is going
to finish - then it does.
This is the point when you remember you have possibly read the book before
and as last time you have to go back to check how the heck our gallant
heroes got from Siberia to Syria in 30 minutes without a Time Machine, a
security hold-up, lost luggage, jet lag and food.
--
Jim S
Tyneside UK
http://www.jimscott.co.uk
Cerumen
> Cerumen said...
>>
>> "Sena" <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.211059203...@news.individual.net...
>> > I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
>> > lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as
>> > I
>> > go and I never have.
>>
>> Labelling a book as "literature" is a pretty good way of turning me off
>> it
>> generally.
>>
> yarn holds my attention wonderfully.
>
And although I've never read a HP book the couple of talkies of the bwk I've
seen on hairyplanes have been rather gwd.
Andrew Marshall
<"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> writes
>soup said...
>Oh well, all I know is that I couldn't have done it. Hats off to Ms
>Rowling for writing a cracking yarn that I enjoyed reading.
HP's not my bag at all; but nevertheless, hats off indeed to JKR for her
uneq jbex in writing the series of books and giving a huge amount of
reading pleasure to millions of people.
> I don't
>want to analyse it on any level at all - I just want to have a darned
>good read, without worrying about whether or not it 'works'.
MNAAW; when I read a story (which happens less frequently these days
than it hfrq to, I must admit), I want to enjoy it, without worrying
about any logic holes or similar imperfections.
--
Regards,
Andrew Marshall, G8BUR, M0MAA.
Unsolicited advertising matter unwelcome. Offenders may be blacklisted.
soup
>but nevertheless, hats off indeed to JKR for her
> uneq jbex in writing the series of books and giving a huge amount of
> reading pleasure to millions of people.
Hear hear, JKR may not be the most technically accomplished author but
she should be applauded for getting lots of people reading.
Guy King
from Andrew Marshall <g8...@g8bur.demon.co.uk> contains these words:
> HP's not my bag at all; but nevertheless, hats off indeed to JKR for her
> uneq jbex in writing the series of books and giving a huge amount of
> reading pleasure to millions of people.
I've just finished it. And jolly good it was, too.
V tbg gur ovg nobhg Fancr evtug! V jnf fher ng gur raq bs gur ynfg obbx
gung ur jnfa'g ba Ibyqrzbeg'f fvqr. Gur erfg bs gur funcr bs gur fgbel
jnf nobhg jung V rkcrpgrq, gubhtu V unq n srryvat UC zvtug unir raqrq hc
nf urnqznfgre ng gur raq.
All in all, a good read. Now it's Inky's turn with it. Some pompous git
of the radio just said that the last few books aren't suitable for
anyone under 13. Ass.
soup
> I've just finished it. And jolly good it was, too.
Jnfa'g gur rcvybthr qvfnccbvagvat gubhtu
Guy King
from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
> Jnfa'g gur rcvybthr qvfnccbvagvat gubhtu
Bu, V qba'g xabj. V engure yvxrq gur uhzqehz beqvanevarff bs vg. Engure
gbb zhpu anzr-qebccvat gubhtu. Nyy gubfr xvqf anzrq nsgre crbcyr.
Richard Robinson
>
> Nyy gubfr xvqf anzrq nsgre crbcyr.
Univat nyernql znqr vg pyrne jul V jbhyqa'g unir n pyhr jung lbh'er gnyxvat
nobhg ... lrnu, jr pna'g tb anzvat xvqf nsgre nal byq Gbz, Qvpx be Uneel.
Guy King
from Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> contains these words:
> Univat nyernql znqr vg pyrne jul V jbhyqa'g unir
I've only just started unROTting this thread, so I don't either.
Richard Bos
> soup said...
> > Indeed JKR has left plot holes all over the place, that don't even
> > follow the internal logic of the HP universe (it gets rather tiresome
> > when for the twentieth time a plot hole is explained as "ah but it's
> > magic").
> >
> Why is this a problem? Do other authors not do this?
Good ones don't, generally. Or at least not as egregiously.
> She's written a series of books. It's a made-up story. It doesn't
> *have* to make sense.
Yes, it does. It doesn't have to make _real world_ sense, but it does
need to make _internal_ sense. If (to use an example which is not taken
from Harry Potter but from thin air) magic can't transport people
through walls when the plot requires that the protagonist remain
trapped, but suddenly changes to being useful for doing exactly that
when three chapters down the protagonist must enter a room unseen,
that's just sloppy writing. It leaves one thinking that the hero might
as well find the "Problemus Solvus" spell on page one, and be done with
it.
It's just as true of other genres, btw. If some character has a crush on
the hero, she can't suddenly want to kill him the next chapter without a
clear reason[14]. If Mr. Terrorist has a bomb that could blow up the
entire city, it should not be safe to set fire to his appartment. If our
naval hero has just sunk the enemy's fleet in its harbour, that enemy
should not be able to launch a full-on naval attack on the hero's home
town three weeks later, and no, "deft use of the trade winds" is _not_ a
good explanation. You can _not_ do the Kessel Run in less than twelve of
_any_ distance measurements, dammit, no matter how many excuses you make
up for your gaffe later.
It's not so much having a McGuffin that is the problem. An author _is_
allowed to have random, wildly useful magic, or even a Machine of
Prodigious Power. What he is not allowed is to have a MoPP which,
unannouncedly and for no good reason, turns on and off exactly when it
is convenient for the plot.
Richard
[14] Unless, of course, she is a teenage girl.
Richard Bos
There is a rather prolific and very popular writer of police novelettes
who does exactly that. Read three and you've read them all, and they all
hinge on the gradual disclosure of previously unmentioned facts. This is
in itself more excusable in a police novel than in a detective - after
all, it's supposed to make a story of real police work, which often does
work like that, with continuous fact-grubbing revealing ever more of the
truth - but doing it again and again, always in the same old predictable
way, shows very little imagination.
Freddie Forsyth, OTOH, seems a bit more reasonable, at least the little
bit of him that I've read does. So it can be done, even in spy novels.
Richard
Richard Bos
> The message <VTZpi.4485$By5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
> from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
>
> > Jnfa'g gur rcvybthr qvfnccbvagvat gubhtu
>
> Bu, V qba'g xabj. V engure yvxrq gur uhzqehz beqvanevarff bs vg.
Gurl'er jvmmneqf. Gurl'er abg fhccbfrq gb or beqvanel. Gung'f n zhttyr'f
yvsr.
Richard
soup
> I've only just started unROTting this thread, so I don't either.
What browser do you use Guy? If it is FF then install the leetkey
add-on/extension it makes unrotting text trivial .
Richard Robinson
>
> Freddie Forsyth, OTOH, seems a bit more reasonable, at least the little
> bit of him that I've read does. So it can be done, even in spy novels.
I like John le Carre's arj one, "the Mission Song". Jbexeth better, for me,
than his last <many>.
Richard Robinson
> Guy King <guy....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
>>
>> > Jnfa'g gur rcvybthr qvfnccbvagvat gubhtu
>>
>> Bu, V qba'g xabj. V engure yvxrq gur uhzqehz beqvanevarff bs vg.
>
> Gurl'er jvmmneqf. Gurl'er abg fhccbfrq gb or beqvanel. Gung'f n zhttyr'f
> yvsr.
Nu. "Erny Yvsr vf sbe gur yvggyr crbcyr". Guvf znl or jung trgf hc zl abfr
nobhg gurz.
Richard Robinson
> from Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>> Univat nyernql znqr vg pyrne jul V jbhyqa'g unir
>
> I've only just started unROTting this thread, so I don't either.
That's a relief.
Richard Bos
> Anything, and I think I really do mean ANYTHING that encourages people
> to read, and not just children either, has to be good.
Even the Eeny Stannit?
> I am among those who couldn't put the canon down, so maybe I'm biased,
> but I say let's not knock it. Miss Rowling has managed to wake up a
> load of people and given them something to think about.
Or to talk about, at least.
But seriously. Yes, Mrs. Rowling has done a good thing by making many
children read. But she did this _before_ all the hype started, and she
did it when she still had an editor. And even then: since when does that
put her beyond criticism? Dickens made a lot of people read, TAAW, and
his books did the empoverished children of his age a lot more good than
Rowling can ever hope to achieve in today's England - but that doesn't,
and shouldn't, stop me from calling him an unreadable tearduct-yanker.
Richard
Richard Bos
> Cerumen said...
> >
> > "Sena" <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote in message
> > > I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
> > > lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
> > > go and I never have.
> >
> > Labelling a book as "literature" is a pretty good way of turning me off it
> > generally.
> >
> MTAAW. Literature doesn't interest me whereas a cracking good (to me)
> yarn holds my attention wonderfully.
How about literature which is _also_ a cracking good yarn? I suggest
Paradise Lost, Gulliver's Travels, and Kim. For something a bit lighter,
try Kai Lung.
Richard
Richard Robinson
> Sena <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote:
>> soup said...
>> > Indeed JKR has left plot holes all over the place, that don't even
>> > follow the internal logic of the HP universe (it gets rather tiresome
>> > when for the twentieth time a plot hole is explained as "ah but it's
>> > magic").
>> >
>> Why is this a problem? Do other authors not do this?
>
> Good ones don't, generally. Or at least not as egregiously.
>
>> She's written a series of books. It's a made-up story. It doesn't
>> *have* to make sense.
>
> Yes, it does. It doesn't have to make _real world_ sense, but it does
> need to make _internal_ sense.
This would appear to be the loop variable that isn't getting incremented.
Some people say it does, others say not.
and repeat until an opinion changes ...
> It's just as true of other genres, btw. If some character has a crush on
> the hero, she can't suddenly want to kill him the next chapter without a
> clear reason[14]. If Mr. Terrorist has a bomb that could blow up the
> entire city, it should not be safe to set fire to his appartment. If our
> naval hero has just sunk the enemy's fleet in its harbour, that enemy
> should not be able to launch a full-on naval attack on the hero's home
> town three weeks later, and no, "deft use of the trade winds" is _not_ a
> good explanation.
*grin*. I suddenly unforget a splendidly-horribly glaring example, some
piece of pencr I had out of a library ages ago ... hero spy breaks into
villainous country's embassy in stereotrypical heart-of-darknes corrupt "we
should never have pretended to give them independence" African country, in
order to rifle safe for Sekrit Documents. Discovers that villainous security
peeps have guarded against this possibility by releasing A Poisonous Snake
on the premises. Unbelievably lethal, monstrously aggressive, hundreds of
feet long, very hungry and it's had a bad day at the office ... which our
hero duly wrestles to death with his bare hands. He then thinks that if they
come in next morning & find it on the floor all strangled they'll know
someone's broken in. So he cuts it up with his handhi penknife (or his
teeth, or something, I forget) and flushes it down the loo, thereby
disposing of all indications that anything happened, and the villains duly
never realised anyone had been in. And the question it completely fails,
apparently, to even notice is, how on earth did the villains stay alive long
enough to figure in the plot at all, if they can't even unforget they've let
such a thing loose on their premises ?
Richard Robinson
>
> But seriously. Yes, Mrs. Rowling has done a good thing by making many
> children read.
Hordes of previously-illiterate kids are queueing up for reading lessons for
the sake of them ?
Guy King
from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
> > I've only just started unROTting this thread, so I don't either.
> What browser do you use Guy? If it is FF then install the leetkey
> add-on/extension it makes unrotting text trivial .
Oh, unROTting is easy, but since I hadn't finished the book I was
carefully not reading it.
That was, after all, why people were posting ROTten in the first place.
Richard Bos
> Richard Bos said:
> >
> > But seriously. Yes, Mrs. Rowling has done a good thing by making many
> > children read.
>
> Hordes of previously-illiterate kids are queueing up for reading lessons for
> the sake of them ?
No, many children who _could_ read, but chose not to do so, now choose
to do so, even if AFAICT many of them choose only to do so with Hairy
Potter books. Some of them may even go on to become functionally as well
as nominally literate; and this is a Good Thing.
Richard
soup
> Oh, unROTting is easy, but since I hadn't finished the book I was
> carefully not reading it.
Fair one, I picked up the wrong meaning (totally my fault nothing to
do with your English)from "I have just started unROTing this thread" I
took it to mean unROTing was an effort to you, not that you hadn't
finished reading the book.
Richard Robinson
Aha. A sort of Schroedinger's Good Thing, then ?
Guy King
from r...@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) contains these words:
> Some of them may even go on to become functionally as well
> as nominally literate; and this is a Good Thing.
And then post on FreeCycle.
"i have a small wardrobe . the wardrobe is small in size and has 4
drawers thats all with it and a small cupboard .
its out of my girls room . needs asap "
I've a ten year old who can do better than that, and a five year old who
could probably match it.
Guy King
from soup <1...@invalid.com> contains these words:
> Fair one, I picked up the wrong meaning (totally my fault nothing to
> do with your English)from "I have just started unROTing this thread" I
> took it to mean unROTing was an effort to you, not that you hadn't
> finished reading the book.
Oh, no, ZIMACS does ROT13 - the users wanted it (well, the sheddi ones,
anyway) so we asked for it. A few days later, there it was. Highlight a
bit, right-click and choose ROT. Simple. Works reading and writing.
Guy King
from Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> contains these words:
> Aha. A sort of Schroedinger's Good Thing, then ?
IRTA Schindler's.
Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse
>
> All in all, a good read. Now it's Inky's turn with it. Some pompous git
> of the radio just said that the last few books aren't suitable for
> anyone under 13. Ass.
>
was better written (and probably better edited).
Will Self was being pompous on Toady this morning and saying that adults
shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
Me, I say Bowwocks to that, I'll read what I want when I want to. If I
read HP, does that make me any less capable of reading summat like Madame
Bovary in the original [1], or Jane Eyre [2], or anything else he
considers to be suitable for adults. The opposing argument was that a lot
of books can be read on different levels. I defy any adult to read Winne
the Pooh and not see things that a child wouldn't pick up on.
[1] It was just as crap in French
[2] Which many people read as teenagers. I'm just glad we didn't do it as
our set book for O level and I could read it for pleasure.
--
Fenny
Xander: I laugh in the face of danger. Then I hide until it goes away.
Guy King
from Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse <um...@onetel.com>
contains these words:
> Will Self was being pompous on Toady this morning and saying that adults
> shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
That's OK. I wouldn't read his books in public or private even if
wrapped in brown paper.
Jim S
> The message <MPG.2112e5f44...@news.individual.net>
> from Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse <um...@onetel.com>
> contains these words:
>
>> Will Self was being pompous on Toady this morning and saying that adults
>> shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
>
> That's OK. I wouldn't read his books in public or private even if
> wrapped in brown paper.
I always use him as an example of people who live up to their name.
--
Jim S
Tyneside UK
http://www.jimscott.co.uk
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
and included this (or some of this):
He should be locked up in a small featureless room for ever with Brian
Sewell in the hope they might bore each other to death.
--
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³
.
Richard Robinson
>> shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
>
> That's OK. I wouldn't read his books in public or private even if
> wrapped in brown paper.
You'd have to unforget to molish eyeholes.
Esra Sdrawkcab
> Guy King said:
>> from Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse <um...@onetel.com>
>>
>>> Will Self was being pompous on Toady this morning and saying that adults
>>> shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
>> That's OK. I wouldn't read his books in public or private even if
>> wrapped in brown paper.
>
> You'd have to unforget to molish eyeholes.
>
>
And airholes
Are you reading this correctly, Frank?
Frank Erskine
wrote:
IRIA:- "aerosols".
--
Frank Erskine
MJBC, OETKBC
Judith
<"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote:
>I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
>lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
>go and I never have. I didn't 'take' to literature at school, but I
>read everything I was asked to even though I hated some of it. The
>academic side of reading passes me by. I can read Jane Austen and all I
>see is a story of people with money living their lives in a different
>world from mine; I don't see the various nuances that I'm 'meant' to be
>able to see.
YM, YA.
As a child I read EVERYTHING I could get my hands on. Kids books,
adult books, comics, recipe books, anything with words on or in it,
but I judged a book by whether I enjoyed it or not. I have not got a
clue whether a novel has great literary merit - all I know is that I
like the story (and finish it) or get bored (and do not finish it).
I like the whole Harry Potter mythology. These wizzards and beasts
and things are all real and if I were a witch (pure or mudblood) I'd
be able to join in the fight of good against evil. Yes, yes, I know
it's all made up but I find the stories exciting and can happily
believe it all.
Judith
Esra Sdrawkcab
JonG
>>> Indeed JKR has left plot holes all over the place, that don't even
>>> follow the internal logic of the HP universe (it gets rather tiresome
>>> when for the twentieth time a plot hole is explained as "ah but it's
>>> magic").
>>>
>> Why is this a problem? Do other authors not do this?
>
> Good ones don't, generally. Or at least not as egregiously.
>
>> She's written a series of books. It's a made-up story. It doesn't
>> *have* to make sense.
>
> Yes, it does. It doesn't have to make _real world_ sense, but it does
> need to make _internal_ sense.
I quite agree, though I must say that, currently part-way through book 6
of the series, I've actually been quite pleased she has explained
several incidences of what I thought were Plot Inconsistencies. I'm not
going to accuse JKR of Literature, but I have read an awful lot of
poorer series which were nevertheless well worth reading[1].
> It's just as true of other genres, btw..... You can _not_ do the Kessel Run in less than twelve of
> _any_ distance measurements, dammit, no matter how many excuses you make
> up for your gaffe later.
Are, well, I reckon you can, and IIRC, it was outlined but not expressly
stated as such in one of the original Foundation Trilogy:
Hyperspace navigations requires care not to re-enter normal space too
near, and particluarly not inside, a star or other body - and another
vague recollection is the concept that the presence of massive objects
tends to encourage re-entry nearby. Much of the calculation of
hyperspace jumps is in planning your re-entry point.
The quickest route will generally be the closest to a straight line, but
in dense star clusters, this may not be safe. The bravest or most
foolhardy pilots, like Solo, do the jumps closest to a straight line,
therefore the shortest distance - in this case "Less than twelve parsecs"
The opposite phenomenon appears in Los Angeles, where distances are
often described in terms of driving time...
[1] I'm not accusing his writing of being worse than JKRs, but talking
of other series reminds me to ask the Shed if anyone has read any
Richard Cowper, who never seems to get mentioned in discussions of good/
reasonable SF/ Fantasy.
--
JonG
I went to the polling station, but the only option
given was to vote for one or other of the politicians.
JonG
> One of the major differences between TP and the authors who take it
> seriously is: most of them are about Good vs. Evil, White Hats and Black
> Hats. Pratchett realises that most hats are grey, and that most people
> (including The Enemy) are just ordinary Joes trying to make sense of it and
> make a few bob. I think Night Watch perhaps does this best.
Not sure I agree there. Carcer and Swing must be two of the nastiest
characters he has ever written about - Pin and Tulip were highly
sympathetic by comparison. And pTerry never seems to miss a chance to
comment on the likes of Ronnie Rust.
But I do agree he writes a good anti-hero, like Vimes - and even Carrot
is Self-aware about his squeaky-clean-ness.
robert...@my-deja.com
<n...@nospamformetodayplease.jongurr.plusnet.com> wrote:
> Hyperspace navigations requires care not to re-enter normal space too
> near, and particluarly not inside, a star or other body - and another
> vague recollection is the concept that the presence of massive objects
> tends to encourage re-entry nearby. Much of the calculation of
> hyperspace jumps is in planning your re-entry point.
According to Ian M Banks, the problems of entering hyperspace while in
the gravity well of a star is a plot device to solve the problem of
apparently instantaneous transfer between planets. It is to introduce
a period of normal space travel during which the crew can interact in
space ship mode.
Guy King
from Sena <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> contains these words:
> I can't see the point of ROTting this, so I won't. Harry was named
> after someone, presumably, just as a lot of other characters were/are.
> Three of my own children are named after other family members. Lots of
> people do it. Guy's own parents did it. For that matter, hasn't Inky
> got Squid's maiden surname as his middle name?
Oh, I've nothing against the practice, it was just laid on a bit thick
in those two pages.
Dave Larrington
Grand Duchess Fenny the Idle of Mabe Burnthouse <um...@onetel.com> tweaked
the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Will Self was being pompous on Toady this morning and saying that
> adults shouldn't be reading kids' books, especially not in public.
Will Self is this: an raes. Being a pompous windbag is what he is for.
Note to self[66]: get round to reading "The Book Of Dave"
66 - me, not Will
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
The Real Slim Shady's gone to play tennis.
Richard Robinson
> Richard Robinson said...
>> Guy King said:
>> >
>> > Nyy gubfr xvqf anzrq nsgre crbcyr.
>>
>> Univat nyernql znqr vg pyrne jul V jbhyqa'g unir n pyhr jung lbh'er gnyxvat
>> nobhg ... lrnu, jr pna'g tb anzvat xvqf nsgre nal byq Gbz, Qvpx be Uneel.
>>
> I can't see the point of ROTting this, so I won't. Harry was named
> after someone, presumably, just as a lot of other characters were/are.
<scratches head> Well, they couldn't all be first.
Cerumen
"Richard Robinson" <rich...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:46a89ebb$0$639$bed6...@news.gradwell.net...
> Richard Bos said:
>>
>> But seriously. Yes, Mrs. Rowling has done a good thing by making many
>> children read.
>
> Hordes of previously-illiterate kids are queueing up for reading lessons
> for
> the sake of them ?
>
set to read when he is old enough along with other books from now that might
not be as easliy available. My daughter is too old to have read them as a
child and therefore they are not hanging around. He can then move on to my
hard back Pratchetts and so on maybe.
--
Chris, West Cork, Ireland.
Festina lente
Cerumen
"Judith" <no.spam.for....@aol.com> wrote in message
news:g71ia39865f727nh2...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:45:25 +0100, Sena
> <"\"#\""@cymoeddorguk.privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>I guess this is the problem I've always had with literature. I read a
>>lot, but I don't take the time or the trouble to analyse everything as I
>>go and I never have. I didn't 'take' to literature at school, but I
>>read everything I was asked to even though I hated some of it. The
>>academic side of reading passes me by. I can read Jane Austen and all I
>>see is a story of people with money living their lives in a different
>>world from mine; I don't see the various nuances that I'm 'meant' to be
>>able to see.
>
> YM, YA.
>
> As a child I read EVERYTHING I could get my hands on. Kids books,
> adult books, comics, recipe books, anything with words on or in it,
> but I judged a book by whether I enjoyed it or not.
supposed to.