Part of the impact of reading the book for the first time is the slow realization that this is NOT a work of fantasy, but SF.
RZ does a masterful job of messing with the readers head through much of the book, leaving one with a sense of satisfaction realization.
This is the key, powerful subtlety of the work, and the mark of the true master story teller. You see, during much of the book the reader is ignorant and RZ gradualy opens their eyes and brings them to " Enlightenment." The readers own thought processes mirror the theme of the book. It's simply marvalous.
I'm afraid that those who read your review before reading the book will be denied that experience, and it is that experience that makes this work not just one of the great works of SF, but one of the great works of literature.
KFG
Re:behavior correction?
on
Water Guns
·
· Score: 2
Well no, actually it's more like mussing their clothing. It does no harm and only annoys.
When teaching intro to computer courses I like to hold up a mouse by the cord, dangling between two fingers, and ask the class:
"Why do you think this is called a mouse?"
Invariably someone will answer brightly," Cause it kinda looks like one."
To which I can reply, " No, actually it looks like a rat, but that isn't cute and cudly and wouldn't sell as well."
KFG
When you throw a lot of speghetti against the wall
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 1
Some of it dosn't stick.
The midget subs were an experiment that didn't work. Modern war is a time of outrageously accelerated technological development and "alpha" versions are tested in actual combat.
This has nothing to do with the overall strategic quality of the attack, and even damned little to do with the overall tactical quality of the attack.
KFG
Re:A couple of quotes from the History Channel's s
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 1
Well yeah, they did a lousy job of picking targets.
Other than THAT the raid was brilliant.
KFG
Re:Doolittle's Raid More Important Than Many Think
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 5
Dolittle's raid is one of the truely great stories of human acts in the time of war, for all the real effect it may or may not have had. However. . .
It's inclusion in the movie was for one reason, and one reason *only*:
To allow the Americans to be the 'winners' at the end of the film.
"history is written by the victors" - Hermann Goering
For whatever the observation of the origination of the quote is worth.
KFG
A couple of quotes from the History Channel's show
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 2
on Pearl aired last night to plug the video release of Tora! Tora! Tora!
" Well of course it was a sneak attack, you don't exactly call the enemy up and let them know you're coming."
" Maybe it's just my Southern upbringing but I was always told that you attack the enemy in greater numbers and when he isn't looking. The Japanese did a fantastic job militarily."
The American military, right down to the lowest gob, was not so much stunned by the perfidy of the attack, they KNEW it was coming sometime somewhere, but rather by the increadible ease, competence and SKILL with which the Japanese pulled it off.
The "infamy" was to sell the war to the public.
KFG
These comments were made by surviving *Americans* stationed on battleships during the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Indeed. With search and rescue missions even with an EPIRB blaring away the " exact location" of a stricken vessel it can be damnably hard to find it in the open sea.
With all due respect we did manage to get a few planes into the air to meet the second wave, and have seen interviews with the actual pilots involved, both American and Japanese.
Ok, let me take your question seriously for a moment. It is the *intention* of an artist that his work has meaning beyond the mere presentation of a literal image. In fact, that is pretty close to the very definition of art.
People who review, critize or explain other's works of art are meerly carrying into the public realm that attempt to find meaning in art that each and every viewer of the work is already carrying on internally.
If done *well* the ensuing public discussion/debate advances the *general* depth of understanding of the work, often including that of the reviewer * and of the original artist*, who may hence be inspired to go to create works of even greater artistic depth.
Of course when done poorly it boils down to nothing more than an attempt to sell a book or be granted a doctorate/sinicure.
Sturgeon's law applies equally to original works and their subsequent criticisms.
Have you never come across the concept of scholarly debate before?
Mr. Wheat wrote a work of scholarship. Mr. Lampe questioned some of that work. Mr. Wheat has defended his premise.
That's the way it works, even in such empirical fields as the hard sciences.
A logical construct was put forward. A criticism of that construct was put forward, and a defense of the logical construct was then, again, put forward. All in all a good exchange. Advantage Wheat. Lampe to serve.
I was not entirely convinced by Mr. Wheat's work. I was not entirely convinced by Mr. Lampe's critque of Mr. Wheat's work. I have not been entirely convinced Mr. Wheat's rebutal to Mr. Lampe's critique.
What I *have* been is given a deeper understanding by the interchange between the two, and the corallary comments and exchanges here in the forum.
There's a good chance that both Mr. Wheat AND Mr. Lampe may have each gained some further enlightenment as well.
This is good. This is as it should be.
At the risk of appearing snide I might also point out that Mr. Wheat's original work was itself a critique of Kubrick/Clarke. Applying your own standards Mr. Lampe rebuted someone else's critique. How lame is that?
that muscles like to work against resitence. Close your eyes and move your arm about. How aware are you REALLY about just where it is?
Not very.
Yet every nerve ending in your skin is highly tuned to sense pressure changes amounting to fractions of an ounce, even when the load gets over 100 lbs. of force.
We are inherently desinged for pressure feedback, not position feedback.
I hate them, the only way to recover a HD from them is to flaten the whole bloody thing and I'm really not sure which is worse, getting a virus, or getting a virus protection program.
Slashdot Mirror
Part of the impact of reading the book for the first time is the slow realization that this is NOT a work of fantasy, but SF.
RZ does a masterful job of messing with the readers head through much of the book, leaving one with a sense of satisfaction realization.
This is the key, powerful subtlety of the work, and the mark of the true master story teller. You see, during much of the book the reader is ignorant and RZ gradualy opens their eyes and brings them to " Enlightenment." The readers own thought processes mirror the theme of the book. It's simply marvalous.
I'm afraid that those who read your review before reading the book will be denied that experience, and it is that experience that makes this work not just one of the great works of SF, but one of the great works of literature.
KFG
Well no, actually it's more like mussing their clothing. It does no harm and only annoys.
KFG
Just be careful that the mechinism dosn't break making the canoe just go faster and faster.
KFG
Well yes, for robots he is.
When you speak the word "robot" you automatically speak the invocation that calls up the God, like it or not.
KFG
How many distros of the LSB are there?*
KFG
*Note for the humor impared. The preceding message was a joke. Don't you know a joke son?
I would take one exception to this.
People really DO need games. Need.
Ever watch otters on snow slides? Cats with a ball of yarn?
The archeological records are full of games, as far back as we can trace, and presumably much farther.
To game is human. . . and weasel, why not penguin?
KFG
They are my actual initials.
But I like "Kentucky Fried Geek."
KFG
Hey, even some of us Yankees have ten fingers AND know how to count on them.
KFG
They're small.
KFG
"accidentally" start dropping buildings on London this could be a bit of alright.
KFG
When teaching intro to computer courses I like to hold up a mouse by the cord, dangling between two fingers, and ask the class:
"Why do you think this is called a mouse?"
Invariably someone will answer brightly," Cause it kinda looks like one."
To which I can reply, " No, actually it looks like a rat, but that isn't cute and cudly and wouldn't sell as well."
KFG
Some of it dosn't stick.
The midget subs were an experiment that didn't work. Modern war is a time of outrageously accelerated technological development and "alpha" versions are tested in actual combat.
This has nothing to do with the overall strategic quality of the attack, and even damned little to do with the overall tactical quality of the attack.
KFG
Well yeah, they did a lousy job of picking targets.
Other than THAT the raid was brilliant.
KFG
Dolittle's raid is one of the truely great stories of human acts in the time of war, for all the real effect it may or may not have had. However. . .
It's inclusion in the movie was for one reason, and one reason *only*:
To allow the Americans to be the 'winners' at the end of the film.
KFG
"history is written by the victors" - Hermann Goering
For whatever the observation of the origination of the quote is worth.
KFG
on Pearl aired last night to plug the video release of Tora! Tora! Tora!
" Well of course it was a sneak attack, you don't exactly call the enemy up and let them know you're coming."
" Maybe it's just my Southern upbringing but I was always told that you attack the enemy in greater numbers and when he isn't looking. The Japanese did a fantastic job militarily."
The American military, right down to the lowest gob, was not so much stunned by the perfidy of the attack, they KNEW it was coming sometime somewhere, but rather by the increadible ease, competence and SKILL with which the Japanese pulled it off.
The "infamy" was to sell the war to the public.
KFG
These comments were made by surviving *Americans* stationed on battleships during the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Indeed. With search and rescue missions even with an EPIRB blaring away the " exact location" of a stricken vessel it can be damnably hard to find it in the open sea.
KFG
With all due respect we did manage to get a few planes into the air to meet the second wave, and have seen interviews with the actual pilots involved, both American and Japanese.
KFG
There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. --
Why do you think they refer to it as "Booting up"?
KFG
Lawrence of Arabia
KFG
you can watch Midway.
Rent these two and see four times the movie, at 10 times the quality, and half the price of a single first run ticket for Pearl.
KFG
Everybody has to make a living?
Ok, let me take your question seriously for a moment. It is the *intention* of an artist that his work has meaning beyond the mere presentation of a literal image. In fact, that is pretty close to the very definition of art.
People who review, critize or explain other's works of art are meerly carrying into the public realm that attempt to find meaning in art that each and every viewer of the work is already carrying on internally.
If done *well* the ensuing public discussion/debate advances the *general* depth of understanding of the work, often including that of the reviewer * and of the original artist*, who may hence be inspired to go to create works of even greater artistic depth.
Of course when done poorly it boils down to nothing more than an attempt to sell a book or be granted a doctorate/sinicure.
Sturgeon's law applies equally to original works and their subsequent criticisms.
KFG
Have you never come across the concept of scholarly debate before?
Mr. Wheat wrote a work of scholarship. Mr. Lampe questioned some of that work. Mr. Wheat has defended his premise.
That's the way it works, even in such empirical fields as the hard sciences.
A logical construct was put forward. A criticism of that construct was put forward, and a defense of the logical construct was then, again, put forward. All in all a good exchange. Advantage Wheat. Lampe to serve.
I was not entirely convinced by Mr. Wheat's work. I was not entirely convinced by Mr. Lampe's critque of Mr. Wheat's work. I have not been entirely convinced Mr. Wheat's rebutal to Mr. Lampe's critique.
What I *have* been is given a deeper understanding by the interchange between the two, and the corallary comments and exchanges here in the forum.
There's a good chance that both Mr. Wheat AND Mr. Lampe may have each gained some further enlightenment as well.
This is good. This is as it should be.
At the risk of appearing snide I might also point out that Mr. Wheat's original work was itself a critique of Kubrick/Clarke. Applying your own standards Mr. Lampe rebuted someone else's critique. How lame is that?
KFG
that muscles like to work against resitence. Close your eyes and move your arm about. How aware are you REALLY about just where it is?
Not very.
Yet every nerve ending in your skin is highly tuned to sense pressure changes amounting to fractions of an ounce, even when the load gets over 100 lbs. of force.
We are inherently desinged for pressure feedback, not position feedback.
KFG
programs is that are virii in their own right.
I hate them, the only way to recover a HD from them is to flaten the whole bloody thing and I'm really not sure which is worse, getting a virus, or getting a virus protection program.
KFG