WATCH: Read A Book – #SolutionsWatch
If you’re like the majority of the population in this post-literate age of TikTok videos and never-ending social media feeds, you don’t read books anymore. But you should. Join James for this simple and to-the-point edition of #SolutionsWatch on the value of physical books.
Sources, shownotes and links – as well as audio versions and download options – can be found here. Previous episodes of #SolutionsWatch can be found here and here.
Follow us on Telegram for regular updates & commentary
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
Admin:
Please, why has my post to Pilgrim Shadow (timed at 9.47am today, just a minute or two ago) gone into ‘pending’? Looks like there’s “gremlins in the works”.
Please can it be sorted out/cleared, and published?
Thank you!
(This post too will, almost certainly, go into ‘pending’…)
Currently reading 5G & 6G related material. I suggest others do the same.
3G is being phased out
dodgy reasons as usual – familiar playbook
Tech for old school pagers
recall Neil Armstrong moon walking..MJ did it best imo
Tech for your latest gizmo
same same like coca cola..re-branding ad nauseam
Thin to no wallets for us. Yay!
Fat wallets for them. Yay!
Have fun. LOVE YOU.
also
President Richard Nixon allegedly made a phone call to an Astronaut.
If the Technology was sound then why all the fuss now?
Very helpful choice
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.01834v1.pdf
How about supposedly great books that turn out to be a disappointment? I always wanted to read “Moby Dick” but when I did I was miffed that the actual story only seems to take up about a third of the book – the other third consisting of chapters on whaling, whales in mythology, technical observations etc. And all that stuff seems to swamp the story. Meanwhile I was getting closer and closer to the end and thinking, “When do we get back to the bit about Ahab’s mad quest?” And then about three chapters from the end, Melville seems to realise, “Oh that’s right! I‘m supposed to be writing a tale! Well I better round this up!” and we get the literary equivalent of a speeded up tape.
As I’m sure you’re aware, Melville was way ahead of his time and was a prime mover in the abolition of flogging in the Navy.
Book reference The Blue Jacket.
His great, great etc grandson is Moby of 90’s electro/cool fame.
Well said. Nevertheless, Moby Dick is the great 19th century novel which predicts the mad rush of 21st century Capitalism to destroy the environment as well as destroy itself. The “technical observations, etc” — such as cutting the captured whales and boiling them for their blubber — symbolize our current technological nightmare. The scenes of mother whales giving milk to their babies symbolize the natural which our 21stC is currently breaking. Like our own current situation in the “affluent freedom loving West” (freedom to rape the world) the destructive power builds up slowly but the catastrophe comes suddenly.
Karma is a whale.
There’s also a book out there saying it’s about Calvinism. I haven’t a clue, but there it is:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/892165.Moby_Dick_and_Calvinism
Thanks for the chuckle! Your perseverance is admirable; you finished it!
Just this week I completed “The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Murder and Mutiny”. I thought the author’s extensive research of the many facets of this sobering account was truly impressive.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61714633-the-wager
It helps getting the deeper meanings of “Moby Dick” to know that Melville was firmly committed to the philosophy of Transcendentalism. This way, the whale as a symbol and therefore Melville’s obsession with it becomes clearer. Also, Melville was a Naturalistic writer in a Romantic era; as such, he focused perhaps inordinately on the actual conditions of the whaling industry.
I would note too that neither Melville nor his masterpiece, “Moby Dick” were particularly well received by the American public – something which persisted well into the 20th Century.
Bit of an irony that you use a short video to advertise the benefits of actually reading! Anyway, I’m glad you’ve taken to reading about Stephenson, the BSC and so on because there’s so much in there that’s relevant to our contemporary world.
FWIW — I’ve just finished “Brave New World”, its one of those “I’ve been meaning to read it but never got around to it” books. It has its flaws, as you’d expect from the author and the date it was written, but its very much a complement to “1984”, presenting an alternate vision to the “boot on the neck forever” vision of Orwell. (Huxley, the author, thought the Orwell approach was not cost effective but then never considered the employment opportunities afforded by a large scale state security apparatus!)
I read a lot of older stuff on a Kindle but important books I collect as hard copy because, as you’ve noted, they can’t just disappear. A lot of books are best obtained second hand and here Amazon or similar is useful because you need to cast a wider net to find them than just your local suppliers. I’m also wary of later editions of books; sometimes things get added that improve them but all too often the text gets modified and ‘interpreted’ for later readers. (I still don’t know how things like Stephenson’s biography got published — but then it was made into a movie which is by far the best way of popularizing knowledge of a book while depriving it of its substance)(case in point — “1984”)
(Incidentally, did you know that the original version of Orwell’s “Animal Farm”, a cartoon made in the UK, was actually commissioned by and financed the CIA?)
I also have “Brave New World” – recently acquired since it was on my “must read” list. Haven’t got round to it yet.
I don’t see the irony in having a short video about reading since the shortness surely complements the message i.e. stuff this video crap and read!
Aldous Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley the evolutionist.
Died on the same day as the JFK thing.
As did C S Lewis.
Yes, all three. That was one helluva shot.
The magical bullet that went round the world.
‘(Incidentally, did you know that the original version of Orwell’s “Animal Farm”, a cartoon made in the UK, was actually commissioned by and financed the CIA?)’
….
I think I read that somewhere. Hasn’t it also been alleged that Orwell was British Intel?
I read a few of Orwells books many years ago. Road to Wigan Pier and Burmese Days.
I remember enjoying them at the time. I still have them somewhere.
A couple of years ago a young Rumanian friend gave me a new copy of 1984 which she’d just read and thought it was brilliant…..so there is hope.
As far as I know, 1984 is still in the UK school curriculum.
Road to Wigan Pier is a good read, as is Down and Out in Paris and London. Burmese Days is on the shelf, but I’ve not read it.
I’m in the States, and 1984 is still in the curriculum here.
‘Keep the aspadistra flying’ is worth a read.
I found ‘Burmese days’ hard work.
There are some good essays which are very evocative of the era like ‘shooting an elephant’
A lot of stuff for free on the Guttenberg project website.
Homage to Catalonia, detailing Orwell’s experience in the Spanish Civil War is another worthwhile read.
No, I didn’t know that, but it makes sense for the CIA to fund such a high profile anti-Communist.
Some disappointments:
Tried the “Game of Thrones” books. Got bored and stopped. Finally got my act together and went back to where I thought I’d left off: towards the end of the second book. I was surprised to find I’d read it and was actually on the third. That was how much attention I was paying. So I just bailed out.
The problem? Menus and costumes. Every meal had to be described minutely. And also, every fucking character had to have his costume described in detail. This reached absurd heights with the attire of Lord Tywin just before a battle. He was decked out in so much metal that the horse he was on would have sunk into the ground and him with it. Cut all this crap out and these books would have been half the size.
Never managed to get through Alex Haley’s “Roots” (yes we’re going back a bit now!). Can’t recall a book so cliché ridden. Apparently he made most of it up anyway.
Took me six attempts to get through “Bleak House”. Mind you, it was worth it.
I’m on my fourth attempt at “War and Peace”. I have read 64 pages out of a thousand. Who am I kidding?
W and P gets better if you can make it past the first 100 pages. Good luck!
A couple of years ago, I persevered with “War and Peace”, and finished it! What a boring book! I very rarely read fiction, but challenged myself to read that one.
I read “Bleak House” about 40 years ago.
Thanks for that alternative view. I read “The Brothers Karamazov” about twenty years ago and loved it but found it unreadable on retrying. Granted that I was reading a different translation – the David McDuff as opposed to the Pevear/Volokhonsky (a team that have sparked a “hype” controversy). McDuff seems to have added about another quarter to the volume. Somebody also commented on this. I have another translation – David Magarshack – which I may get round to.
Other books I found difficult to re-read include Tolkien’s massive trilogy – though to be fair, even on a first reading at the age of 14, I found the third volume a bit off-putting with all that King James Bible stuff (“And lo!)
Yes, the translator is everything. When you read a translation by a great translator, you get in effect two books for the price of one.
I read where Gabriel Garcia-Marquez waited two years for Gregory Rabassa to become available. I read lots of Latin American literature; and believe me Gregory Rabassa is well worth the wait.
The surfeit of detail in Game of Thrones seems to suggest that the author has a background in graphic or web programming.
Or is just a boring twat.
I was pleasantly surprised by War and Peace, so often hearing how lonnnng and boring it was. Not at all! Being a woman, maybe it’s the tapestry of the characters which kept me engaged, but for the man, there’s so much history that I should think you’d be likewise engaged. True, I did get bored with many swaths of these historic narratives where I skim-read until the better story resumed.
If you could read Moby Dick, this should be a breeze!
Another great one: The Count of Monte Cristo.
Monte Cristo, yes!
Talking of books, this is paraphrased from ‘In Pursuit of the Metaverse’: A vital De Facto about religion & the true nature of evil that has been intentionally obscured, is the traditions of these pestilential people, are a 100% negation of religious values, or rather the inverse of the main principles of natural law & fundamental human dignity. If you wish to enter into life, to live, (RtoL is evil) keep the commandments (Matthew 19:16-17). Their manner of law, government, religion, and ideologies are diametrically opposite to tradition. It is seldom that upon investigation this cultus diabolicus are not found to abet disorder, theft, depravity & degeneracy. With this dog-eat-dog hivemind by design, one will regard everyone as their enemy, utopia on earth unobtainable; unless one side of this ultimate dialectic is erased. Their end game is not just centralization of all power into a one world edifice, but the suppression and eradication of conscience, and thus, all that is good. Its that simple!
YES, YES, YES! James Corbett, one of the first independent journalists online that I followed, echoes my thoughts to the letter. For those of us with ever-curious minds, reading is an absolute must and I mean REAL BOOKS, ones that will last, that will grace my bookshelves as long as I’m around. That won’t disappear if the whole digital THING goes down. And, though often criticised for doing so, I highlight and make notes in my books. Those blank pages at the end are great for that. This doesn’t apply to fiction of course which is a whole different matter. Thank you James, enjoy your well-deserved hols!
Yes, Sue, I too make copious highlights and notes in my large personal library!
Reading is most definitely an absolute must and, as you say, without doubt this means REAL books!
I’d never read any book on a Kindle machine.
Reading on kindle or screen gives me migraines and is aweful for the eyes.
real book s all the way,
I’m currently reading Catafalque by Peter Kingsley. Its not the sort of book I would usually read but I’m going through my “Jung phase”. My reading pile is huge. I must devote more time to getting through them. I’ve been busy lately and have resorted to using the audio book format. Its not the same.
Try Jung’s “Memories, Dreams, Reflections”. His dream about a massive turd falling on the church is itself worth the admission fee.
Yes, a nice snippet of history there from Corbett.
For more on the connections between the ‘Deep State’ and ‘the occult’ I heartily recommend Peter Levenda’s ‘Sinister Forces’ trilogy, where you can learn about, amongst other things, David Ferrie and his fellow Wandering Bishops and the Secret Schools of the 1950s.
Current reading: ‘The Coming of Neo-Feudalism’ by Joel Kotkin. Recent reading: ‘Green Tyranny’ by Rupert Darwall and ‘Labour and the Gulag’ by Giles Udy. All written from within conventional paradigms but full of useful information if one can tolerate that limitation.
Next up: ‘Was Jonestown a CIA Medical Experiment?’ by Michael Meiers and ‘Storming Heaven’ by Jay Stevens.
Top priority: still looking for Ratiu’s ‘The Milner-Fabian Conspiracy’ at any sort of a reasonable price (after recently having found Hopsicker’s two books, ‘Barry and the Boys’ and ‘Welcome to Terrorland’, at last after many years of searching).
The Milner Fabian Conspiracy “provides a critical study of the Milner Group and the Fabian Society, two closely related organizations set up in the late 1800s by banking and industrial interests for the purpose of subverting the existing order and establishing a socialist world government controlled by themselves.”
Fabians included millionaire socialists and imperialist like Bernard Shaw. The Milner / Chatham / EU group got together with the Bush / Ford / Dupont U$ group to create Socialism for the Rich. Austerity for the People.
I have adjusted my lecturing to incorporate the fact that most students don’t read books anymore. Interestingly, a select few that still read books tend to wrtie the best essays.
Off Guardian is a great alt. media forum.
Especially if you agree with the regular commenters.
If there is a subject that you feel strongly about that is not “a la mode” best talk about it elsewhere.
I’ve always found, if you can justify your opinions with facts and aren’t just a hate filled ranter, most people here are very open minded.
Islam ?
Dare to criticise it here and out come the down voters!
Or conversely, you could bring up your “bravely dissenting” opinion here and argue about it.
Contagion ?
Contagion is debated here ad nauseam
Germ theory seems to be regarded as the heretical idea.
Surely, as the usurper, it is up to the terrain fans to have a better case before assuming the higher ground ?
I haven’t seen that argument
Regarding islam, I understand why people don’t want to discuss it.
It is any publisher’s nightmare.
I brought up a legitimate story yesterday, which I had crosschecked, about marriage in Iraq which was called bullshit by a commentor.
Nobody else seemed bothered enough to reply.
If there are taboo subjects then I will avoid them and enjoy the site as it is.
It would be sad to think that was the case.
Not by everyone, just a very vocal few. Admin Sam does his best to keep balance going.
< Nobody else seemed bothered enough to reply. >
Strange, I gave your post an uptick and added a comment. Here it is:
“Younger than she have been mothers made”
“Aye, and marred in the making” — Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet.
Naturally I now watch the Iraqi Parliament with interest, would be happy if ultra-conservative countries (such as Malaysia) were to adjust this old custom of child marriage in the light of modern medical knowledge and modern opinion that young adults ought to develope themselves before taking on the responsibility of rearing offspring.
Apologies Nick, you are correct.
I am amazed, in what should be an enlightened age, that “customs” should take precedence over child welfare.
Simply incomprehesible.
“as the usurper, it is up to the terrain fans to have a better case.”
No, your premise is completely flawed as it is based on the consensus fallacy..
Just because more people believe in something does not make it more true.
It is disappointing that this obvious and logical fact still eludes you.
There is no such thing as “the usurper”.
There are competing hypotheses, each should be weighed according to the evidence and what the majority of people believe must be understood to mean nothing. Beliefs are not evidence.
You didn’t retract your “bullshit” accusation on the child marriage issue.
I assume you have now crosschecked it and found it to be true.
On the contagion thing, I not sure whether it’s a case of commenters trying to be “right on” or just plain contrary.
Either way, I’ve enough personal evidence of germ theory to believe it’s real and absolutely none of terrain.
That’s sort of how I make up my mind on things.
I assume that your decision to change the subject is a concession of sorts! I checked that claim thoroughly before making the comment.There is no evidence of any plan to change the legal marriage age in Iraq to 9, that was the claim made by the video and that is a lie, that is what I called bullshit. The Iraqi parliament are in the process of passing legislation that will allow people to choose between the state and the church in relation to family law. Those who oppo9se it are presenting the world with a worst case scenario based upon nothing in order to solidify opposition to these laws. Because people oppose the laws, they feel free to wildly exaggerate and distort what the legislation actually entails. I completely agree that the legislation is a terrible idea but not that it should be opposed through hype and fabrication. The process that the Iraqi parliament envisages is that after the law is passed they will give Sunni and Shia leaders six months to come up with a plan for how the legislation will be enacted. Only then will anyone be able to make a comment about what the application of the law entails, until then the only reference to age in the legislation is a vague reference to “being of age” Regardless of the outcome, the legislation is a terrible idea and should be opposed, but not with a hype story that has absolutely no substance and I think it is unjust to take one terrible idea promoted by the political leadership of Iraq and somehow act as though all 1.6 billion or whatever Muslims are somehow responsible, or the entire Muslim world supports it. To me it is just as ridiculous as blaming a Jewish New Yorker for the crimes… Read more »
When did I change the subject ?
I answered your post re: contagion .
Regarding your “It’s their custom” argument, the problem seems to be one of religious equivalence in the belief that all religions are the same.
They’re not and when ANY religion goes against moral decency it should be called out by any means possible.
I assume you know why age 9 is important ?
“answered your post re: contagion”
Indeed, but my post had nothing whatsoever to do with the germ theory argument one way or the other. My comment entirely related to your use of consensus fallacy. On that, you said nothing..
It’s only a ‘concensus fallacy’ if you appeal to it to make a fallacious argument! Simply pointing out there IS a consensus is not the same. The commenter said terrain needed stronger evidence before ‘assuming the higher ground. Ie. From that commenter’s pov, terrain should argue its case more effectively and stop declaring it’s already won the argument in this forum. And I thoroughly agree!
That is fine, but that is not at all what was said. What was said was that in essence “If an idea is widely believed then that idea should be deferred to, that is the default position that must be displaced by the other position.”
At least that is how I interpret:
“…… seems to be regarded as the heretical idea.
Surely, as the usurper, it is up to the ……. fans to have a better case before assuming the higher ground ?”
I don’t think that is an unfair interpretation and to me that is a classic case of “the widely believed position is more valid because it is more widely believed.” fallacy.
Virus and contagion is the mainstream. That’s reality. Terrain is the ‘usurper’, which is a flattering term since let’s be honest they ain’t usurping a thing and clearly the OP meant it ironically. The point being, if you’ve got no lab evidence supporting your theories stop acting like it’s all settled. Get stronger arguments before you start bullying the conversation in these comments, eg. calling everyone a virus shill left, right and centre. Or switching on the indignation every five minutes, like you are doing. It’s all appeals to emotion designed to steer conversation and muddy the waters.
He didn’t mean it ironically. The point is a simple one: Just because it is believed by more people does not in of itself constitute evidence. Does not make it more true.
I think that we have now seen enough big lies to cease the reflexive appeal for and respect for a consensus position.
Unless you are the OP posting under a different name, stop trying to override me. Unless you’re psychic my interpretation is, at the very least, as valid as yours mate.
I saw no attempt to use consensus to win an argument, just a statement of fact. There IS a big consensus surrounding germs and virology. If terrain wants to ‘usurp’ then it needs stronger arguments, since it’s literally got no published science at this point.
Factual statements.
Honestly I’m sick to death of wading through this boring idiot treacle every time this comes up. Get good evidence of terrain, stop using nitpicking and emotional arguments to avoid and distract from the fact THERE IS NONE.
I have never argued in favour of terrain theory nor against germ theory. I am not an advocate of terrain theory so your rant is wasted on me and you completely missed the point.
My sole point was to oppose the fallacy that consensus equals evidence.
Your comment is ridiculous as you state “there was no consensus fallacy, only facts” and then make it clear that you believe that consensus should carry the weight of evidence.
You openly support the fallacy you denied was even present in the preceding sentence.
” There IS a big consensus surrounding germs and virology. If terrain wants to ‘usurp’ then it needs stronger arguments, since it’s literally got no published science at this point”
And it is clear that at the heart of your comment is your passionate belief and advocacy for germ theory., Because you agree with what the person is saying, and you support the consensus, you don’t see it as fallacy, but it is..
But if you want to see the world that way, please go for it. It isn’t worth disagreement.
If you really believe that relying on the established consensus is a good starting point, I would point you to an event like Covid, or 911, where an overwhelming consensus has proven to be false.
The fact that almost everyone in the world initially believed the establishment stories never made them true.
My point was nothing to do with terrain versus germs and everything to do with rejecting the idea of accepting every establishment narrative as the first port of call on any topic..
I never expressed my views on the subject either. If you don’t think there’s a consensus for virology then you’re either a fool or deluded. Try to separate facts from your emotions.
Look up what consensus means and give your head a wobble
Glad you picked my pronoun of choice !
Perhaps ‘usurper’ was a bad choice of words.
As Rob Mc Chicken points out, terrain has yet to take the podium so maybe a better turn of phrase would be ‘new kid on the block?’
You said nothing on the importance of the age 9.
The Gwyneth Paltrow movie?
I’m not being facetious. I’m tired of folk spouting off a one word answer and assuming everyone else will know what they’re talking about.
Sounds like you need safe space.
Lol
Touched a nerve ?
Read a short astrological demonstration of the natall moon based on three foundational texts that I am working my way through and writing about at the same time on Substack: https://open.substack.com/pub/karlskellenger/p/notes-from-a-native-astrology-the?r=fjmlo&utm_medium=ios
C’ mon guys, It’s party on till the digital gulag, c’mon yeah
best thing to do
advice is, read a book
most impact Miller jew 80s did not know
then the black cube closed in
black spring was also a miller
Aquarius
Classical
they don’t update for the folk not on X or Fake
Define gay ; This, every gay Friday
I mean you get tired of these boys, on a Friday night is it ?
Books, okay
Fave books
name a fuckin book after the black cube, internet thats worth not looking at the black cube
Black cube, dude.
Print press when cube went down
We come back
Cattle
Breeders
97%
See
I don’t know
What is that in plain English…?
Do you ever get real dreams, not normal dreams ?
I’m currently reading: ‘Climate Past, Present and Future’ by the late Prof. Hubert Lamb.
This two volume seminal work was written in the late 60s/early 70s, long before the IPCC existed and long before climate bedwetting was a mainstream illness.
Of course, it was written at times when much of the modern technology used in ‘climate analysis’ did not exist. No satellites to monitor arctic and antarctic ice, troposphere temperatures, total global leaf area etc etc.
However, it contains an absolute treasure trove of information on the history of climate, on a wide variety of techniques used to probe past climates, plus large amounts of technical explanations of a wide variety of weather phenomena, climate patterns etc etc.
The pair are the sort of books you won’t find in your local book shop – I bought the two volumes online and one came from a UK source, the second came from a US source.
The book was written by an honorable academic as an academic treatise. It has zero political overtones, only an over-riding interest in furthering the understanding of climate and highlighting the areas that climate expertise could help to improve the overall life experience of humans on earth.
Prof. Hubert Lamb. prob mason like you, history is an increasing lie, everything before ca. 1800 mainstream is bs.
Interpreting history is done between the lines. Ur either good at it or yee aint.
If you think that low level gaslighting is going to make me feel intimidated, you may have identified the wrong target for your inadequate insults.
For the record, I am not a mason, I have never known anyone who told me that they were a mason. Not surprising that, for a supposedly ‘secret society’.
Of course, you will be telling every Christian, Jew and Muslim worldwide that the Talmud, the Bible and the Quran are bs, because they were written before 1800.
You are saying that basic abilities to measure high water on rivers did not exist before 1800. You are saying that every written record of vine growing in Europe prior to 1800 is lies. You are saying that the Great Fire of London never happened, the Plague never happened, the Black Death never happened, the Bank of England was not founded in the 17th century, Columbus never discovered America and the Boston Tea Party was a fiction.
You are saying that the Roman Empire did not exist and all the works of Socrates, Plato and any other Greek Philosophers was made up nonsense. No knowledge of Astronomy existed in ancient Greece, nor in ancient Egypt, nor in Persia.
You’re free to believe all those things, even if you are wrong on all counts, but you do need to learn that your ‘probable assignment of RTJ as a mason’ is unregurgitated, ignorant lies.
Perfectly stated Rhys.
It is an unsubstantiated claim, not necessarily a lie per se. The Lambs are a very interesting family ” Lamb was son of Ernest Horace Lamb (1878–1946), DSC, DSc, professor of engineering at Queen Mary College, London,[14][15] and Lilian, daughter of the Rev. G. H. Brierley.[16] He was a grandson of the mathematician Horace Lamb, whose influence he credited for his own early career at the Meteorological Office,[2] and a nephew of the classicist Walter Lamb, the painter Henry Lamb and the archaeologist Dorothy Lamb. His son Norman Lamb was the Liberal Democrat MP for North Norfolk from 2001 until 2019.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Lamb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Lamb Good response though, but I think your claim of Lamb’s work being non-political is naive, Not to cast aspersions on those books, which I have not read, but the Wikipedia page makes it clear that this was a highly politically charged area of research at that time and Lamb seems to have been forced to bow down at the altar of CO2 driven global warming by 1984. “Lamb’s 1977 book Climatic History and the Future described studies of fossil pollen showing an abrupt change from a glacial era of pinewoods to oak trees,[7] pointing to “great rapidity of climate change”. He discussed research on the complex effects of human caused pollution, and suggested that “On balance, the effects of increased carbon dioxide on climate is almost certainly in the direction of warming but is probably much smaller than the estimates which have commonly been accepted.”[8] In the preface to his 1984 edition of the book, Lamb noted studies of the “carbon dioxide problem” and called for more investigation of past climate, particularly “evidence that some major climatic changes took place surprisingly quickly.” He outlined recent research suggesting that the next glaciation would begin in 3,000 to 7,000… Read more »
Sorry, if you say yer not a mason,
It’s the distraction that gets me every time
I am saying anything and most probably everything pre 1800 is false, made up, fake.
https://gorojanin–iz–b-livejournal-com.translate.goog/89184.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB
< The book was written by an honorable academic as an academic treatise. It has zero political overtones, only an over-riding interest in furthering the understanding of ….. >
Written half a century ago. Yes, those were the days.
But the sense of honour and of professional integrity has not died — neither among academics nor among members of the community. Witness marine colonel Scott Ritter, steadfast for twenty years as the foremost man among the righteous Yanks:
Scott Ritter Statement Following FBI Raid on his home
https://youtu.be/_2BQAYUtLrg?si=slgOgVEzoBcxzVWS
Does that sense of honour of Mr Ritter’s extend to his behaviour online with what he thought were underage (teen) girls?
The first of these took place in 2001, well before the Iraq war, in case anyone thinks “they were out to get him” before the Iraq war had even started. In fact, it was covered up until 2003, although that charge was later dismissed.
His subsequent crime took place later in 2009 and were down to sting operations.
He just can’t help himself it seems. This man is classic Kompromat material and therefore his integrity and credilbility should be viewed as zero.
The acting role he has now been given is to shill for the multipolar NWO like an obedient doggie. Who knows what other dirt there is on him, that makes him a useful servant.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2011/04/18/weapons-inspector-scott-ritter-convicted-over-online-sex-chat-with-underage-girl/
Thie following article actually comes from someone who admires his work but not his private behaviour.
https://johndenugent.com/my-stance-on-the-two-morals-charges-against-scott-ritter-kay-griggs-expose-of-the-cherry-marines/
Two downvoters without the cajones to write a comment in defence of their ‘hero’.
Although, defending a married man with children, who exposed himself on a webcam to what he thought was a 15 year old girl, is indefensible, so no wonder those downvoters prefer to remain anonymous.
And there was me thinking that – according to its shills – one of the big tenets of BRICS/multipolar world shills are ‘family values’.
Ultimately Ritter’s analysis seems overwhelmingly designed to entertain a partisan audience of one type or another by telling them exactly what they want to hear. That’s why I don’t see much value at all at paying attention to him, he’s not even trying to tell the truth.
The internet issues are reasons not to admire him, but if his analysis was high quality, if he was Alistair Crooke, a person with some similar limitations but a far more nuanced and incisive analysis I would probably put that aside as being unconnected with what he is talking about and listen.
Science must serve capital, or suffer defunding. Not very different from the USSR Lysenko era.
“your local book shop”.
Invariably as controlled and as toxic as any mainstream outlet for anything. The occasional visit to the local Waterstones is like being dumped in a vat of something extremely unpleasant.
So-called independents aren’t much better in my experience. I remember asking in every Hay-on-Wye bookshop about Dave McGowan and being greeted with blank stares.
You may be right about local bookshops, but in the case of Lamb’s treatises, the reason local bookshops probably won’t store it is that they wouldn’t sell very many copies!! It’s not bed time reading for children, after all.
Sounds fascinating Rhys.
I’m a 65-year-old Englishwoman here in the UK, and I’ve been a voracious reader of books since I was 9 or 10 years old (at the tender age of 10, I was researching the subject of cosmology, and read many books on it that were intended for adults; I borrowed books from the adult library on our dad’s library ticket). I’ve carried out scholarly research into many, very diverse non-fiction subjects since that tender age of ten, and am still doing so today. I decided to cancel my TV licence in mid-2021; for I literally hardly ever watched the TV. My longtime partner used to watch a lot, but I didn’t (he returned to the very real Spirit Dimension [of this in fact multi-dimensional cosmos] in early 2019). My eldest niece (35) visited me from another part of the country in Feb. this year, and wondered why I don’t watch TV; she made it obvious that she thinks [that] people who choose to not do so are peculiar in some way! She said “Why don’t you reinstate your TV, Chris?”. I told her in no uncertain terms as to why I’d not be doing so. She responded “But you could watch documentaries…”. I said “But I don’t want to watch documentaries… I’m a reader, and not a watcher”. She replied “Oh well, fair enough…”. I have a large personal library of 1400+ books, 99.9% of them being non-fiction books on many subjects (yes, I’m fully aware that some people will have larger libraries than that, but many people will own only a few books. Some own none…). My sister only reads romance novels… her husband doesn’t read at all. My brother reads a few books, but mainly fiction; and his wife (a ‘christian’ from the Caribbean…) reads books on her… Read more »
Hi – out if interest, what books do you recommend – ‘several books, the contents of which would have much enlightened’
Hi Mark,
I’ve gifted/tried to gift informative books to relatives and friends for decades, but as of 2020, I gifted to my sister and her husband, my brother and his wife, and a couple of friends, several books on the medical fraud of ‘vaccines’ (they’ve been known for 150-200 years to be a medically-fraudulent product; a number of honest doctors and scientists way back then spoke out about it, and also wrote of the fraud). Also some books on the hoax/scam of ‘covid’. I gifted the following to members of my family, and some friends:
“Anyone who tells you that vaccines are safe and effective is lying. Here’s the proof”, by the esteemed [now retired] Dr Vernon Coleman (he used to be a GP, here in the UK).
“Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History”, by Dr Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk. N.B., a few months ago, they issued an expanded/updated edition, for the book’s 10th anniversary. The contents provide incontrovertible proof that ‘vaccines’ are indeed a medical fraud.
“‘Covid 19: the greatest hoax in history”, by the afore-mentioned Dr Vernon Coleman.
“Truth-teller: the price”, also by Dr Vernon Coleman.
There are many other excellent books out there re. the medical fraud of ‘vaccines’; there are also many books that have been written on the ‘covid’ scam/hoax/psyop.
Amongst them are:
“Vaccine Voodoo: what YOU don’t know about vaccines”, by Catherine J Frompovich.
“The Poisoned Needle: suppressed facts about vaccination”, by Eleanor McBean.
“Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 important scientific papers summarised for parents and researchers”, by Neil Z Miller.
“The Vaccine Papers”, by Janine Roberts.
I’ve just replied to your request with some titles. The post has gone into ‘pending’. Hopefully it will be released and printed soon!
Hi Mark,
In my earlier reply to you, I didn’t provide many book titles re. the ‘covid’ scam/hoax etc. Here are some of the many that have been written.
“The ‘Covid-19’ Illusion: a cacophony of lies”, by Gary Jordan. [is an excellent book; and no, I have NO connection to him or to any booksellers!]
“Welcome to the Masquerade: prelude to the coming Reset”, by Shannon Rowan and John Hamer. [N.B., someone here on Off-G some time ago mentioned that this book is no longer available. I was therefore lucky when I bought a copy a couple of years ago!]
“Covid-19: the Great Deception”, by Mark Keenan.
“No worries, no virus”, by Mark Keenan.
“‘Covid-19’: a pandemic of ignorance, fear, hysteria, and ‘official truth lies”, by James DeMeo.
“Crisis, Cull, or Coup? Exposing the Great Lie and the truth about the ‘covid-19’ Phenomenon”, by Stephen Manning.
“States of Emergency: keeping the global population in check”, by Kees van der Pijl.
“‘Covid’ Hoax: Scam of the century”, by K Mullins.
“The worldwide ‘Corona’ Crisis: global coup d’etat against Humanity”, by Professor Michel Chossudovsky. [N.B., this is also available free, in a pdf file format, at the Global Research site, which Prof. Chossudovsky is the Founder and Director of]
“Perceptions of a Renegade Mind”, by David Icke.
“The Bodies of others: the new Authoritarians. ‘Covid-19’ and the War against the Human”, by Naomi Wolf.
“The Naked Sheep: humans in a nutshell”, by Andrew Voller.
“Fighting ‘Covid-19’ corruption: one lawyer’s relentless battle for truth, freedom, and justice”, by Thomas Renz.
And there are many more on this subject!
I, have always been a reader since I, was a kid. The sisters and brother of I, all had library cards as kids and the library used to have storytimes for kids. I, remember spending ages deliberating over the four books I, could take out each time at the library. I, have a lot of books and call the book collection of I, ‘The Library of Alexandria.’ 🙂
How can someone have thumbed-down my post above?!? It’s a 100% factual post!
The ‘thumber-downer’ must be one of the following:
i) someone who doesn’t like reading.
ii) someone who [foolishly] doesn’t like my posts on the [proven] survival of physical body death truth.
iii) an actual human being who is a ‘troll’, whether ’77th brigade’ or otherwise.
iv) a ‘troll’ in the form of an AI bot.
Don’t worry about down votes. An up vote is an indication of agreement and therefore requires no further action. But a down vote signals disagreement and therefore obligates the down voter to give an explanation – which usually never happens. That’s why down votes are a total waste of time. They are the equivalent of someone blowing a raspberry through your letter box and then running away.
Or shit through yer letter box, must be asking for it, living in the wrong place, too tired to explain again,
Total blindside on thee topic, stick up for a globe fool.
We people who know that the Earth is a globe are not ‘fools’.
Mostly maybe, just misguided.
It’s you ‘flat-earthers’ who are misguided.
Yes, that’s exactly what down-votes are!
I admit that I sometimes do thumb-down a post without giving an explanation, but in a percentage of instances I do respond re. why I’ve thumbed-down their comment.
I never downvote.
Those commentors are condemned by their own words.
They’re condemned by their own lack of words.
And as if to prove my point I note that sometimes every single post BTL soon gets a single down vote. I don’t know if that’s some kinda bot or just some jerk compulsively banging away.
Yes, I noticed that, here on Off-G, a year or so ago, and mentioned it BTL. As you mentioned, I considered that it’s probably an AI bot.
Pretty much disagree. Offering only up-votes as many sites do, is an attempt to hide public opinion.
I use the down-vote judiciously, as for example, with Off-G’s old friend Jaques et al, who would often pen posts that, even if I didn’t wholly agree with them, would at least come at things from a different and interesting angle, which would make them, to my mind, worth considering. Alas! He forever spoiled his posts through his incessant use of profanity (I use it myself, but not every other word and rarely on public sites) and ad hominem. He was called out regularly for this, so no need to comment to him. The down-vote button is enough.
Bit reductionist, that.
I don’t post here very often but each post I make, gets a single down vote. Somebody else mentioned bots and if this is the case, saddens me. Those down votes are worn as a badge that no bot can tarnish!
Sometimes, I will up vote something I don’t necessarily agree with. Perhaps the writer provided info that I found helpful or maybe the post was amusing. Cannot assume agreement. And down votes aren’t always disagreement. Maybe the post was off-topic or I disapproved an ad-hom, especially toward the essayist.
Up or down, I neither sense nor expect any obligation.
Up means “I agree” and therefore requires nothing further.
Down means “I don’t agree” and ought to be followed by an explanation. This includes cases of “off-topic” or “ad-hom”.
Christine,
Even I get downvoted and my posts are cast iron truth bombs.
LOL (as the kids say)
Xx
Yes, I’ve read that a number of people have posted online re. (o name one example of many) their ‘jab’ injuries (during the past 3.5 years), and [foolish] people have thumbed-down what they wrote. The original commenters respond by saying “How on earth could they thumb me down, for what I wrote was what I personally have actually experienced!”.
A percentage of people on this planet simply don’t like/can’t cope with the facts/truths… (whatever the subject might be).
There you go ! There’s one there..
I confess. I routinely down-vote all of your posts where you insist on the petty, childish, and insulting use of ‘christian’ or ‘christianity.’ It very much cheapens you, particularly in light of the fact that your name is a derivative of Christ. If you want to be consistent, you should probably start writing your own name as ‘christine.’
To be fair however, I regularly up-vote you when you’re offering a spelling correction or etymological tidbit. I, for one appreciate good use of language, grammar, spelling etc. and you’re one of the site’s foremost grammarians, which makes your use of ‘christian’ etc, particularly grating, because you know better.
Thank you for the compliment re. “one of the site’s foremost grammarians”, Pilgrim Shadow. However, I make no apology for writing ‘christian’ and ‘christianity’. What ‘christians’ blindly believe is BS. ‘Born of a virgin’, ‘walking on water’, the ‘salvation’ stuff is absolute BS, for that truly is not how the very real Afterlife works, etc etc. The fact that my name is what it is does not mean that I ‘must’ use capital letters for the two words in the preceding paragraph. Because I never fell for that thing, and know enough of the history of its origins to despise the entire thing. The ‘christian church’ is BS’ing the gullible masses. When ‘christians’ arrive back in the very real Spirit Dimension (not ‘Heaven’ and not ‘Hell’; they don’t exist. What truly does exist is the Spirit World/Spirit Dimension [of this multi-dimensional cosmos], our actual place of origin), they’ll all have to face the (for them) unpalatable fact that the ‘christian church’ well and truly duped them. That they fell for nonsense. That they foolishly believed what is merely false doctrine and false dogma. I had a distant cousin (6th cousins x times removed, something like that; I used to be a genealogist [1988-1994, sat and passed two exams in the subject, carried out one hell of a lot of research into about 70 of our family lines, that of my sister’s husband, did research for some friends, including some in Australia, then, in 2006, that of my longtime partner Jim; and still do some family history research for people, which is how I discovered a number of distant cousins, way back then), a Scot. He turned out to be a Christian Fundamentalist, and said the most ridiculous things to me. When he discovered that I despise ‘christianity’, he said “Oh… Read more »
I get that you’re not a fan of Christianity, but that’s not the point. Intentionally spelling it with lower case is both petty and incorrect grammar, but you will do as you will. Might I assume you also use lower case spelling on other religious groups, or does Christianity come in for special opprobrium?
Christianity most definitely comes in for special opprobrium…
There are many books which relate the salient facts re. the BS of ‘christianity’… one excellent one being “The Christ Conspiracy: the greatest story ever sold”, by ‘Acharya S’ (the pseudonym of the American woman who wrote the book. Can’t recall her name… think her surname was Murdock, something like that. Dorothy the first name? Can’t recall.
‘Christianity’ is the one ‘religion’ which spews out most false dogma/false doctrine. At least Islam does disseminate the actual survival of ‘death’ facts/truths (I am NOT a Muslim!, I am very proud to be a properly-informed Spiritualist; am not ‘religious’, I’m spiritual [many spiritually-enlightened people around the world make that very real, necessary distinction between being ‘religious’ and being ‘spiritual’. The latter meaning that one is aware of the survival of ‘death’ truth and the many associated spiritual truths of existence]).
‘Christianity’ emphatically does not disseminate the actual facts/truths re. survival of physical body death. It, ‘christianity’, merely spews out its very many false dogmas/false doctrines, which the gullible ‘christian’ masses all fall for, hook, line and sinker!!
I must interject something here – something which I, as a materialist, would call obvious. Namely, with your ideas of a spirit world you are leaving yourself wide open to the same charge you level against Christianity. Yes, I’m well aware you accept that this particular realm has been proven; but simply basing ideas on a non-corporeal dimension leaves you open to essentially the same criticism as what you level against Christians. And, after all, there are many Christians who will insist that their particular ideas have been proven.
The fact remains, because it’s indisputable, that nothing incorporating the non-corporeal is totally immune from the kind of criticism those who accept the physical universe as the only reality are able to offer.
Any kind of spiritual dimension, while fascinating, is ultimately highly questionable, no matter how many of its advocates offer what they believe to be proof.
If you researched the survival of ‘death’ truth to the degree which I and many, many others around the world have, you would discover that there truly IS absolute, incontrovertible proof for the very real existence of the Spirit World/Spirit Dimension [of this multi-dimensional cosmos] and, thus, of the very real Afterlife.
The thing termed ‘christianity’, on the other hand, is truly not able to provide proof for even just one of its mere claims! Everything which ‘christians’ ‘blindly believe’ are, each and every one of them, merely false doctrines and false dogmas, and ‘believed’, by ‘christians’, on mere ‘faith’!! They will all get a big shock, when they each arrive back in the very real Spirit Dimension. Which has (as I’ve just said) masses of multi-faceted evidences for its true reality (there are 30+ different categories of evidences): evidences which together provide absolute proof.
All ‘christians’, at that point (on arrival back in the Spirit realms) will each have to face that they had been well and truly duped.
Science hasn’t, and never will, locate the source of Life.
Life is unfathomable.
Life has no beginning and no end.
Living, on the other hand, does end.
Somebody said that God threw cells into the ocean, the cells continued to spilt until you either got an ear or a gill, the gills stayed in the water to continue to split and grow, or evolve, and the ears crawled to land to survive and evolve.
This continued until the ape was made, but through evolution the human grew a brain on top of the apes brain to evolve its self. The missing link is the stronger ape that cared for its new weaker creation until it realized its creation was smarter than its self and a threat, in a great battle of survival, the new humans extincted the mother apes that cared and nurtured them to adult as they could not live peacefully together.
Next is the technology of man which brings us to the current day of human evolution.
Its not a secret, its just not accepted political publication.
Yes, Johnny, you’re right, life has no beginning and has no end: we are all eternal spirit beings, who live literally forever (the soul that we each are [we don’t possess a soul, we each are a soul] lives many, many lifetimes [thousands…]).
Living on Earth (at the conclusion of each lifetime) ends, yes, but when we arrive back in the very real Spirit dimension, we continue to live: for we’ll all then be ‘alive’ in our immortal spirit body. We literally will still be alive, then, just not in our physical body, but in our spirit body (sorry to labour the point!).
Yes, the current scientific community on Earth follows the incorrect materialistic paradigm; thus, whilst thinking in that erroneous way, they’ll not discover the actual nature of life (there are quite a number of spiritually-enlightened scientists around the world who do know what life is, but the ‘scientific’ community as a whole is, as I said above, working on a false paradigm. And most of them are closed-minded, which makes it even less likely that they’ll discover the true nature of life.
I think it must about 3.35pm right now, there in Australia [or one hour either side of that… for our clocks went either forward or back an hour, some months ago].
It’s currently 5.35am here in the UK; the reason I’m online at this time is because I’ve been suffering a severe attack of sinusitis, thus have had to stay up all night.
Twenty minutes ago I decided to go onto the computer, to see if doing so might help in some small way to take my mind off my current physical suffering.
Hope you feel better soon Chris.
Do you eat dairy products?
I haven’t had any sinus issues since giving up dairy and meat.
Fifteen years ago.
Hi Johnny,
Thanks very much for your good wishes re. my health, it’s appreciated.
Re. dairy products. Well, a few months ago I made a decision to reduce (although not eliminate entirely…) my intake of dairy products.
Your words have made me think… my current sinus attack began approx. three weeks ago; and that was the precise time when I had some cheese for the first time in more than a year (since you ask, it was Red Leicester, my favourite! Don’t know whether it’s available there in Australia).
I’m now thinking back, and would you believe it, the previous sinusitis attack was round about the time when I’d last had some cheese, a year ago… I’m now wondering whether that might be a significant “aha!” moment… an enlightening observation?!?
Many thanks for giving me some food for thought (oops, sorry about the ‘sort of’ pun!).
That promised fountain of youth eludes me again, shucks!
Almost all cheese products now use non-animal rennet. Most non-animal rennet uses CRISPR technology.
More changing of the human genome through food.
Since being vigilant with hunting down the few cheese products still using animal rennet and switching to raw milk we have seen vast improvements to allergies and overall health.
Hope you feel better soon Christine.
A short PS to my reply to you of a few minutes’ ago.
When in 2020 I’d booked myself a 2+ week holiday to Sydney (but had to cancel it in Aug. that year, due to my not being prepared to submit to injection, wear mask, have temperature taken at airport, etc…), I’d learnt that one of the big supermarket chains in your country begins with a C (have written it like that, just in case mentioning the name of a store is ‘not allowed’!). And I looked up food items on their website, and worked out the groceries I’d be purchasing.
So, following on from your words re. taking out dairy products [and meat] from your diet caused your sinus issue to be a thing of the past, I looked up online the site of that Aussie store. And yes, of course they do have Red Leicester cheese! I worked out the comparisons of prices of that item, based on an approximation of the current exchange rate, and was quite stunned to see that the price for that item is several times more than the price here in the UK!!
Rough approximations: 150g in Australia = AUS$9.50 (= approx. £7; however, I’ve not checked the current exchange rate, so my estimate might be a bit out)
400g in UK: approx. £4.
It is, I believe, your loss that 99.9% of what you read is non-fiction. This being the case, it would be logical for you to equate fiction with romance novels (which is what it seems since you make no mention of genuine literature). My experience is nearly the opposite in that I have read primarily works of fiction.
Fiction, if it’s good, transcends facts and figures to give a view and a sense of life which conveys truths of human nature and existence across the ages. It isn’t analytical in that it doesn’t answer questions or impart data, nor does it argue a particular point of view by presenting specific evidence. It is wildly unscientific – if by science is meant meticulous attention to details of size, shape, color, texture and usage. But it does present a picture of reality as experienced by humans, warts and all. Whereas non-fiction weeds out the warts to purify the object being studied.
If one equates purity with truth, then perhaps fiction would be unsuitable. But if one is willing to accept the impure as being as much a part of life, then fiction would definitely be in order.
I read a number of ‘classic’ novels in my younger days. As I mentioned to George Mc (at the top end of this forum) an hour or so ago, 2-3 years ago I persevered with “War and Peace”, and completed it. I found it to be very boring…!
Yes, in my teens and early-mid 20s I read quite a number of ‘classics’. Many by Thomas Hardy, several by Dickins, “Ulysses” [can’t recall the author; ah, James Joyce?], and numerous others (I unfortunately can’t recall which books were amongst those I read at that time).
I had a large set of the ‘classics’ [approx. 40 books] in the early 1980s [no longer own them, donated them decades ago], all bound in dark green material (not leather; it constantly amazes me that so many people seem not to know what leather actually is!), and also a full set of the novels of Agatha Christie, bound in a similar material, in red. I recall reading all of them.
I’m passionate about History, and own approx. 400 books on that subject. As well as non-fiction books on various periods in history (am currently reading “Greek Lives”, by Plutarch). Also (it goes without saying!) I’m passionate about the Survival of ‘death’ truth and the many associated spiritual truths of existence, and again own approx. 400 on that subject too. And many books on diverse other subjects too.
Oops, a typo!! I of course meant to type Dickens!
Your sets in green and red sound a bit like the ones published by Heron. I had a few if them including a 3 volume set of War and Peace. Which isn’t the one I’m currently reading.
I’ve just looked up ‘Heron’ books, and yes, the ‘Classics’ and ‘Agatha Christie’ collections which I had in the early 1980s were Heron publications! The bindings were faux leather (see my earlier post re. the reference to leather!).
It’s better to have read one great book in a lifetime and to have come to love that work so much that the thought of parting with it is almost unbearable than to have read a hundred and then simply set them all aside and moved on to another subject.
I’ve read literally many thousands of books in my (current) life so far, and own 1400+. I do NOT set any of them aside; it’s not a case of my “moving on to another subject”. I have a number of major subjects which I’m interested in; they’re all shelved under categories in my five large bookcases (and the overspill books are in [labelled] boxes in the store-room).
I reiterate: I don’t “set them all aside and move onto another subject”. Why would you think that I might be doing that?? I quite often re-read certain books in my collection, and refer to many of them.
I don’t see the value in fiction. A friend of my 30+ years ago said to me (he wasn’t aware of the survival of ‘death’ truth, but that’s beside the point, re. his remark), “Life’s too short to read mere fiction”. Well, exactly…
I fear your friend had a very shallow view of life. I fear also that you don’t care for fiction because your don’t fully understand the value of books in general. From your posts, I conclude that you view books as providing useful information – as if literature consists primarily of a series of “How-To” scenarios; and anything not of a utilitarian nature is a waste of time.
By saying you found “War and Peace” boring, you betray a misunderstanding of fiction in general and great works in particular. You seem to be looking for an easy read in fiction – where the narrative flows rapidly so the book can be read quickly. “War and Peace” is anything but an easy read; and if you read it you must expect to spend perhaps as much as a year with it. The same with James Joyce’s “Ulysses”: I haven’t read it yet simply because I’m not ready for it just yet. And that’s how it is with great works of fiction: they should not be read until one is in the proper mindset for that particular work. If you take them up at the right time in your life, they will come alive and reveal to you all they have to offer. Otherwise, they will simply bore you to tears.
I was told by a middle school teacher when I was volunteering in her classroom that taking turns reading Ulysses by James Joyce out loud with a friend is a good way to experience the book.
I can just see a class of Middle Schoolers experiencing Joyce’s “Ulysses” in a read aloud.
Excuse me, Howard, but please STOP abusing me/accusing me of things which I truly am NOT. You are so misinterpreting me. Firstly, I took 18 months to read “War and Peace”, so that fact confounds your claim about me, for a start. And how you can think you have a right to claim that “I don’t fully understand the value of books in general”, I do not know. For that claim is SO wide of the mark, with me! I’ve been a bibliophile all my life (in this lifetime); the fact that I appreciate non-fiction, as opposed to mere fiction, does not equate to me ‘not understanding the value of books in general’. And NO, I most definitely do not view books as being merely “a series of ‘How-To’ scenarios”. You couldn’t have got me more wrong if you tried!! The fact that I found ‘War and Peace’ boring does NOT mean that I have a “misunderstanding of fiction in general and ‘great works’ in particular”. And haha!!!, you are SO wrong when you wrote “You seem to be looking for an easy read in fiction – where the narrative flows rapidly so the book can be read quickly”. Making that oh so wrong mere assumption of my reading habits and attitude is so very ironic, if you were aware of my actual attitude to books and reading! I have, over the decades, read many very long novels; deep stuff. I can’t bring titles to mind, for, as I mentioned in the earlier posts on this, above, fiction is not my main form of reading. But oh yes, I’ve certainly read deep novels, in my time. You couldn’t have got me more wrong, to make the very incorrect assumption that “You seem to be looking for an easy read in… Read more »
I have no argument with most of what you wrote, other than:
“And true bibliophiles would NOT rate fiction as being of any deep significance.”
What constitutes a “true bibliophile?” And why would they rate fiction as lacking “deep significance?”
I’m pretty confident, for example, that most educated Chinese would consider works like All Men are Brothers (Water Margin), or Journey to the West to be of very deep significance, and would probably consider them indispensable to any understanding of their culture. Likewise, works in the Western canon, like Homer, and the great Greek Dramatists, Virgil, Shakespeare, Cervantes, and so on.
What I meant by “a true bibliophile” was a reference to people who read, in the main, non-fiction books… (Bring on the words of disagreement/disbelief…!) I read Don Quixote a few years ago. Merely an amusing tale. I certainly would not ascribe to it the term ‘great work’. [one of my friends is a Spanish lady. We used to work together in London in the 1980s, we’ve been friends for almost 36 years. She’s almost 90, and has been married to her English husband for 54 years. She told me that she read Don Quixote in her past, and regarded it as merely “an amusing read”.] As I’ve mentioned, on this site, re. the ‘Shakespeare’ writings (it’s a 99.9% certainty that those plays etc were not written by ‘the Stratford bloke’; the very high odds are that they were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford; one of ‘queen’ Elizabeth 1’s courtiers; almost her ‘right-hand man’), many of them describe actual events in the life of Edward de Vere. Thus, many of them are not fiction, but accounts, in dramatic form, of actual events in the life of the [almost certain] author. And many of the others are plays which relate actual history; ie, the lives of certain ‘kings’ etc. [I put ‘queen’ and ‘king’ in quotes because for 35-40 years I’ve been a very passionate ANTI-‘royalist’. So-called ‘monarchy’ should not exist. Is deplorable, nonsensical. All ‘royalists’ are immensely gullible, servile fools, should be ashamed of themselves. I have several of them in my own family.] Thus they, too, are not mere fiction. I’ve not read Homer, Virgil, etc, but of course know of them. I mentioned in a post a few days ago (addressed to Howard, I think) that one of the several books I’m currently reading… Read more »
A bibliophile is simply a person who loves and or collects books. There is no premium put on fiction or non-fiction, which is simply the preference of the individual bibliophile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliophilia
As for Don Quixote, I read it about 30 years ago, resulting in huge laughing fits, ending with crying, to the great amusement of my then spouse. So, I like it, you didn’t (much), but historically, it’s a very important work, and one that is of deep cultural significance not only to the Spanish people, but to Westerners in general. If nothing else, it’s given us the wonderful concept of Quixotic, and I’d wager it’s read as much or more as any non-fiction book of the same place and era.
As for Shakespeare, the mystery of his authorship is of secondary interest to me (though not without interest) to the actual works themselves, no matter who wrote them. In nature, as in human society, the cream rises to the top, so I accept aristocracy as a sort of human ‘given’; it’s going to happen whether one likes it or not. Ironically, the presumed historical Shakespeare is not considered the real author of the works attributed to him precisely because he is a poor slob, and in order to get at the real author’s identity, it’s necessary to introduce some lords, and Sirs, and other nobility.
Yes, okay, I agree that it’s the preference of the individual bibliophile, as to what sort of books they read/collect.
But so-called ‘aristocracy’ are not “the cream rising to the top”; they’re merely ordinary people, who have (chosen, before birth, to have) been born into those families. They are not intrinsically ‘better than’ people who are not born into the so-called ‘aristocracy’.
(N.B., we all choose/plan, prior to coming to Earth [ie, when still in the Spirit realms] when and where we’ll be born, in each of our eternal soul’s many, many lifetimes. Thus, people who are currently a part of the so-called ‘aristocracy’ planned/chose, before birth, for some spiritual reason, to be part of one of those families)
The ‘Shakespeare Authorship question’ exists precisely because the known facts of William Shaksper of Stratford-on-Avon militate strongly against his having been the author of those works.
I’ve read 20-25 books on that topic, and there are numerous reasons which, stacked up, indicate that he could not have been the author.
One of those many practical reasons being that, at his ‘death’, the stuff left in his will did not include anything that would support the claim that he’d been any sort of a writer, let alone a top writer. For eg, he left no paper, no pens, no manuscripts, no books, etc etc.
Everyone who’s been any sort of a writer does have such things amongst the possessions left in their will, on their ‘death’.
And that is merely one of many facts about the life of ‘the bloke from Stratford’ which militate against his having been the author.
I’ve just (tried to…) posted a reply to your comment of yesterday. It’s gone into ‘pending’.
Have sent Admin. a note about it, hopefully it will be cleared soon.
The term ‘great works of fiction’ is, more or less, an oxymoron.
But people who read nothing but mere fiction would not comprehend that.
I saw you deny any accusations of “snobbery” in one of your posts to Howard, but that is certainly one of the more snidely elitist opinions I’ve seen.
I agree Howard.
Novels are often based on some of the author’s Life experiences.
An insight into the mind of another human being can be very elucidating.
The writings of [so-called] ‘Shakespeare’ were, in all probability, actually written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (1540-1604). He is the main contender for the actual authorship of those works, as opposed to the merely assumed author, William Shaksper of Stratford-upon-Avon.
Many of the ‘Shakespeare’ works relate actual events in the life of Edward de Vere (Hamlet, King Lear, and a number of others. I’ve not read any of them in full, but do have a “Complete Works of Shakespeare” in my personal library).
I’ve read 20+ books on the ‘Shakespeare authorship’ question, and evidences abound that ‘the Stratford bloke’ could not have been the author, and that De Vere most probably was the author.
Once again, I must object to the assumption (if unstated) that genius only runs in aristocratic families; and consequently only the best educated have any shot at genius. Well, I submit that genius CANNOT be taught, no matter how good the education. In that regard, familiarity with the historical basis of events depicted in literary works does not necessarily include the wording used to display those events. The best understanding of events is wasted if the words are banal and conventional.
“The Play’s The Thing…” – not the background of the playwright.
Howard, we’ve been over this before. I am most definitely NOT a snob; in fact, I’m an ‘inverted snob’, if the truth be known. I despise the concept of ‘aristocracy’. It just should not be.
The fact is that many of the events in ‘Shakespeare’s works were actual events in the life of de Vere, and moreover, many facts re. the writings of the plays etc and the facts re. the life of William Shakspere of Stratford strongly militate against the Stratford bloke’s having been the author of them.
I gave many of those details in posts a year or so ago, so I’m not going to repeat them here now.
1984, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, Stranger in a Strange Land, The Cleft, all explore scientific and political theory in story form. Whether the writers wrote from personal experience or purely speculative imaginings, does not factor for me. Perhaps experiential elements are used in characterisation but I think ideas prompting these outpourings were pure thought.
For the reader, caveat emptor, ideas, even those of others, can lead one to think. That was why when I had a child not remotely interested in reading, I did not discourage those publications he did not eschew, i.e, comics. I wanted him to think about what he was reading, question or even interrogate it, and hopefully, take a deeper dive. Never happened! He was and is, as he is. Pity really, as he did have quite a good imagination for writing stories, even though, annoyingly, he always reverted to use of first person descriptive. His imagination worked better for him if he imagined himself in those situations he had never experienced, nor due to tender age, even observed.
As to purifying the object being studied, in my view attempts as purification renders the object and therefore the study, flawed. As, science in particular but also history, are not definitive but change with each new discovery, I think fiction provides a clearer insight than so called fact that constantly proves itself mutable.
The use of first person narration in a story sometimes allows for a better story in that it gives the writer a much wider range of writing techniques. One of the best examples of first person narrative is Laurence Sterne’s “Tristram Shandy.” – which is one of the world’s greatest masterpieces. The thing about first person narration is that the writer is not necessarily putting himself in the person of the narrator – he may create the narrator just the same as any other character.