Jump to content

ThePersistanceOfWaffles

Member
  • Content Count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ThePersistanceOfWaffles

  1. That is so true. I must have given that book a go at least three time between the ages of thirteen and fifteen, and I could never make it past the first London chapter. If only someone had told me, and my teachers, that just because a classic novel has a young hero, it doesn't necessarily mean the ideal audience is a young reader. An excellent observation. It's truly a testament to how much the reader brings to the equation of reading--the book stays the same, but the experience is different every time. Hehe, funnily enough, it was your namesake who gave me more trouble than anyone wh
  2. A Tale of Two Cities. I don't know why, but I've been on a Victoriana kick lately. This means, among other things, that I'm finally getting around to some essential Dickens. This is my second Dickens novel after Oliver Twist (flawed, but enjoyable). I'm enjoying this quite a bit so far: sprawling, human, dryly funny, and melodramatic in a way that reminds you why melodrama was ever appealling. The Innocence of Father Brown. Made me realize once again that I'm not so keen on the Murder Mystery as a genre. But, heesh. Chesterton can write.
  3. I like how they seem to be following the naming template for Blackadder. Otherwise... I got nuthin'.
  4. Hm... mystical institution who've survived into the post-WWII world; whom Hollywood is more than comfortable with turning into cartoon villains? I hope the Catholic Church is ready for its closeup. And as if there wasn't already enough reason to fear this would be a dreary Da Vinci Code ripoff.
  5. , so that would work. Ooh! That's interesting. Very interesting. And perhaps the are ? I think I have a new pet theory.
  6. Personally, my first thought when reading the title was of the . I always expected that Rowling would return there eventually. At any rate, I like the title. It seems spooky and evocative and the natural culmination of where the last couple of books have seemed to be heading. Okay, I can actually sort of buy as a Christ figure (assuming , which I do)--at any rate, it's no more farfetched than Sirius Black as Christ figure. But I really don't understand how Granger gets a metaphor for Christ out of the Chamber of Secrets--it's basically just the bad guy's Fortress of Doom, no? At a
  7. So, uh, did this: raise a WTF? from from anyone else? I guess he's trying to distance himself from the threat of association with conservativism or pro-Americanism, and maybe emphasize what a provocative guy Jesus is, but still, seriously. WTF?
  8. Well since Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is on my "favorite writing" list, I better add my two cents. I think I'm with Ebert on this one. The transfer between mediums just doesn't work for me, and I'm not sure it could have worked. Aside from the points about the camera's "eye" that Ebert makes, I think the main problem is that there is no equivalent of the "empty stage" in film, and the empty stage was crucial to this play. To have the early scenes transplanted to a forest where Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are actually travelling and doing something and interacting with a world th
  9. I also adored "Come thou Fount." It and "Amazing Grace" (a song that never truly moved me before I heard Sufjan's rendition of it) were my favorites on the original three Christmas albums. Ironic, since neither are Christmas songs! Also, I haven't heard it yet, but I'm already in love with "Get Behind Me, Santa."
  10. Heh. You've got a real gift of foresight there, Peter.
  11. I'm signed up. And I'm almost certain I'm going to fail--I've only written 1,700 words in the past three days and I'm already running out of steam. But, hey, it's good practice for next year, what?
  12. I can't be the only one who needs to watch a film to get into the Halloween spirit. (And I can't be the only one who loves to get into the Halloween spirit.) I tend to think spooky and fun--or just plain funny-- films capture the true mood of Halloween better than horror does, and so my preferences tend to run toward the silly stuff like Young Frankenstein, Army of Darkness, or Nightmare Before Christmas. And even though it's not film, I'm extremely fond of the early "Treehouse of Horror" Simpsons episodes. (Probably a little too fond--I'm pretty sure I can quote the entire paordy of The Shi
  13. This is all well and good, folks, but it seems you've forgotten that even though you might have rockhard abs and chiseled features, it doesn't mean you too can't not die in a freak gasoline fight accident.
  14. I saw this this weekend. I liked it far more than I expected to. My friends chose the movie, and I went in expecting preachy Oscar-bait: an attempt to cash in on the current popularity of Africa as a political cause. But it was far more complex and affecting than that. Unfortunately, like Popechild, I can see the film's violence hurting its reception. (I covered my eyes through the aforementioned scene, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one--you could hear the entire audience sink down in their seats when the appear.)
  15. Thanks for raising a question I pondered quite often while I was taking a Shakespeare class in London. I thought about this the most when we were reading Measure for Measure, which arguably has the most overt religious content of any of his plays: its main characters are a nun, a duke who pretends to be a friar most of the play, and a pharisee, essentially...religious hypocrisy, death, and forgiveness are main themes, and even its name is a biblical allusion. But it's such a morally and spiritually ambiguous play, and it leaves me with no clear idea of what he was trying to say about anythin
  16. I too appreciate the mention of Kuhn, and I also appreciate the courteous, open-minded tenor of the discussion that's been going on. I hope I don't ruin it. I agree that scientists are probably busy people who are sick of talking about this, but I don't see it as a defense mechanism against "having their world turned upside down." I like to picture myself in the scientist's shoes. If I, as a student of history, kept getting confronted by the media or the public with a "new" theory that attacked some principle central to the way I study history, like, I dunno, that people in different time
  17. For what it's worth, Ken, I would love to have you as a professor, if your words here and elsewhere on the board are anything to go by. I read the book a few months ago, and absolutely loved it. What a heartbreaking story about a life strewn with regrets. It made me want to be more honest and even vulnerable in my own life. I finally saw the movie version this week. Very good adaptation. The ending didn't quite work for me though, and I think you did a good job of analyzing why (lack of ambiguity). The book also ended with what I thought was a very ccompelling image (Stevens sitting on the
  18. Wow, I go away for a day and the thread completely takes off. I can't leave this place for a moment! Going back upthread for a moment.... Popechild wrote: Well, sort of. If there's overwhelming evidence against something, then we should probably deny it because it most likely isn't true. But yes, looking foolish and irrelevant is certainly an issue for me as well--and not because I'm afraid the cool evolutionist kids won't let me join in any of their cool evolutionist games, but because it means people who might have seriously considered Christ and Christianity now won't. (It's a familia
  19. I beg to differ. It established Hagrid's weakness for believing in the inherent goodness of all magical creatures as something a bit more serious than a running joke. But Hagrid's weaknesses have no relevence to the plot of either the fifth book or sixth book, so why introduce a new character to establish them? (Admittedly, Grawp may end up proving essential to Book 7--but I still didn't need to see so much of him, especially when there was no satisfactory payoff to his appearance in this book.) No offense, but is this meant to be sarcasm? 'Cause if it is, you gotta put in a smiley,
  20. I don't really like what the debate is "doing" to Xianity either, though I'm not sure our "doing" is defined the same way. What do you think it is "doing" to Xianity? Hmm... reading over my comments, I realize I should have written "not just because it's bad science." I implied that I think ID is good science. Not my intent. Anyway. My second sentence was intended to explain what I think it
  21. I love Bonham Carter, but she never would have entered my mind as Bellatrix. Bellatrix always struck me as a real straightforward, serious, humorless, "true believer" kind of psychopath--the closest point of reference that I can think of is that she's a lot like Silas the Evil Albino Monk from The Da Vinci Code.* Bonham Carter seems a bit too, I don't, know--warm? quirky? cute? for the character. But that should make things interesting. In less positive news, the word from Comic-Con (I can't find the link, sorry) is that the Grawp scenes have been filmed. This character was crying out to
  22. I think Alan's point was that "theory" has a different meaning in scientific terminology than in regular parlance--a theory is something scientists are more or less certain of. That's why even something as indisputable as gravity is still called a theory. (If scientists were uncertain about evolution, it'd be called a hypothesis.) But sometimes basic laboratory testing is impossible. It doesn't mean you can't collect enough evidence to become confident that a hypothesis is correct. For example, evolutionary theory makes certain predictions about what the fossil record, the comparative ana
  23. I came across this book several times back when I was working at Barnes and Noble. Admittedly, I still don't know anything more about it than what the cover says. But my impression was that it's another Eldredge-type book exhorting men to throw off the shackles of an oppressive, ultra-feminized society and embrace good, old-fashioned American-style masculinty in the name of Jesus. Maybe it's a girl thing, but just reading the cover made me angry. Hopefully I've misjudged this book-- I'll ditto everyone else: can you tell us more about it?
×
×
  • Create New...