Reply by George Herold●September 29, 20202020-09-29
On Tuesday, September 29, 2020 at 5:19:40 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> On 2020-09-29 12:52, George Herold wrote:
> > On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:46:44 PM UTC-4, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> >> bitrex wrote:
> >>> On 9/28/2020 10:54 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> >>>> bitrex wrote:
> >>>>> On 9/27/2020 9:18 PM, George Herold wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 9/27/2020 7:30 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgdhhwlqggm7y4y/Book-Review.jpg?raw=1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Brideshead Revisited is what you would give an overeager teenage
> >>>>>>> boy at the library when he says he wants an "adult novel."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I haven't read it, why not "Portnoy's Complaint" ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I recently reread "Double Star" by RAH. It's a wonderful
> >>>>>> 'Shakespearean' story. And tightly written... in my top ten
> >>>>>> at the moment.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> George H.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have traumatic childhood memories of expecting "Great Railway
> >>>>> Journeys of the World" to be showing on PBS but mixing up the days
> >>>>> or something and finding out the made-for-TV version of Brideshead
> >>>>> was coming on at 9 pm, instead. Unnnngggh.
> >>>>
> >>>> Railway Journeys? Never tried it, but I didn't like Sesame Street
> >>>> either. I called BS when it claimed we were running out of clean
> >>>> water.
> >>>
> >>> Some of them like most things are available on YT, Railway Journeys
> >>> was a much more interesting show for 8 year old me that's for sure:
> >>>
> >>> <https://youtu.be/LRwtABg21YA>
> >>
> >> Oh, it had Michael Wood. He made In search of the Trojan War. I wouldn't
> >> have watched either when I was 8 though.
> >>
> >> He made the Trojan War series when it was still not known if it really
> >> happened. He started the series not believing it, but changed his mind
> >> after seeing the evidence. After that every documentary that mentioned
> >> it assumed it was reality, so it seemed as though Wood discovered it or
> >> at least was the first to present it as fact.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yeah say what you want about Seasame Street but the 1980s were the
> >>> Golden Age of educational programming/public television for children I
> >>> think. No corporate sponsors to please so when the actor who played
> >>> the kindly old man who ran the Sesame Street Store, "Mr. Hooper"
> >>> passed away in reality they didn't just write him out or find a
> >>> replacement, the story is just what is, Mr. Hooper died (often a
> >>> novel concept to 3 and 4 year olds), and Big Bird or whoever plays
> >>> the audience-insertion is made to understand by the human characters
> >>> that sometimes people go away, and they don't come back.
> >>
> >> Mr Hooper was the one who claimed we were running out of clean water,
> >> while washing dishes in a basin so he could re-use the water. (Why a
> >> store keeper would need to wash dishes in front of his store didn't make
> >> sense either.)
> >>
> >> I was 5 when I called BS on that. "Don't they know there's a water
> >> cycle?" That was the same year my grandfather died too.
> >>
> >>
> >>> That is to say they refused to insult the intelligence of the audience
> >>> even though the audience was mostly 4 year olds.
> >>>
> >>> Over on 3-2-1 Contact this was considered age-appropriate material for
> >>> 8-9 year olds, a time trip 1 billion years into the future:
> >>>
> >>> <https://youtu.be/WppJEf3ZtFU>
> >>>
> >>> Again they figured that age group was mature enough for it
> >>
> >> Good animation.
> >>
> >> I watched Nova since it started in 1973. Two years later a dimwitted
> >> teacher suggested that I should watch The Big Blue Marble because she
> >> hadn't noticed that I wa beyond kids' science shows.
> >>
> >> Nova was college material back then. Now it's high school. I call it
> >> Nova Dumbed Down.
> > Hmm, Yeah I see the same thing. (And why can't someone make
> > nature documentaries as well as David Attenborough? We have
> > beautiful photography but no story. Or worse some made up story.)
> >
> > Part of it is 'science as entertainment for the masses'.
> > So Sci Am changes from what it was ~1980 and before... to what
> > it is today.
> >
> > I think there is another part, (of why nova is dumber) that reflects
> > how science is kinda broken. You risk much (as a scientist) if you
> > step outside the excepted dogma of your field. So we on the outside
> > will not hear any controversy... or you have to dig more.
> >
> > Hey if nova stinks (I still watch it.) Do you know any good science
> > videos/ podcasts?
>
> Backreaction is OK, though I only look at the transcripts.
Yeah, More guest postings would be nice. After several years and
her book I feel I mostly understand Sabine's physics point of view.
I like triton station by Stacy McGaugh (sp) if you are
mond curious*.
The Lex Fridman podcast is good.. but no transcript.
>
> To see good popular science writing, nearly anything in SciAm during the
> Gerard Piel era (post WW2 up do 1989) is applicable. The mag was sold
> off in the mid-80s and Piel was replaced as publisher in the late '80s.
> After awhile, the new people started chasing the audience of Omni
> Magazine. SciAm and Discover squeezed Omni out of business from above
> and below, but then SciAm became Omni, and now seems to have become
> Discover. :(
>
> I learned a lot of science and engineering from SciAm back in the day.
> I own every issue published in my lifetime up to December 1989. I
> subscribed up to about 1994, but the quality never came back out of the
> tank, so I pitched the last five years' worth when I cancelled my
> subscription. A great pity.
Yeah I have a similar story.. but my subscription started
sometime in the mid 70's. And I placed my collection at
the curb years ago.
George H.
*I read D. Merrit's MOND book.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/philosophical-approach-to-mond/9E770E2F021E79EE639C9A750143C589
I'd give it a B. For me not much new, since I've been reading
triton station for years. And a bit tedious in spots.
(Various Popperian definitions of science.)
What I hadn't realized was that cosmologists had to
tweak (factor of 2) the baryon density to get lamda-CDM
to fit the CMB anisotropity data. And this has led to the
current day 'missing baryons problem' and 'lithium problem'.
>
> Cheers
>
> Phil Hobbs
>
> --
> Dr Philip C D Hobbs
> Principal Consultant
> ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
> Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
> Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
>
> http://electrooptical.net
> http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by Phil Hobbs●September 29, 20202020-09-29
On 2020-09-29 12:52, George Herold wrote:
> On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:46:44 PM UTC-4, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>> bitrex wrote:
>>> On 9/28/2020 10:54 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>>> bitrex wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2020 9:18 PM, George Herold wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/27/2020 7:30 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgdhhwlqggm7y4y/Book-Review.jpg?raw=1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Brideshead Revisited is what you would give an overeager teenage
>>>>>>> boy at the library when he says he wants an "adult novel."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't read it, why not "Portnoy's Complaint" ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I recently reread "Double Star" by RAH. It's a wonderful
>>>>>> 'Shakespearean' story. And tightly written... in my top ten
>>>>>> at the moment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> George H.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have traumatic childhood memories of expecting "Great Railway
>>>>> Journeys of the World" to be showing on PBS but mixing up the days
>>>>> or something and finding out the made-for-TV version of Brideshead
>>>>> was coming on at 9 pm, instead. Unnnngggh.
>>>>
>>>> Railway Journeys? Never tried it, but I didn't like Sesame Street
>>>> either. I called BS when it claimed we were running out of clean
>>>> water.
>>>
>>> Some of them like most things are available on YT, Railway Journeys
>>> was a much more interesting show for 8 year old me that's for sure:
>>>
>>> <https://youtu.be/LRwtABg21YA>
>>
>> Oh, it had Michael Wood. He made In search of the Trojan War. I wouldn't
>> have watched either when I was 8 though.
>>
>> He made the Trojan War series when it was still not known if it really
>> happened. He started the series not believing it, but changed his mind
>> after seeing the evidence. After that every documentary that mentioned
>> it assumed it was reality, so it seemed as though Wood discovered it or
>> at least was the first to present it as fact.
>>
>>
>>> Yeah say what you want about Seasame Street but the 1980s were the
>>> Golden Age of educational programming/public television for children I
>>> think. No corporate sponsors to please so when the actor who played
>>> the kindly old man who ran the Sesame Street Store, "Mr. Hooper"
>>> passed away in reality they didn't just write him out or find a
>>> replacement, the story is just what is, Mr. Hooper died (often a
>>> novel concept to 3 and 4 year olds), and Big Bird or whoever plays
>>> the audience-insertion is made to understand by the human characters
>>> that sometimes people go away, and they don't come back.
>>
>> Mr Hooper was the one who claimed we were running out of clean water,
>> while washing dishes in a basin so he could re-use the water. (Why a
>> store keeper would need to wash dishes in front of his store didn't make
>> sense either.)
>>
>> I was 5 when I called BS on that. "Don't they know there's a water
>> cycle?" That was the same year my grandfather died too.
>>
>>
>>> That is to say they refused to insult the intelligence of the audience
>>> even though the audience was mostly 4 year olds.
>>>
>>> Over on 3-2-1 Contact this was considered age-appropriate material for
>>> 8-9 year olds, a time trip 1 billion years into the future:
>>>
>>> <https://youtu.be/WppJEf3ZtFU>
>>>
>>> Again they figured that age group was mature enough for it
>>
>> Good animation.
>>
>> I watched Nova since it started in 1973. Two years later a dimwitted
>> teacher suggested that I should watch The Big Blue Marble because she
>> hadn't noticed that I wa beyond kids' science shows.
>>
>> Nova was college material back then. Now it's high school. I call it
>> Nova Dumbed Down.
> Hmm, Yeah I see the same thing. (And why can't someone make
> nature documentaries as well as David Attenborough? We have
> beautiful photography but no story. Or worse some made up story.)
>
> Part of it is 'science as entertainment for the masses'.
> So Sci Am changes from what it was ~1980 and before... to what
> it is today.
>
> I think there is another part, (of why nova is dumber) that reflects
> how science is kinda broken. You risk much (as a scientist) if you
> step outside the excepted dogma of your field. So we on the outside
> will not hear any controversy... or you have to dig more.
>
> Hey if nova stinks (I still watch it.) Do you know any good science
> videos/ podcasts?
Backreaction is OK, though I only look at the transcripts.
To see good popular science writing, nearly anything in SciAm during the
Gerard Piel era (post WW2 up do 1989) is applicable. The mag was sold
off in the mid-80s and Piel was replaced as publisher in the late '80s.
After awhile, the new people started chasing the audience of Omni
Magazine. SciAm and Discover squeezed Omni out of business from above
and below, but then SciAm became Omni, and now seems to have become
Discover. :(
I learned a lot of science and engineering from SciAm back in the day.
I own every issue published in my lifetime up to December 1989. I
subscribed up to about 1994, but the quality never came back out of the
tank, so I pitched the last five years' worth when I cancelled my
subscription. A great pity.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.nethttp://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by George Herold●September 29, 20202020-09-29
On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:46:44 PM UTC-4, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> bitrex wrote:
> > On 9/28/2020 10:54 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> >> bitrex wrote:
> >>> On 9/27/2020 9:18 PM, George Herold wrote:
> >>>> On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
> >>>>> On 9/27/2020 7:30 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgdhhwlqggm7y4y/Book-Review.jpg?raw=1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Brideshead Revisited is what you would give an overeager teenage
> >>>>> boy at the library when he says he wants an "adult novel."
> >>>>
> >>>> I haven't read it, why not "Portnoy's Complaint" ?
> >>>>
> >>>> I recently reread "Double Star" by RAH. It's a wonderful
> >>>> 'Shakespearean' story. And tightly written... in my top ten
> >>>> at the moment.
> >>>>
> >>>> George H.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I have traumatic childhood memories of expecting "Great Railway
> >>> Journeys of the World" to be showing on PBS but mixing up the days
> >>> or something and finding out the made-for-TV version of Brideshead
> >>> was coming on at 9 pm, instead. Unnnngggh.
> >>
> >> Railway Journeys? Never tried it, but I didn't like Sesame Street
> >> either. I called BS when it claimed we were running out of clean
> >> water.
> >
> > Some of them like most things are available on YT, Railway Journeys
> > was a much more interesting show for 8 year old me that's for sure:
> >
> > <https://youtu.be/LRwtABg21YA>
>
> Oh, it had Michael Wood. He made In search of the Trojan War. I wouldn't
> have watched either when I was 8 though.
>
> He made the Trojan War series when it was still not known if it really
> happened. He started the series not believing it, but changed his mind
> after seeing the evidence. After that every documentary that mentioned
> it assumed it was reality, so it seemed as though Wood discovered it or
> at least was the first to present it as fact.
>
>
> > Yeah say what you want about Seasame Street but the 1980s were the
> > Golden Age of educational programming/public television for children I
> > think. No corporate sponsors to please so when the actor who played
> > the kindly old man who ran the Sesame Street Store, "Mr. Hooper"
> > passed away in reality they didn't just write him out or find a
> > replacement, the story is just what is, Mr. Hooper died (often a
> > novel concept to 3 and 4 year olds), and Big Bird or whoever plays
> > the audience-insertion is made to understand by the human characters
> > that sometimes people go away, and they don't come back.
>
> Mr Hooper was the one who claimed we were running out of clean water,
> while washing dishes in a basin so he could re-use the water. (Why a
> store keeper would need to wash dishes in front of his store didn't make
> sense either.)
>
> I was 5 when I called BS on that. "Don't they know there's a water
> cycle?" That was the same year my grandfather died too.
>
>
> > That is to say they refused to insult the intelligence of the audience
> > even though the audience was mostly 4 year olds.
> >
> > Over on 3-2-1 Contact this was considered age-appropriate material for
> > 8-9 year olds, a time trip 1 billion years into the future:
> >
> > <https://youtu.be/WppJEf3ZtFU>
> >
> > Again they figured that age group was mature enough for it
>
> Good animation.
>
> I watched Nova since it started in 1973. Two years later a dimwitted
> teacher suggested that I should watch The Big Blue Marble because she
> hadn't noticed that I wa beyond kids' science shows.
>
> Nova was college material back then. Now it's high school. I call it
> Nova Dumbed Down.
Hmm, Yeah I see the same thing. (And why can't someone make
nature documentaries as well as David Attenborough? We have
beautiful photography but no story. Or worse some made up story.)
Part of it is 'science as entertainment for the masses'.
So Sci Am changes from what it was ~1980 and before... to what
it is today.
I think there is another part, (of why nova is dumber) that reflects
how science is kinda broken. You risk much (as a scientist) if you
step outside the excepted dogma of your field. So we on the outside
will not hear any controversy... or you have to dig more.
Hey if nova stinks (I still watch it.) Do you know any good science
videos/ podcasts?
I offer this, "The roots of evolutionary dentistry"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYpPu-NrYSI&list=PLjQ2gC-5yHEtxcqAW_ABA9ILm-OzugEEy
(~2 hr video.)
(I mostly just listen while doing other work.)
George H.
>
> In high school Mr Crivelli explained antigens, and it was not only
> simplified, but flat wrong, with the cause and effect sequence reversed!
> I didn't want to embarass him so I waited until after class to say, "but
> I thought antigens work this way..." He said, "you're right but we
> simplify it for high school." Today's Nova wouldn't offer the complete
> exposition like they did back then.
Reply by Tom Del Rosso●September 28, 20202020-09-28
bitrex wrote:
> On 9/28/2020 10:54 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>> bitrex wrote:
>>> On 9/27/2020 9:18 PM, George Herold wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/2020 7:30 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgdhhwlqggm7y4y/Book-Review.jpg?raw=1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Brideshead Revisited is what you would give an overeager teenage
>>>>> boy at the library when he says he wants an "adult novel."
>>>>
>>>> I haven't read it, why not "Portnoy's Complaint" ?
>>>>
>>>> I recently reread "Double Star" by RAH. It's a wonderful
>>>> 'Shakespearean' story. And tightly written... in my top ten
>>>> at the moment.
>>>>
>>>> George H.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have traumatic childhood memories of expecting "Great Railway
>>> Journeys of the World" to be showing on PBS but mixing up the days
>>> or something and finding out the made-for-TV version of Brideshead
>>> was coming on at 9 pm, instead. Unnnngggh.
>>
>> Railway Journeys? Never tried it, but I didn't like Sesame Street
>> either. I called BS when it claimed we were running out of clean
>> water.
>
> Some of them like most things are available on YT, Railway Journeys
> was a much more interesting show for 8 year old me that's for sure:
>
> <https://youtu.be/LRwtABg21YA>
Oh, it had Michael Wood. He made In search of the Trojan War. I wouldn't
have watched either when I was 8 though.
He made the Trojan War series when it was still not known if it really
happened. He started the series not believing it, but changed his mind
after seeing the evidence. After that every documentary that mentioned
it assumed it was reality, so it seemed as though Wood discovered it or
at least was the first to present it as fact.
> Yeah say what you want about Seasame Street but the 1980s were the
> Golden Age of educational programming/public television for children I
> think. No corporate sponsors to please so when the actor who played
> the kindly old man who ran the Sesame Street Store, "Mr. Hooper"
> passed away in reality they didn't just write him out or find a
> replacement, the story is just what is, Mr. Hooper died (often a
> novel concept to 3 and 4 year olds), and Big Bird or whoever plays
> the audience-insertion is made to understand by the human characters
> that sometimes people go away, and they don't come back.
Mr Hooper was the one who claimed we were running out of clean water,
while washing dishes in a basin so he could re-use the water. (Why a
store keeper would need to wash dishes in front of his store didn't make
sense either.)
I was 5 when I called BS on that. "Don't they know there's a water
cycle?" That was the same year my grandfather died too.
> That is to say they refused to insult the intelligence of the audience
> even though the audience was mostly 4 year olds.
>
> Over on 3-2-1 Contact this was considered age-appropriate material for
> 8-9 year olds, a time trip 1 billion years into the future:
>
> <https://youtu.be/WppJEf3ZtFU>
>
> Again they figured that age group was mature enough for it
Good animation.
I watched Nova since it started in 1973. Two years later a dimwitted
teacher suggested that I should watch The Big Blue Marble because she
hadn't noticed that I wa beyond kids' science shows.
Nova was college material back then. Now it's high school. I call it
Nova Dumbed Down.
In high school Mr Crivelli explained antigens, and it was not only
simplified, but flat wrong, with the cause and effect sequence reversed!
I didn't want to embarass him so I waited until after class to say, "but
I thought antigens work this way..." He said, "you're right but we
simplify it for high school." Today's Nova wouldn't offer the complete
exposition like they did back then.
Reply by John Larkin●September 28, 20202020-09-28
On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:45:47 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
<fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:40:26 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>> <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> PG Wodehouse is brilliant.
>>>
>>> I never even discovered him until the Jeeves and Wooster series.
>>> That's another example. It should have been more popular that Cheers
>>> or Seinfeld.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I find the J+W series to be sort of slapstick. The Pig books are
>> great. A Damsel in Distress is maybe the best-written book in the
>> English language. The last chapter is the best, and it's a short phone
>> call.
>
>It is a lot of slapstick, but the most witty slapstick ever made. Like
>the scene where the Brown Shirt bully chases Wooster.
>
>I'll get A Damsel in Distress. I assume it's ok to start with that one.
Wodehouse tended to tell the same story many times, and he knew it.
Damsel is just the best.
>
>
>> As a socially-impaired (somewhat austistic, according to my wife)
>> engineer, I like books with strong discriptions of the physical
>> surroundings, things I can visualize. PG was good at that. So was Jane
>> Austen. A Room with a View is good that way.
>
>Speaking of the physical world, I was just reading the wikipedia article
>on Feynman. He was not exposed to religion as a Jewish kid, but later he
>visited a Jewish academic society and looked at the Talmud for the first
>time. He was impressed by the tradition of question and comment, but
>disappointed that none of the rabbis had any curiosity to ask questions
>about the physical world. Rabbis must be people persons.
>
>
>> Nero Wolfe is very Sherlock-y and very visual. We have the cookbook
>> too. The excellent Timothy Bottoms series is on Youtube.
>
>You mean Timothy Hutton. Maury Chaykin was one of those character
>actors who could out-act any movie star.
>
>
Right, Hutton. Another thing that's fun about that series is that they
had an acting troupe and people played different roles in different
episodes. A guy would be a thug in one and an FBI agent in the next.
Reply by bitrex●September 28, 20202020-09-28
On 9/28/2020 4:03 PM, bitrex wrote:
> On 9/28/2020 11:57 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:40:26 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>> <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>> jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Most people are people-people. They care most about social
>>>> interaction, emotions, loving and hating, tribalism, belonging or not.
>>>> Like most of the posters here.
>>>>
>>>> A good engineer deliberately puts that stuff aside so he can make
>>>> proper judgements about things.
>>>>
>>>> DA is mostly about people, and UBX is mostly about bombs.
>>>
>>> Upstairs Downstairs (the original) was similar to DA but most didn't
>>> know it existed. I Claudius was also about people, and was also ignored,
>>> so I don't understand why the masses suddenly discovered PBS when DA
>>> started.
>>>
>>>
>>>> A lot of red-blooded American boys (including this one) went through a
>>>> Sherlock Holmes phase as teenagers. Sherlock would have made a good
>>>> engineer.
>>>
>>> You weren't a teenager any more when Jeremy Brett played Holmes but I
>>> hope you saw that series. The Sherlock Holmes Society in London agreed
>>> with me that Brett was the best ever.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I tried to read Brideshead a couple of months ago. Made it about 20%
>>>> through. Boring. Henry James, ditto.
>>>
>>> I could never have made it to 20%.
>>>
>>>
>>>> PG Wodehouse is brilliant.
>>>
>>> I never even discovered him until the Jeeves and Wooster series. That's
>>> another example. It should have been more popular that Cheers or
>>> Seinfeld.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I find the J+W series to be sort of slapstick. The Pig books are
>> great. A Damsel in Distress is maybe the best-written book in the
>> English language. The last chapter is the best, and it's a short phone
>> call.
>>
>> As a socially-impaired (somewhat austistic, according to my wife)
>> engineer, I like books with strong discriptions of the physical
>> surroundings, things I can visualize. PG was good at that. So was Jane
>> Austen. A Room with a View is good that way.
>>
>> Nero Wolfe is very Sherlock-y and very visual. We have the cookbook
>> too. The excellent Timothy Bottoms series is on Youtube.
>>
>>
>>
>
> If you like lots of descriptions then Dickens or anything by Dostoyevsky
> or Tolstoy are the classics for you.
>
> PS: Anna Karenina commits suicide by leaping in front of a train I think
> most Russian novels tend to conclude sort of like that. Not a spoiler.
> Y'all have had 150 years to read that book.
Anna Karenina is basically the Russian "The Great Gatsby" if you will.
Reply by bitrex●September 28, 20202020-09-28
On 9/28/2020 11:57 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:40:26 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
> <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>
>> jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Most people are people-people. They care most about social
>>> interaction, emotions, loving and hating, tribalism, belonging or not.
>>> Like most of the posters here.
>>>
>>> A good engineer deliberately puts that stuff aside so he can make
>>> proper judgements about things.
>>>
>>> DA is mostly about people, and UBX is mostly about bombs.
>>
>> Upstairs Downstairs (the original) was similar to DA but most didn't
>> know it existed. I Claudius was also about people, and was also ignored,
>> so I don't understand why the masses suddenly discovered PBS when DA
>> started.
>>
>>
>>> A lot of red-blooded American boys (including this one) went through a
>>> Sherlock Holmes phase as teenagers. Sherlock would have made a good
>>> engineer.
>>
>> You weren't a teenager any more when Jeremy Brett played Holmes but I
>> hope you saw that series. The Sherlock Holmes Society in London agreed
>> with me that Brett was the best ever.
>>
>>
>>> I tried to read Brideshead a couple of months ago. Made it about 20%
>>> through. Boring. Henry James, ditto.
>>
>> I could never have made it to 20%.
>>
>>
>>> PG Wodehouse is brilliant.
>>
>> I never even discovered him until the Jeeves and Wooster series. That's
>> another example. It should have been more popular that Cheers or
>> Seinfeld.
>>
>>
>
> I find the J+W series to be sort of slapstick. The Pig books are
> great. A Damsel in Distress is maybe the best-written book in the
> English language. The last chapter is the best, and it's a short phone
> call.
>
> As a socially-impaired (somewhat austistic, according to my wife)
> engineer, I like books with strong discriptions of the physical
> surroundings, things I can visualize. PG was good at that. So was Jane
> Austen. A Room with a View is good that way.
>
> Nero Wolfe is very Sherlock-y and very visual. We have the cookbook
> too. The excellent Timothy Bottoms series is on Youtube.
>
>
>
If you like lots of descriptions then Dickens or anything by Dostoyevsky
or Tolstoy are the classics for you.
PS: Anna Karenina commits suicide by leaping in front of a train I think
most Russian novels tend to conclude sort of like that. Not a spoiler.
Y'all have had 150 years to read that book.
Reply by Tom Del Rosso●September 28, 20202020-09-28
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:40:26 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
> <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>> PG Wodehouse is brilliant.
>>
>> I never even discovered him until the Jeeves and Wooster series.
>> That's another example. It should have been more popular that Cheers
>> or Seinfeld.
>>
>>
>
> I find the J+W series to be sort of slapstick. The Pig books are
> great. A Damsel in Distress is maybe the best-written book in the
> English language. The last chapter is the best, and it's a short phone
> call.
It is a lot of slapstick, but the most witty slapstick ever made. Like
the scene where the Brown Shirt bully chases Wooster.
I'll get A Damsel in Distress. I assume it's ok to start with that one.
> As a socially-impaired (somewhat austistic, according to my wife)
> engineer, I like books with strong discriptions of the physical
> surroundings, things I can visualize. PG was good at that. So was Jane
> Austen. A Room with a View is good that way.
Speaking of the physical world, I was just reading the wikipedia article
on Feynman. He was not exposed to religion as a Jewish kid, but later he
visited a Jewish academic society and looked at the Talmud for the first
time. He was impressed by the tradition of question and comment, but
disappointed that none of the rabbis had any curiosity to ask questions
about the physical world. Rabbis must be people persons.
> Nero Wolfe is very Sherlock-y and very visual. We have the cookbook
> too. The excellent Timothy Bottoms series is on Youtube.
You mean Timothy Hutton. Maury Chaykin was one of those character
actors who could out-act any movie star.
Reply by ●September 28, 20202020-09-28
On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:40:26 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
<fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>
>> Most people are people-people. They care most about social
>> interaction, emotions, loving and hating, tribalism, belonging or not.
>> Like most of the posters here.
>>
>> A good engineer deliberately puts that stuff aside so he can make
>> proper judgements about things.
>>
>> DA is mostly about people, and UBX is mostly about bombs.
>
>Upstairs Downstairs (the original) was similar to DA but most didn't
>know it existed. I Claudius was also about people, and was also ignored,
>so I don't understand why the masses suddenly discovered PBS when DA
>started.
>
>
>> A lot of red-blooded American boys (including this one) went through a
>> Sherlock Holmes phase as teenagers. Sherlock would have made a good
>> engineer.
>
>You weren't a teenager any more when Jeremy Brett played Holmes but I
>hope you saw that series. The Sherlock Holmes Society in London agreed
>with me that Brett was the best ever.
>
>
>> I tried to read Brideshead a couple of months ago. Made it about 20%
>> through. Boring. Henry James, ditto.
>
>I could never have made it to 20%.
>
>
>> PG Wodehouse is brilliant.
>
>I never even discovered him until the Jeeves and Wooster series. That's
>another example. It should have been more popular that Cheers or
>Seinfeld.
>
>
I find the J+W series to be sort of slapstick. The Pig books are
great. A Damsel in Distress is maybe the best-written book in the
English language. The last chapter is the best, and it's a short phone
call.
As a socially-impaired (somewhat austistic, according to my wife)
engineer, I like books with strong discriptions of the physical
surroundings, things I can visualize. PG was good at that. So was Jane
Austen. A Room with a View is good that way.
Nero Wolfe is very Sherlock-y and very visual. We have the cookbook
too. The excellent Timothy Bottoms series is on Youtube.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
Reply by bitrex●September 28, 20202020-09-28
On 9/28/2020 10:54 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> bitrex wrote:
>> On 9/27/2020 9:18 PM, George Herold wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/2020 7:30 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgdhhwlqggm7y4y/Book-Review.jpg?raw=1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Brideshead Revisited is what you would give an overeager teenage
>>>> boy at the library when he says he wants an "adult novel."
>>>
>>> I haven't read it, why not "Portnoy's Complaint" ?
>>>
>>> I recently reread "Double Star" by RAH. It's a wonderful
>>> 'Shakespearean' story. And tightly written... in my top ten
>>> at the moment.
>>>
>>> George H.
>>>
>>
>> I have traumatic childhood memories of expecting "Great Railway
>> Journeys of the World" to be showing on PBS but mixing up the days or
>> something and finding out the made-for-TV version of Brideshead was
>> coming on at 9 pm, instead. Unnnngggh.
>
> Railway Journeys? Never tried it, but I didn't like Sesame Street
> either. I called BS when it claimed we were running out of clean water.
Maybe they thought the conservative audience would be interested in
conservation a common misunderstanding, lol. I expect it's hard to write
a show aimed at 4 y/os and conservatives in the third or fourth decade
of life and manage to please everyone you know!!