BattleStar-eyed wonder

[Burt]

Originally Posted by PointyHairedJedi

Oh, they are immensely entertaining, that's for sure, but hardly of great literary worth. I personally find Agatha Chirstie to be a far keener observer of human nature than Doyle, though Sherlock Holmes undoubtedly remains one of the better characters ever created.

lol, dude you totally beat me to the Agatha Christie point!
Did you know there's a new 'Murder on the Orient Express' coming out with David Suchet playing? Totally excited about that! Been waiting for it for years!

[evay]

Originally Posted by Burt

after Shakespeare (And in my humble opinion - I think he's totally crap! Dull writing and almost no relevence to today's world!)

wow, I'm sorry you feel that way. I find Shakespeare still relevant (MacBeth for politics, Othello for politics and jealousy, Julius Caesar for politics, Romeo and Juliet for headstrong teenage rebellion and the giddy rush of first love, lots of the sonnets can break your heart -- just off the top of my head) and his language sparkles. What did you read, or what kind of teacher did you have, that the Bard came off so poorly to you? You've never seen a single film adaptation of Hamlet you enjoyed? Never watched a single stage performance of any of the plays you liked?

[Burt]

Originally Posted by evay

wow, I'm sorry you feel that way. I find Shakespeare still relevant (MacBeth for politics, Othello for politics and jealousy, Julius Caesar for politics, Romeo and Juliet for headstrong teenage rebellion and the giddy rush of first love, lots of the sonnets can break your heart -- just off the top of my head) and his language sparkles. What did you read, or what kind of teacher did you have, that the Bard came off so poorly to you? You've never seen a single film adaptation of Hamlet you enjoyed? Never watched a single stage performance of any of the plays you liked?

Ok yeah, there are some aspects that are ok. As you say, the love the R&J felt for each other, and the tragic nature of Macbeth.
Macbeth was one that we studied. I found it drawn out, and quite frankly, dull. The same with R&J (R&J? That sounds like a Deptment store...! lol). But my biggest bone is with 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'. I was looking forward to that. A comdey? That will brighten up English class (After essay's on euthanasia and the genocide of World War Two!).
But brighten up?
I have yet to find and humor in the whole thing! Because (I feel) it's no longer relevent to today.... The humor is no longer funny.
But my teacher certainly tried to sell him. She was a fantastic English teacher, though and utterly loved Shakespeare.
I just dislike that so much time is spent in schools studying it. I really think they should open up (Certainly in England) and look at other books/authors. Like I said, I think Agatha Christie is certainly under used. The women is a humor nature genius!

[Burt]

I'm not saying I pushed the reply button twice. There is however, a chance that it happened....

[Zeke]

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown). And the Bard is definitely worthy of his fame. I cherish my copy of Shakespeare's collected works -- a one-volume, leather-bound book printed over a hundred years ago. I'm the third in my family to own it.

I'm a bit of a Polyanna sometimes, I know. But I'm glad of that. I'd rather my standards be too low than too high -- people who take everything cynically rarely find something they can just enjoy.

Speaking of which, I meant to remark on this earlier...

Originally Posted by Chancellor Valium

Not really. It's all sentiment sans emotion -

What in the world is "sentiment sans emotion"? It reminds me of the Cynic's oft-repeated term in his VOY reviews: "name-dropping masquerading as continuity." That always ticked me off. Most of the time, name-dropping is what continuity is.

[evay]

Originally Posted by Zeke

What in the world is "sentiment sans emotion"? It reminds me of the Cynic's oft-repeated term in his VOY reviews: "name-dropping masquerading as continuity." That always ticked me off. Most of the time, name-dropping is what continuity is.

"name-dropping masquerading as continuity" is throwing in something without really addressing it properly -- the Ferengi on ENT is a prime example. Given that we aren't supposed to know who the Ferengi are prior to "The Last Outpost," to have them abduct the most important ship of the fleet, and spend several hours in contact with the bridge officers and crew, but have no log of the event surviving to Picard's time even in a fragmentary or misunderstood form, seems ridiculous. That was someone trying to make a TNG connection but not understanding how to do it properly. "Regeneration" with the Borg was better, although still not a great idea. Mentioning kas-wahn in a story with a lot of camping references is a name-drop which is continuity.

So maybe "sentiment sans emotion" is the idea that the sentiment is stuck in falsely, rather than really earned by good writing engendering the actual emotion in the viewer? It's the script holding up a sign saying "YOU SHOULD SAY 'AWWWW' NOW!" because the writer couldn't figure out how to create something properly? That's my guess. The phrase was in reference to Dr. Who, which I haven't seen to tie in to the discussion.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Zeke

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown).

Chesterton wrote fiction? One more reason to try to get around to reading some of his stuff.

[Burt]

Originally Posted by Zeke

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown).

I'd wasn't sure I'd heard of this guy, it sounded like something I knew...but that turned out to be the Father Dowling Mysteries.
Don't tell anyone I said that, ok?

I did find this cute story about a Father Brown movie though...

'While on set, filming the Father Brown movie, actor Alec Guinness was approached by a young Italian boy who, seeing him in costume, exclaimed 'Padre, padre!' and, hanging on his arm, rambled on and on in a language that Guinness didn't understand. Eventually, the boy said goodbye and left. Guinness, amazed and impressed that the mere uniform of a priest could inspire such trust and happiness in a child who was such a complete stranger, that he started to investigate the Roman Catholic faith, and subsequently joined the church.'

Originally Posted by Zeke

I'm a bit of a Polyanna sometimes, I know. But I'm glad of that. I'd rather my standards be too low than too high -- people who take everything cynically rarely find something they can just enjoy.

I totally agree with that. I'll reading anything once. And a few thousand times if I like it. Shakespeare I've tried - we learned about and read many in school - I've even picked up a few more and read them since. But it is really not my thing. But I won't turn anything new down.
I do remember a slight disagreement with a friend. He loved 'Lord of the Flies'. Best book ever he said and certainly best childrens book. While, on the other hand, I thought Harry Potter was. I read his, and while it was ok, I found it a little dull and depressing. He on the other hand read about 10 pages of 'Potter', and proclamed it 'Crap!'
Hey ho!
There is one book I want to read again, but I can remember it's name. It's about a bunch of people all over a town, caught in an earthquake (including one guy who has an (?)Irish surname). When they wake up the part of the town they're in has been shifted to another world, and it's now like a floating island in a no-where place. And there's this scary black goo monster thing, that doesn't like the light and is trying to kill them.
Sounds daft, but really was rather good. Anyone know it?

[PointyHairedJedi]

I can't say it rings a bell at all.

Chesterton is one of those people whose work I feel I ought to read more of, but have never actually got round to doing so (a bit like the essays of George Orwell, when I've only read his fiction, but oh, what fiction). I'm also I suspect rather biased towards SF, in that my standards are perhaps less stringent than they are for other sorts of fiction, though to be fair I consider some of the best novels and short stories ever written to be in that genre, wide as it is.

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Valium, I've officially lost all hope of you and me ever seeing eye to eye on the quality of stuff. There's very little I enjoy more than a Sherlock Holmes story.

Don't get me wrong, I find them entertaining in a similar way to that by which I find the Flash Gordon film entertaining ( "Quick! Check the angular vector of the moon!" ), just not literature in the same way that, say, the aforementioned Christie is.

Oh, and "sentiment sans emotion" is like...well...when you hear of people crying about for example, the death of someone they never knew, never met, probably never even saw in their life, but cry because its...done. Or because they ought to. There's sentiment, but there's little substance.


Oh, and cynicism is fun.

[Zeke]

No, disguises are fun. Cynicism is practical. And I'm all in favour of it, just not all the time. When you find yourself being really cynical about a TV show, it may be a sign that you're taking it too seriously (or too personally).

I'm aware of the irony, by the way. I take BSG and Veronica Mars way the heck too personally. Nobody's perfect.

[PointyHairedJedi]

Apart from the Pope, obviously.

[mudshark]

Obviously.

[Chancellor Valium]

Obviously.

I apologise for not choosing the BBC, but A) I don't trust their neutrality, and B), they are rather silent on this topic...

I believe this conversation may be spiralling into the same furrow carved by a certain gentleman named "Borusa". I suggest we change the topic, PDQ.

[mudshark]

Righ-- ... errr, how's that?

[Zeke]

The parts of Valium's post I understand are right -- this is an unproductive line of conversation. I think a sensible compromise we all can agree on is that (a) Pope Benedict does kinda look like the Emperor, and (b) that's not his fault.

Anyway, papal infallibility is a much-misunderstood subject. It only applies to ex cathedra statements, and those are rare.

Originally Posted by Chancellor Valium

I believe this conversation may be spiralling into the same furrow carved by a certain gentleman named "Borusa".

Personally, I was thinking Martin Luther.

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by mudshark

Righ-- ... errr, how's that?

I'm sorry?

[Burt]

Who's Borusa? The only one I know is...well the Timelord one.....And I think he's still stuck on the side of a coffin/tomb....

[Chancellor Valium]

My point

[ijdgaf]

I just thought I'd pop in to say that "Exodus, Part 2" was without a doubt one of the finest hours of sci fi to ever grace television. Or hell -- any medium.

To call it amazing would be an understatement.

Hot frakking damn....