Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Boroda on May 21, 2004, 12:15:10 PM
-
He is Mr. Kurt Vonnegut, the author of "Slaughterhouse Number Five".
Cold Turkey
By Kurt Vonnegut
Many years ago, I was so innocent I still considered it possible that we could become the humane and reasonable America so many members of my generation used to dream of. We dreamed of such an America during the Great Depression, when there were no jobs. And then we fought and often died for that dream during the Second World War, when there was no peace.
But I know now that there is not a chance in hell of America’s becoming humane and reasonable. Because power corrupts us, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Human beings are chimpanzees who get crazy drunk on power. By saying that our leaders are power-drunk chimpanzees, am I in danger of wrecking the morale of our soldiers fighting and dying in the Middle East? Their morale, like so many bodies, is already shot to pieces. They are being treated, as I never was, like toys a rich kid got for Christmas.
-------------------------
When you get to my age, if you get to my age, which is 81, and if you have reproduced, you will find yourself asking your own children, who are themselves middle-aged, what life is all about. I have seven kids, four of them adopted.
Many of you reading this are probably the same age as my grandchildren. They, like you, are being royally shafted and lied to by our Baby Boomer corporations and government.
I put my big question about life to my biological son Mark. Mark is a pediatrician, and author of a memoir, The Eden Express. It is about his crackup, straightjacket and padded cell stuff, from which he recovered sufficiently to graduate from Harvard Medical School.
Dr. Vonnegut said this to his doddering old dad: “Father, we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is.” So I pass that on to you. Write it down, and put it in your computer, so you can forget it.
I have to say that’s a pretty good sound bite, almost as good as, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” A lot of people think Jesus said that, because it is so much the sort of thing Jesus liked to say. But it was actually said by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher, 500 years before there was that greatest and most humane of human beings, named Jesus Christ.
The Chinese also gave us, via Marco Polo, pasta and the formula for gunpowder. The Chinese were so dumb they only used gunpowder for fireworks. And everybody was so dumb back then that nobody in either hemisphere even knew that there was another one.
But back to people, like Confucius and Jesus and my son the doctor, Mark, who’ve said how we could behave more humanely, and maybe make the world a less painful place. One of my favorites is Eugene Debs, from Terre Haute in my native state of Indiana. Get a load of this:
Eugene Debs, who died back in 1926, when I was only 4, ran 5 times as the Socialist Party candidate for president, winning 900,000 votes, 6 percent of the popular vote, in 1912, if you can imagine such a ballot. He had this to say while campaigning:
As long as there is a lower class, I am in it.
As long as there is a criminal element, I’m of it.
As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
Doesn’t anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public schools or health insurance for all?
How about Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes?
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. …
And so on.
Not exactly planks in a Republican platform. Not exactly Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney stuff.
For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that’s Moses, not Jesus. I haven’t heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
“Blessed are the merciful” in a courtroom? “Blessed are the peacemakers” in the Pentagon? Give me a break!
-------------------------
There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don’t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president.
But, when you stop to think about it, only a nut case would want to be a human being, if he or she had a choice. Such treacherous, untrustworthy, lying and greedy animals we are!
I was born a human being in 1922 A.D. What does “A.D.” signify? That commemorates an inmate of this lunatic asylum we call Earth who was nailed to a wooden cross by a bunch of other inmates. With him still conscious, they hammered spikes through his wrists and insteps, and into the wood. Then they set the cross upright, so he dangled up there where even the shortest person in the crowd could see him writhing this way and that.
Can you imagine people doing such a thing to a person?
No problem. That’s entertainment. Ask the devout Roman Catholic Mel Gibson, who, as an act of piety, has just made a fortune with a movie about how Jesus was tortured. Never mind what Jesus said.
During the reign of King Henry the Eighth, founder of the Church of England, he had a counterfeiter boiled alive in public. Show biz again.
Mel Gibson’s next movie should be The Counterfeiter. Box office records will again be broken.
One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.
-------------------------
And what did the great British historian Edward Gibbon, 1737-1794 A.D., have to say about the human record so far? He said, “History is indeed little more than the register of the crimes, follies and misfortunes of mankind.”
The same can be said about this morning’s edition of the New York Times.
The French-Algerian writer Albert Camus, who won a Nobel Prize for Literature in 1957, wrote, “There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide.”
So there’s another barrel of laughs from literature. Camus died in an automobile accident. His dates? 1913-1960 A.D.
Listen. All great literature is about what a bummer it is to be a human being: Moby Dick, Huckleberry Finn, The Red Badge of Courage, the Iliad and the Odyssey, Crime and Punishment, the Bible and The Charge of the Light Brigade.
But I have to say this in defense of humankind: No matter in what era in history, including the Garden of Eden, everybody just got there. And, except for the Garden of Eden, there were already all these crazy games going on, which could make you act crazy, even if you weren’t crazy to begin with. Some of the games that were already going on when you got here were love and hate, liberalism and conservatism, automobiles and credit cards, golf and girls’ basketball.
Even crazier than golf, though, is modern American politics, where, thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative.
Actually, this same sort of thing happened to the people of England generations ago, and Sir William Gilbert, of the radical team of Gilbert and Sullivan, wrote these words for a song about it back then:
I often think it’s comical
How nature always does contrive
That every boy and every gal
That’s born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative.
Which one are you in this country? It’s practically a law of life that you have to be one or the other? If you aren’t one or the other, you might as well be a doughnut.
If some of you still haven’t decided, I’ll make it easy for you.
If you want to take my guns away from me, and you’re all for murdering fetuses, and love it when homosexuals marry each other, and want to give them kitchen appliances at their showers, and you’re for the poor, you’re a liberal.
If you are against those perversions and for the rich, you’re a conservative.
What could be simpler?
-
-------------------------
My government’s got a war on drugs. But get this: The two most widely abused and addictive and destructive of all substances are both perfectly legal.
One, of course, is ethyl alcohol. And President George W. Bush, no less, and by his own admission, was smashed or tiddley-poo or four sheets to the wind a good deal of the time from when he was 16 until he was 41. When he was 41, he says, Jesus appeared to him and made him knock off the sauce, stop gargling nose paint.
Other drunks have seen pink elephants.
And do you know why I think he is so pissed off at Arabs? They invented algebra. Arabs also invented the numbers we use, including a symbol for nothing, which nobody else had ever had before. You think Arabs are dumb? Try doing long division with Roman numerals.
We’re spreading democracy, are we? Same way European explorers brought Christianity to the Indians, what we now call “Native Americans.”
How ungrateful they were! How ungrateful are the people of Baghdad today.
So let’s give another big tax cut to the super-rich. That’ll teach bin Laden a lesson he won’t soon forget. Hail to the Chief.
That chief and his cohorts have as little to do with Democracy as the Europeans had to do with Christianity. We the people have absolutely no say in whatever they choose to do next. In case you haven’t noticed, they’ve already cleaned out the treasury, passing it out to pals in the war and national security rackets, leaving your generation and the next one with a perfectly enormous debt that you’ll be asked to repay.
Nobody let out a peep when they did that to you, because they have disconnected every burglar alarm in the Constitution: The House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the FBI, the free press (which, having been embedded, has forsaken the First Amendment) and We the People.
About my own history of foreign substance abuse. I’ve been a coward about heroin and cocaine and LSD and so on, afraid they might put me over the edge. I did smoke a joint of marijuana one time with Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead, just to be sociable. It didn’t seem to do anything to me, one way or the other, so I never did it again. And by the grace of God, or whatever, I am not an alcoholic, largely a matter of genes. I take a couple of drinks now and then, and will do it again tonight. But two is my limit. No problem.
I am of course notoriously hooked on cigarettes. I keep hoping the things will kill me. A fire at one end and a fool at the other.
But I’ll tell you one thing: I once had a high that not even crack cocaine could match. That was when I got my first driver’s license! Look out, world, here comes Kurt Vonnegut.
-
Ok... so we let all the criminals run free and everyone is broke and homeless. sounds like a great plan..
Who cares what that senile old fart thinks anyway? Or his nutjob son for that matter.
even more pointedly... since you baroda, have no solution and simply wish to ramble on about the few things that may be wrong with the U.S. while ignoring the total financial and moral collapse of your own country.....
who cares what you think?
lazs
-
Is everybody here on drugs?
jk... y'all should see my new house in Oceanview.. it's coming along real nice!.. It's not a country cabin anymore it's a frickin' Swiss Challey.. er spelling ;)
-
I think we need a prayer thread for boroda.
Let us pray
-
:D
LOL
thanks for post
-
Been a long time since I've read Vonnegut. Like 7th grade.
always liked his humor. Guess it's time to go back. I'm sure I'll get more of the humor this time around.
-
baroda.. vonnegut has allways been pretty anti American.. Like kerry and McCain... he was damaged by war.
lazs
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Is everybody here on drugs?
"Dave's not here....."
-
I Like it............Reminds me of the song...Rambling Man
-
Originally posted by lazs2
baroda.. vonnegut has allways been pretty anti American.. Like kerry and McCain... he was damaged by war.
lazs
Just because you have a different viewpoint on what America SHOULD be, doesn't make you anti-american. Speaking up for what you believe in is VERY American, whether you like what they say or not.
-
Who is that anti-america....
hey...
that's me! :)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
baroda.. vonnegut has allways been pretty anti American..
why do you think ?
-
Citing Kurt Vonnegut's views on government is rather like citing Goldie Hawn's views on nuclear physics.
He is a freaking science fiction author. He makes money by writing crap like this.
curly
-
Soooo..... your views on government are more valid than his because........?
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Soooo..... your views on government are more valid than his because........?
Have you ever hear Jane Fonda (or some other uneducated idiot) speak in public about the dangers of some technology (of which she is totally ignorant?)
Yeah, I know more about nuclear physics than Jane Fonda and I sure as hell know more about government than Kurt Vonnegut.
Man, he's an entertainer! He writes very entertaining books, but they are fiction. Read some of James Hogan's books (another science fiction author.) They are superb reads and about as realistic as Dagwood finding a closed form solution to the 3-body problem.
curly
-
SH5 was a good book.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Have you ever hear Jane Fonda (or some other uneducated idiot) speak in public about the dangers of some technology (of which she is totally ignorant?)
Yeah, I know more about nuclear physics than Jane Fonda and I sure as hell know more about government than Kurt Vonnegut.
Man, he's an entertainer! He writes very entertaining books, but they are fiction. Read some of James Hogan's books (another science fiction author.) They are superb reads and about as realistic as Dagwood finding a closed form solution to the 3-body problem.
curly
Ok, so you've just said that you know more about government than him... the question was why? Why do you think your views are more valid. Because they are different than his? Because your views make more sense to you?
And just because he's an entertainer doesn't mean that that is ALL he knows. Jane Fonda is a nice example to prove your point.... what about President Ronald Reagan or the present governor of california. Or are they OK because they share your views?
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Citing Kurt Vonnegut's views on government is rather like citing Goldie Hawn's views on nuclear physics.
He is a freaking science fiction author. He makes money by writing crap like this.
curly
you have the logic of a Vulcan...oh wait, thats Sci-Fi, too....:lol
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Ok, so you've just said that you know more about government than him... the question was why? Why do you think your views are more valid. Because they are different than his? Because your views make more sense to you?
And just because he's an entertainer doesn't mean that that is ALL he knows. Jane Fonda is a nice example to prove your point.... what about President Ronald Reagan or the present governor of california. Or are they OK because they share your views?
Ronald Reagan and Herr Groppenfuhrer certainly don't share political views with me.
Concerning the entertainer stuff, sure, I'll admit it, I'm prejudiced. Uneducated people with strong political views are usually poorly educated or at best naive.
If I want an informed opinion about medicine, I ask a physician; if I want an opinion about government, I would check with sociologists/economists/government hacks. And I repeat, reading Kurt Vonnegut for meaningful theories about government is ludicrous.
curly
-
Don't forget 'Ice Nine'.... The guy new what he was talking about...:D
-
Gotta say curly... that's a pretty narrow-minded POV and thus confusing to me.
Literature cannot touch on government.... or Hey!... anything but writing, because the authors are not experts in any other field. Do you know how many great works that'd wipe out? One Russian writer comes immediately to mind. Among many others. And that's just politics.
It's a forest for the trees thing. Of course you'd go to the experts for such things as how exactly how a law is drafted (for eg.)... But I sure as hell wouldn't look to any of those same people for meaning or perspective on how it winds up affecting us.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Gotta say curly... that's a pretty narrow-minded POV and thus confusing to me.
Literature cannot touch on government.... or Hey!... anything but writing, because the authors are not experts in any other field. Do you know how many great works that'd wipe out? One Russian writer comes immediately to mind. Among many others. And that's just politics.
It's a forest for the trees thing. Of course you'd go to the experts for such things as how exactly how a law is drafted (for eg.)... But I sure as hell wouldn't look to any of those same people for meaning or perspective on how it winds up affecting us.
Sure, you expect (and need) commentary from the press. But one should not confuse statements by authors or reporters with facts.
A good function of the press (and authors like Vonegut) is they cause us to re-examine our beliefs. Hell, they're free to say anything because they are the press ... free society.
I took exception to Boroda posting Voneguts meanderings like they were some great findings, that's all. Vonegut is a great author of fiction. While his work is certainly grounded in reality, it may not even represent his opinion. He exists to sell books.
curly
-
"He exists to sell books."
omg. Vonnegut?
That's the depressing and sheep-like (read all-too-common) height of cynisism that sadly pervades too much of our discourse.
Like an accomplished 81 year-old writer would say these things to sell even more millions of books he'd written 40 years ago.
The asians don't look at their elders as "gone through war thus damaged". I appreciate that model. If someone who's actually been through the depression, WWII, Korea and etc., wants to offer me his perspective, trust me, I am going to listen.
The thought of him trying to hawk yet even more of his books won't even cross my mind.
I will NOT read Kennedy/Lott/Clinton/Bush... your so-called experts.... to give me perspective on how great the law they just crafted really is.
In my mind, I thanked Boroda for posting this.
It's was an authentic change of pace from all the cnn/fox rip 'n paste garbage posts. If you have something to paste from anyone who happens to be smarter than the folks I named above (can't be that hard), feel free to post them here. No matter what viewpoint it advocates, it would be a welcome change believe me.
You might disagree with Vonnegut... hell knows many do. But ditch the cynisism, listen and then decide where to store it. He sure as hell knows a bit more about things than pampered generations like mine.
-
Originally posted by Nash
"He exists to sell books."
omg. Vonnegut?
That's the depressing and sheep-like (read all-too-common) height of cynisism that sadly pervades too much of our discourse.
Like an accomplished 81 year-old writer would say these things to sell even more millions of books he'd written 40 years ago.
The asians don't look at their elders as "gone through war thus damaged". I appreciate that model. If someone who's actually been through the depression, WWII, Korea and etc., wants to offer me his perspective, trust me, I am going to listen.
The thought of him trying to hawk yet even more of his books won't even cross my mind.
I will NOT read Kennedy/Lott/Clinton/Bush... your so-called experts.... to give me perspective on how great the law they just crafted really is.
In my mind, I thanked Boroda for posting this.
It's was an authentic change of pace from all the cnn/fox rip 'n paste garbage posts. If you have something to paste from anyone who happens to be smarter than the folks I named above (can't be that hard), feel free to post them here. No matter what viewpoint it advocates, it would be a welcome change believe me.
You might disagree with Vonnegut... hell knows many do. But ditch the cynisism, listen and then decide where to store it. He sure as hell knows a bit more about things than pampered generations like mine.
Ah yes, but you see, I don't belong to your pampered generation.
Whether I agree or disagree with Vonnegut isn't the issue. The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society and Vonnegut is an entertainer.
Tell you what Nash, next time you need a few facts on nuclear energy, write Susan Sarandon. She'll give you all manner of *facts.* Or hey, since Boroda started this, if you need a few *facts* about biology, ask him to send you a copy of a text by Lysenko.
One depressing issue with your sheep-like, pampered and drug-besotted generation is that you have trouble with facts. You want to the truth to sound like you *think* it should. You want your facts to come to you via brisk media sound bites.
Cyncism my left foot! :(
curly
-
So what generation DO you belong to? Baby boomers is my guess. You aint that different than me. In fact you taught us everything we know.
K.....
Let me see if I understand you right.
Literature is merely "entertainment", with nothing more than entertainment to offer. Is that what you're saying?
Anyone who has a certain view can be equated with the dumbest of viewpoints of same:
"Nookular is bad. Sarandon said so. She's a ditz. Therefore nookular is good."
Obvious bs tactic. Aren't/weren't you a Prof? Would you accept the same reasoning from any of your students?
You say our generation has trouble with the facts. Your generation is feeding us the so-called facts. Do you honestly fault us for not buying them?
-
And I find it funny that you say our generation has trouble with the facts.
... after casually brushing off Vonnegut by saying "he exists to sell books".
I'm going over your head for "facts".... and you're spitting out the sound bites here.
-
Fuggit and Gawdamn!
"The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society..."
That just gets under my skin. I cannot help myself in being a post-potato onnacount of it. Forgive me for I have ranted.
I have seen alotta dumb things said here... but MAN....
.... Cuz I think yer smarter than this... And so I immediately have to think of your motive in posting something like that. Cuz dude you can't possibly mean that.
All the literary works are based on the sale of books.
And those authors are some how not "serious contibutors to our socitey..."
Hello!
Damn...
And those books are "entertainment"....
What shrecking caca! Just retarded.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Fuggit and Gawdamn!
"The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society..."
That just gets under my skin. I cannot help myself in being a post-potato onnacount of it. Forgive me for I have ranted.
I have seen alotta dumb things said here... but MAN....
.... Cuz I think yer smarter than this... And so I immediately have to think of your motive in posting something like that. Cuz dude you can't possibly mean that.
All the literary works are based on the sale of books.
And those authors are some how not "serious contibutors to our socitey..."
Hello!
Damn...
And those books are "entertainment"....
What shrecking caca! Just retarded.
Lol Nash. Sorry dude, slip of the finger. Instead of *serious contributor*, I meant *serious commenator.*
Entertainers have to be serious contributors, or they go down the tubes. But their comments? Well, they have to fill a niche of some sort. They need to resonate with current problems or they need to be entertaining, but they sure don't have to be accurate.
curly
-
whatever....
The Coming of Wisdom with Time
Though leaves are many, the root is one;
Through all the lying days of my youth
I swayed my leaves and flowers in the sun;
Now I may wither into the truth.
-Yeats
Here's an "entertainer" for you. With nothing to offer you that Madonna can't.
You talk of accuracy? Well then this dude is missing the mark because there's no way he could grow leaves.
But maybe there's something more here....
Maybe it aint just entertainment (Pahtoohey! spit)
And maybe you, curly, need to revisit this. Just my observation cuz you seem to be getting farther from it.
-
Originally posted by Nash
"The issue is citing *entertainers* as serious contributors to our society..."
Guess that rules out Jesse Ventura, Arnie Scwartzenegger and good old Ronnie Raygun then...........
-
lol that would be the 1st dead-on "accurate" post of this whole thread, seeker. :D
Who the hell would argue that?
btw.... Where you been? Premature to say "Welcome back!" Or have you been hanging out in the other forums all along. :)
-
Originally posted by Nash
whatever....
The Coming of Wisdom with Time
Though leaves are many, the root is one;
Through all the lying days of my youth
I swayed my leaves and flowers in the sun;
Now I may wither into the truth.
-Yeats
Here's an "entertainer" for you. With nothing to offer you that Madonna can't.
You talk of accuracy? Well then this dude is missing the mark because there's no way he could grow leaves.
But maybe there's something more here....
Maybe it aint just entertainment (Pahtoohey! spit)
And maybe you, curly, need to revisit this. Just my observation cuz you seem to be getting farther from it.
I've never obtained much enlightenment from poetry. Much of it (Yeats time period) was written under the influence of malt or opium. Why should I be interested in anything said by someone who has given up?
If I want enlightened current social commentary, I'll read what cops and sociologists have to say. If want forecasts and perspectives, I'll read sociology/economics and history with perhaps a dash of government hacks.
But I sure won't read the meanderings of someone who spent his life writing for the general public. Wrong focus ...
Nash, I think you are misjudging my criticism. I don't fault Vonnegut for what he said. He's always interesting and frequently causes me to pause and think a bit. But, Vonnegut lacks the depth and perspective to be a serious social commentator.
Citing Vonnegut as a social commentator is equivalent to asking Murry Gellman how the persian santour has influenced contemporary jazz.
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Citing Vonnegut as a social commentator is equivalent to asking Murry Gellman how the persian santour has influenced contemporary jazz.
Jazz fan eh?
anyways....
What subject did you teach at University? Math/science-ish?
Yer now discarding work from giants because it was written during a so-called period of heavy opium use.
Before it was because they're all merely "entertainers".
What crap... history is a gazillion years old. Anyone can pick a work that you can't conveniantly blame on opium.
So, lame come-back.
Nevertheless, I thought Hendrix kicked ass. And Chruchill was one hell of a drunk.
Go ahead and continue to categorize them. And these guys will continue make history outside of your lame expectations/limitations.
Reminds me of a certain campaign. Can't discuss things on their own merits... attack the opponent.
Curly... your entire mind is a scientist. I quote Yeats and instead of responding to it you tell me that it was written during a period of heavy opium use or whatever.
You can't talk about the subject without attacking it.
And you are attacking people so much better than you or I.
What am I to make of it? Honestly?
-
Here's a website I dug up on Vonnegut.
Some of the highlights are:
1940 Enrolls at Cornell University as a biochemistry major. Contributes to the Cornell Sun as managing editor and columnist.
1943 March. Enlists in United States Army. Sent to Carnegie Institute and University of Tennessee for training in mechanical engineering.
1944 May 14. Edith Lieber Vonnegut, mother, commits suicide.
December 22. Vonnegut captured during the Battle of the Bulge while a battalion scout with the 106 Infantry Division.
1945 February 13. Dresden, Germany bombed killing 135,000 citizens. Vonnegut and fellow Allied POWs take shelter in an underground meatlocker, the basis of Slaughterhouse-Five.
April. Soviet troops occupy Dresden.
May 22. Vonnegut released to return to the U.S. Awarded the Purple Heart.
Uneducated entertainer???? Holy cow Curly! Did you know this stuff before you judged him? Or does any of this even matter still?
Anti-American??? Holy Cow Laz. This guy has done it man! Think he might have a little different and more realistic perspective on war and America than you ? you know.... fighting for it and all....
http://www.duke.edu/~crh4/vonnegut/vonnegutia/chronology.html
-
As far as lazs is concerned... Vets, you know, alla guys who actually fought in wars, are so entirely damaged from the experience that they are now not qualified to speak on it.
Apearently it takes draft dodgers and the like to offer the most realistic perspective on war.
-
Thanks Boroda... I believe the perspective of one that has lived so long is valuable.
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Here's a website I dug up on Vonnegut.
Some of the highlights are:
1940 Enrolls at Cornell University as a biochemistry major. Contributes to the Cornell Sun as managing editor and columnist.
1943 March. Enlists in United States Army. Sent to Carnegie Institute and University of Tennessee for training in mechanical engineering.
1944 May 14. Edith Lieber Vonnegut, mother, commits suicide.
December 22. Vonnegut captured during the Battle of the Bulge while a battalion scout with the 106 Infantry Division.
1945 February 13. Dresden, Germany bombed killing 135,000 citizens. Vonnegut and fellow Allied POWs take shelter in an underground meatlocker, the basis of Slaughterhouse-Five.
April. Soviet troops occupy Dresden.
May 22. Vonnegut released to return to the U.S. Awarded the Purple Heart.
Uneducated entertainer???? Holy cow Curly! Did you know this stuff before you judged him? Or does any of this even matter still?
I knew he had a BS degree in science of some sort. Yeah, he's lacking in education to be considered a social commentator.
curly
-
Sooo..... what creditials does a first rate "Social Commentator " need?
-
Originally posted by Nash
Nevertheless, I thought Hendrix kicked ass. And Chruchill was one hell of a drunk.
yep & yep.
Curly... your entire mind is a scientist. I quote Yeats and instead of responding to it you tell me that it was written during a period of heavy opium use or whatever.
You can't talk about the subject without attacking it.
And you are attacking people so much better than you or I.
What am I to make of it? Honestly?
I can't help being logical. You can't expect me to take a gifted pianist and look for social pearls to dribble from his fingers. Conversely, you shouldn't expect a gifted historian / social scientifst to make meaningful contributions to music.
I'm not attacking Yeats or Vonnegut, They are far more accomplished in their fields than I ever was in my field. But good grief man, it doesn't translate! Why should I expect them to be gifted outside their fields of endeavor?
I object to Vonnegut being considered a social historian. He's an interesting SF writer with a modicum of education in the sciences.
curly
-
Can anyone actually be lacking in a formal education to be a "commentator"?
Yer being elitist here.
Because you were a U Prof. But you were a Prof of science.
Trying to spout of with authority on social/artistic subjects is stoopid. You have no more cred on the issue than any one of us on the matter. Which is obvious.
-
I almost guaruntee you haven't read any of the things/books in this thread.
-
Originally posted by Seeker
Guess that rules out Jesse Ventura, Arnie Scwartzenegger and good old Ronnie Raygun then...........
It sure does, Seeker. :) Ventura / Herr Groppenfuhrer are pure opportunists and Ronnie Raygun was nothing other than seller of soap and a pathological liar to boot. Being president or governor doesn't mean you are a distinguished social commentator, current president included. He's a common moron. :)
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
I object to Vonnegut being considered a social historian. He's an interesting SF writer with a modicum of education in the sciences.
curly
Social Historian??? Social Commentator??? Social Contributer???
Which one is he? or isn't he?? or.... wtf?????
-
at this point it behooves you to provide examples of "distinguished social commentators".... cuz I'm starting to think I don't know exactly what the hell yer talking about.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Can anyone actually be lacking in a formal education to be a "commentator"?
Yer being elitist here.
Because you were a U Prof. But you were a Prof of science.
Trying to spout of with authority on social/artistic subjects is stoopid. You have no more cred on the issue than any one of us on the matter. Which is obvious.
and
I almost guaruntee you haven't read any of the things/books in this thread.
In the hard sciences, occasionally you see successful guys w/o formal education. Freeman Dyson comes to mind. He had a BS in physics and was a full professor at one of the Eastern schools. In the hard sciences, sheer brilliance makes up for a lot of missing territory.
In the soft sciences, you want historical perspective and that is almost always accompanied by academic achievement. Who else has the leisure? I suppose educated cops with some leisure time would be the ideal social commentators.
I'm not trying to spout with authority. I'm simply stating my opinon as you are. It is ok to have an opinion, right?
And, you are so right about my ignorance of Vonnegut and Yeats. Why, I had never heard of them before this thread occurred. Thank you for bringing them to my attention.
curly
-
Sure! It's okay to have on opinion!
I just wonder why yer raggin' so hard on others for theirs.
Cuz it's "soft science"?
Sure... Tell me again how that's not some kind of lofty elitist perspective spouted by a professed but definitely never-to-be verified reader of literature by someone of the "hard science" realm.
No way. Yer sellin - I ain't buyin'.
Gimme a coupla examples of worthy social contributing commentators.
-
Mosgood
Social Historian??? Social Commentator??? Social Contributer???
Which one is he? or isn't he?? or.... wtf?????
[/b]
Is you're talking about Vonnegut, he definitely has contributed to society. [see above note.] I see no reason to take someone like Vonnegut seriously when it comes to social commentary.
Nash said
at this point it behooves you to provide examples of "distinguished social commentators".... cuz I'm starting to think I don't know exactly what the hell yer talking about.
[/b]
Someone who is familiar with the entire span of recorded human civilization, understands the economics which drives a nation and is intimately familiar with his/her current society.
Look guys, we obviously don't agree and that's cool. I'm done typing.
curly
-
Ciao.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Gimme a coupla examples of worthy social contributing commentators.
Heh, last response. I'm tired and want to shoot down red guys.
Churchill comes to mind as a Brit reference, Page Smith is fair so far as America goes (don't know if he's still kicking). For you Nash, Engelbert Humperdink.
curly
-
"You're havin' mah baby!"
-
Vonnegut is entitled to his own views of course. However, his sneering self-righteousness and contempt for those on the opposite end of the political spectrum infected the collegiate generation of the 1960s, and thereby helped bring an end to civil discourse.
One hear's his rantings everytime someone disparages the intelligence or education of a political opponent.
He does not deserve our respect, for that reason alone.
Shuckins/Leggern
-
All these "hes bull****ter" comments..
Didn't that jesus or moses guy tell us to respect the elderly people (for they have seen much more in life than most of us, including one and very few even two of the biggest wars known to human kind)
Also labeling those with differing opinion of what US of A should be as an anti-american, is closer to mentality of soviet union/national-sosialistic germany than what USA was built on.
Often these same people are also very critict about nazis and communists. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Vonnegut....helped bring an end to civil discourse.
wow!
lol funny.
-
Heh heh heh! Ahee!
Shuckins
-
woot.
-
because we don't think he is relavant we are against free speech? He doesn't get published because there is no market short of a bunch of U.S. hating eurotrash.
How come he isn't published in every paper in yurup?
lazs
-
Laz....
What's the difference between Anti-Amercian and Anti-Government?
-
Am I the only one here considering the title and source of the thread? It has nothing to do with Kurt Vonnegut, at least the way I see it.
Baroda offered up a thread titled, "Who's that anti-american bastard?" Or something to that effect. Then proceeds to divert attention away from him using a somewhat eccentric American author who is an elderly man now.
Is that correct Baroda? You have "communist bastard" in part of your sig. So lets see, I know, you figured you'd get the Americans all worked up about one of their own respected and somewhat obscure authors, and sit back and enjoy the fun....without anyone questioning you at all.
Is that how the communists do things Baroda? Let old men take all the pounding while you get off scott free?
I for one am curious about Baroda's motives...mainly because he's the only one here who has a hammer and sicle as an avatar.
That being said, I think Nash has stood up admirally in the defense of artists/writers being contributors to society. Imo, Kurt Vonnegut is an eccentric, but I would hesitate to call him anti-American. Though Vonnegut's essay certainly is. I don't think it has much negative impact on the moral of our troops in war. I certainly hope not.
Baroda has no right to come in here sporting a hammer and sicle avatar, suggesting anti-Americanism and subjecting Mr. Vonnegut to critique on a piece he wrote, when he suspects Mr. Vonnegut is not here to respond to Baroda. That's not very nice. And, aside from Nash and a couple others, it doesn't seem like many here have read his works.
Baroda does have a right to his opinion, and I would like to hear it, because so far as I can tell, he hasn't justified his first post, unless it was to put down Kurt Vonnegut.
Maybe I missed something.
And Nash, I don't think I've ever seen you get so, well, for lack of a better word, passionate about a discussion. I agree with your points about creative people and artists being great contributors to society. Pure technology without some spiritual basis could be the end of us all.
Les
-
Baroda, I think it's important here so there are no misunderstandings about my post mentioning you. I'm not being accusatory toward you, and I would rather be friends than enemies.:)
I have to get on you because, hell, for all I know, you may BE Kurt Vonnegut.
Anyway, no matter what anyone else here says, I hope you understand this is not a personal attack.
Les
-
Originally posted by Leslie
Am I the only one here considering the title and source of the thread? It has nothing to do with Kurt Vonnegut, at least the way I see it.
Baroda offered up a thread titled, "Who's that anti-american bastard?" Or something to that effect. Then proceeds to divert attention away from him using a somewhat eccentric American author who is an elderly man now.
Well, I posted the same article in another thread, and failed to get any attention. Vonnegut is one of my favourite authors, so I started this provocation...
Sorry, I was drunk as hell when I posted it for the second time. :(
Originally posted by Leslie
Is that correct Baroda? You have "communist bastard" in part of your sig. So lets see, I know, you figured you'd get the Americans all worked up about one of their own respected and somewhat obscure authors, and sit back and enjoy the fun....without anyone questioning you at all.
Sorry again...
This "imbecilic communist bastard" thing is a long story, I was called so by one representative of a "multimillion dollar corporation", and I found it extremely funny. I am not a member of a Communist party and I don't vote for them. (Communists are one of the big political parties here and at the last parliament elections they got 13%).
Originally posted by Leslie
Is that how the communists do things Baroda? Let old men take all the pounding while you get off scott free?
I for one am curious about Baroda's motives...mainly because he's the only one here who has a hammer and sicle as an avatar.
I hope I explained it all above. My avatar is a sign that I suppose should mean my background as a person brought up in USSR, show my attitude to some Western "values" and generally to make me a target for some people here for whom this emblem of Labour is an essence of their unconscious hatred.
-
Originally posted by Leslie
Baroda, I think it's important here so there are no misunderstandings about my post mentioning you. I'm not being accusatory toward you, and I would rather be friends than enemies.:)
I have to get on you because, hell, for all I know, you may BE Kurt Vonnegut.
Anyway, no matter what anyone else here says, I hope you understand this is not a personal attack.
No problem, thanks ;)
Are you serious that I may BE Kurt Vonnegut?! This is a great compliment for my lame English :)
Here is a link to an original Vonnegut's article:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/cold_turkey
In a first thread I asked about this strange magazine, "In these Times", is it a popular and reliable edition or just another yellow unknown tabloid? This article was translated to Russian from Mexican newspaper "La Joranda", and some media here said that it was published in Mexico because major US press refused to print it... Can this be true?...
Sorry, I'll have to read other comments in this thread later...
So it goes... ;)
-
:)
Thanks for your response Boroda. I too was drunk when I made my post. Your English is very good.
I can't answer your question about the magazine "In These Times." I have not seen it or read any contents. Maybe someone else here knows more about it. Looking at the covers from the link you provided, it does seem to adhere to a political agenda partisan in nature.
My reading has been very light recently, so I'm not a good one to ask. I spend most of my time drawing pictures.
Anyway, thank you again for your good natured reply. I raise my glass of whiskey to your good health and prosperity.
Les
-
"Laz....
What's the difference between Anti-Amercian and Anti-Government?
__________________
Mosgoo - The Old Turks "
are you asking for my opinion? I have allways been against big government. I would suggest that the founders of this country were too and that anyone who is for big government and socialism is anti American so far as the founders and the constitution are concerned.
I would say that any federal gun laws are anti American. I would say that having a class of "hate crimes" is anti American. I would say that most taxes are anti American.
lazs