OT: Do politics and humour mix?

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:49:23 +0000, Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

"James Arthur" <arthurj@aol.comet.net> wrote

The fun of a schematic, to me, is its expressiveness: the thing
itself, the way it flows, reveals & highlights its function;

Myself, I'd take a woman ...

Yabbut, every time I try to draw a schematic of one, there's
always this inscrutable Black Box....

Cheers!
Rich

 

[John Larkin]

On 20 Oct 2004 03:35:28 GMT, arthurj@aol.comet.net (James Arthur)
wrote:

On 10/18/04, Rich Grise rich@example.net wrote:

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:02:26 +0000, James Arthur wrote:

On 10/18/04 jeffm_@email.com (JeffM) wrote:

an "artist" named Maplethorpe
Scott Stephens

If you look at art as having no intrinsic utilitarian value
--as only something that stirs the emotions--his work
passes the test.

My favorite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analog circuit, fer instance. Art *with*
intrinsic utilitarian value... Performing art?

To coin a paraphrase, "Music hath charms that soothe the savage breast."

Yeah, I say that "stir[ring] the emotions" itself has intrinsic
utilitarian value.

Cheers!
Rich

Yes, perhaps. Merely stirring seems rather a commonplace though,
doesn't it? Inspiring might be a loftier aim.

A cool thing about schematics-- they're symbolic,
yet actually say something!

--James

There are few comparable drawings in other fields. Maybe software flow
charts (does anybody still use flow charts?) come close. A schematic
is a symbolic representation of something entirely different, but is
so precise that a netlist can be extracted and create, or be exactly
checked against, a physical entity.

The electronic concept of "connectivity" may be unique.

John

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:30:45 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On 20 Oct 2004 03:35:28 GMT, arthurj@aol.comet.net (James Arthur)
wrote:

On 10/18/04, Rich Grise rich@example.net wrote:

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:02:26 +0000, James Arthur wrote:

On 10/18/04 jeffm_@email.com (JeffM) wrote:

an "artist" named Maplethorpe
Scott Stephens

If you look at art as having no intrinsic utilitarian value
--as only something that stirs the emotions--his work
passes the test.

My favorite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analog circuit, fer instance. Art *with*
intrinsic utilitarian value... Performing art?

To coin a paraphrase, "Music hath charms that soothe the savage breast."

Yeah, I say that "stir[ring] the emotions" itself has intrinsic
utilitarian value.

Cheers!
Rich

Yes, perhaps. Merely stirring seems rather a commonplace though,
doesn't it? Inspiring might be a loftier aim.

A cool thing about schematics-- they're symbolic,
yet actually say something!

--James

There are few comparable drawings in other fields. Maybe software flow
charts (does anybody still use flow charts?) come close. A schematic
is a symbolic representation of something entirely different, but is
so precise that a netlist can be extracted and create, or be exactly
checked against, a physical entity.

The electronic concept of "connectivity" may be unique.

Only in "ordinary" science. >:->

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Clarence]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:v6pcn094vvt5191qsio0m3s2ei808f2qpu@4ax.com...

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:14:37 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nqabn0tv0pdbsnkajq8032qv2pqh63mega@4ax.com...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:08:51 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

snip
I was talking about a book.
WTH are you on?
Don't answer, I know!
---
You don't know "John Fields".
Gee, I KNOW you!

<four letter words removed to protect the child who wrote them.>
What a potty mouth you have "John Fields" Opps, I did it too.

---
A moronic attempt at a clever retort?
Notice that I wrote that you _don't_ know "John Fields",
which means that if I _were_ "John Fields",
(which you're trying to imply) you _wouldn't_ know me.
It follows, then, that since you _think_ you know me,
you _can't_ logically think I'm "John Fields".
---

<sniped irrelevant remarks>

11002 --- 78758-5426

Just a hop-skip-and-jump away!
---
A veiled physical threat?

How could some unrelated numbers be considered a threat?

No. A reminder that you have to live in a small world with many other people.
Something you seem to have forgotten.

Be careful; a glock and spiel like yours makes music no one likes but
that the authorities _will_ listen to, and they're harsh critics.
---

The Police in Austin will be interested in your threats, perhaps you think I
should call them?

Crawl back under the covers now, and take a nap.
---
OK, I could use the rest, and you crawl back under your rock.

I don't have a rock, but your welcome to yours!

 

[Scott Stephens]

Rich Grise wrote:

I guess that's kind of a dumb question. I was interested to note my
own reaction to the trailers for this new movie, "Team America: World
Police" by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
....

But it's by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park.

It has to be gut-splittingly funny - I saw "South Park: Bigger, Longer,
and Uncut" five times before I finally heard all the jokes through the
laughter.

Pornography may be funny, but the fact it is sick and disgusting still
makes it pornography. In fact, being funny is like excellent camouflage
on a predator. The humor is the vehicle the poison uses to contaminate
your mind. After I'm finished laughing, it leaves me feeling disgusted
my culture would tolerate it, and I didn't spend my time thinking about
something, if not edifying, at least horribly real.

Anyways from one of the handful of episodes I was subjected to, I take
it they are anti-war. The town divides and fights over the war issue
while one of the characters tries to have a flash-back to depict what
the founding fathers would do. The solution was the all too corrupt
political habit of implementing the policy (in this case war) for the
wrong reason, then holding up dissenters to critics to excuse the policy.

But what I'm worried about is that I get a feeling that it's going
to come out on the neocons' side. Parker and Stone on TV the other
night looked, and sounded, like Young Republicans. And all they
talked about was making a movie using marionettes - very non-
controversial.

And it would destroy the fabric of the space-time continuum if
Trey Parker and Matt Stone turned out to be for the neocons.

If they want to be seen and heard from, they must conform to societies
norms. The liberal mommy-culture has itself in a real double bind
regarding the "war on terror". Zionist influence is sacrosanct. To be
against war is to be anti-Zionist, anti-semitic. Its opponents are
fascists and Nazis!

You're not a Nazi, are you Rich?

Anyways, we are horribly mis-informed regarding the nature of how this
world really works. Throughout history politicians fought wars so
businesses could safely trade, acquire resources to the end they pay
taxes. But America was different.

Americans revolted against their politicians so they could keep their
profits. America came to be a nation where the merchants controlled the
politicians!

If you read the economic chapters in "The Oil-Age Is Over" from the link
in the recent thread I referred you to, you will find the anti-globalist
luddite author in agreement with the following Pentagon architect of
American military strategy:

Peter Barnett's globalist perspective:
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/pnm/pnm_index.htm

Man is at the mercy of primal drives. Money is the abstraction of the
value we assign to the means of satisfaction of primal and philosophic
drives. Therefore, we should see it as no strange or evil thing the
pursuit of money is central in conflicts and war.

To the extent a nations fiat currency (dollar, euro, yen, et.) is used,
that nation controls and can tax the global economy. And determine how
much your cheeseburger and gas costs.

--
Scott

**********************************

DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

Those who sow excuses shall reap excuses

**********************************

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <7c584d27.0410172301.6c542cdf@posting.google.com>,
bill.sloman@ieee.org (Bill Sloman) writes:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message news:<ior5n09t0mduvndnjub204u82c83l4vo26@4ax.com>...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:


Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the explicit
homoerotic art- including flowers.

And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John

Nature ensures that we all die eventually, and it has lots of
different ways of rendering the biological mechanism non-viable.

Your kind of thinking is akin to the fact that AIDS doesn't really

increase the number of deaths over time. That is a good way to
try to make AIDS and the nowadays errant/irresponsible behaviors a more
acceptable situation/outcome. Alot like cancer from smoking, AIDS results
from a mostly volutary activity (in the west.) Of course, this discounts
the relatively less common rapes (or other involuntary activitites) that
also assist the transmission of HIV.

John

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:15:41 GMT, the renowned Scott Stephens
<scottxs@comcast.net> wrote:

For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.

That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/502bg.jpg

Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the explicit
homoerotic art- including flowers. Perhaps the the flip-side to
Georgia O'Keeffe's paintings? David Hockney is about as far as I like
to go in that direction.

Obviously you're not an art aficionado.

;-)



Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Kryten]

"Scott Stephens" <scottxs@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:FxHcd.146320$He1.2238@attbi_s01...

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

Other 'artists' have sold cans of their own shit, labelled "Artist's Shit".
Tracy Emin sold her unmade bed for Ł50,000.
Damien Hurst sells sliced pickled animals.
Another guy turns corpses into posed preserved anatomy exhibits.

Maybe someone could blend these ideas to make
"Sliced pickled artists in a bedful of their own shit"

One might argue it is a witty yet brutal satire juxtaposing the position of
art and artist where a mysterious third party has ambiguously presented
either a harsh negative critique of their previous works or the sincerest
form of flattery. The tableaux is complimented by the separate work entitled
"art patrons being beaten up", where the people who paid Tracy Emin are
enthusiastically thrashed by anyone who has had to do real work for money.
This has proved most popular with hospital bedmakers who get paid minimum
wage to make beds.

Unfortunately the law will take a harsher view.

Sigh. Everyone is a critic eh?

Me, I'm going to re-label tins of baked beans as "Artist's Shit".
I mean, who would want to check it out?

Kryten - the potential master art forger.

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:15:41 GMT, the renowned Scott Stephens
scottxs@comcast.net> wrote:

For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.

That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/502bg.jpg

<ahem> Isn't this a little blasphemous? Wasn't there an outcry from
the Religious Right over a grant of taxpayers' dough for such a
questionable "work of art"? How much can I expect to get for
photographing myself taking a shit?
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[Scott Stephens]

Great suggestions! True genius is most often unappreciated and
unrewarded. <sigh>

Kryten wrote:

"Scott Stephens" <scottxs@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:FxHcd.146320$He1.2238@attbi_s01...

Spehro Pefhany wrote:


That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.


Other 'artists' have sold cans of their own shit, labelled "Artist's Shit".
Tracy Emin sold her unmade bed for Ł50,000.
Damien Hurst sells sliced pickled animals.
Another guy turns corpses into posed preserved anatomy exhibits.

Maybe someone could blend these ideas to make
"Sliced pickled artists in a bedful of their own shit"

One might argue it is a witty yet brutal satire juxtaposing the position of
art and artist where a mysterious third party has ambiguously presented
either a harsh negative critique of their previous works or the sincerest
form of flattery. The tableaux is complimented by the separate work entitled
"art patrons being beaten up", where the people who paid Tracy Emin are
enthusiastically thrashed by anyone who has had to do real work for money.
This has proved most popular with hospital bedmakers who get paid minimum
wage to make beds.

Unfortunately the law will take a harsher view.

Sigh. Everyone is a critic eh?

Me, I'm going to re-label tins of baked beans as "Artist's Shit".
I mean, who would want to check it out?

Kryten - the potential master art forger.

--
Scott

**********************************

DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

Those who sow excuses shall reap excuses

**********************************

 

[Scott Stephens]

Rich Grise wrote:

Actually, this hullaballoo about funding blasphemous shit - the
fundamental problem that needs to be corrected is government funding
of _anything._

All taxation is theft.

Agreed, but this started over my comments about the non-acceptability of
material that would offend conservatives contrasted to the preference
for material that offends them.

In this case, it isn't the government that is using a privately owned
limited media (cable-TV air time) to offend a minority. The left is
surely getting pay-back for all the shit it has taken in past decades
from the right.

Of course I had to watch South Park last night, and damned if it wasn't
an episode about the "Passion of Christ", starring Mel Gibson. The
theme - most Christians are stupid, some Christianity turn into Nazis,
Jews are victims. And of course the constant recurring theme: its cute
to be mean and vulgar, especially to stupid and naive to earn social
prestige in a rat race.

As disgusted as I am with organized religion, Christianity has my
sympathy when attacked by rats that want to poison the culture with such
pornography. Fools may bring about evil with altruistic good intentions,
but there is no way good intentions can be attributed to smut peddlers.

--
Scott

**********************************

DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

Those who sow excuses shall reap excuses

**********************************

 

[Kryten]

"Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote in message
newsfXcd.32150$QJ3.17630@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...

"Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com> wrote in message
news:4cXcd.660$ta5.114@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"James Arthur" <arthurj@aol.comet.net> wrote

My favourite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analogue circuit

I like my own schematics, which I draw in well-chosen sections.

Other people's schematics often seem to be drawn to hide the architecture.

Have you read the SF novel "A Canticle for Leibowitz?", you
might enjoy it. The novel has monks illuminating schematics
with gold leaf.

My brother read this and said that it wasn't the technical meaning of the
schematics that was important, but what they represented (civilisation).

I didn't read this, but I postulate that this merely mocks the stupidity of
human beings in their worship of things without the essential understanding
of their meaning.

e.g. religious texts saying people should love others as they love
themselves, then people murdering each other for centuries over how they
should not murder each other. Or people professing love of animals murdering
scientists.

Along with the "Pope's children" eating the brains of travellers.

Ah, junk food.

Nice book, I have tried to finish it five times, maybe some day I will try
again.

If you have to try to finish it, is it really a good book?

Moby Dick was particularly dull in this regard, even when I worked aboard a
seismic survey vessel.

I heard Leibnowitz had no limbs. Not going to be made into a Hollywood
action movie anytime soon then?

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:26:24 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:



Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the
explicit homoerotic art- including flowers.


And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John




Better to have lived 43 years as a Maplethorpe than 100 as a Larkin-
damned boring idiot.


I'm not bored,

You bore others.

and I'm glad I'm still alive.

So are many cockroaches.

How are you doing?

NOYDB, idiot.

 

[Clarence]

"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.10.19.07.14.11.988456@example.net...

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:09:53 +0000, Clarence wrote:

Well written, and somewhat interesting. But parts are quite gory, I can't
get
past those. Skipped over to and Read the last four chapters, I thought it
was
good. I just don't care for gore up to my knees!

Then why are you pushing the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld carnage machine?
Or is it just, It's OK as long as it's up to somebody else's knees?
Thanks,
Rich

I was talking about a book.
WTH are you on?
Don't answer, I know!

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:21:16 +0200, "Frank Bemelman"
<f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:4177BCBA.4050900@nospam.com...

Well- how in hell does anyone have sex in a bookstore?

On the counter?

The back room at the Jaguar was famous. Lots of people started dying
there.

John

 

[Rich Grise]

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:49:54 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:21:16 +0200, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:4177BCBA.4050900@nospam.com...

Well- how in hell does anyone have sex in a bookstore?

On the counter?



The back room at the Jaguar was famous. Lots of people started dying
there.

If they were finding corpses there, there was probably more than just

sex involved.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:08:51 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.10.19.07.14.11.988456@example.net...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:09:53 +0000, Clarence wrote:

Well written, and somewhat interesting. But parts are quite gory, I can't
get
past those. Skipped over to and Read the last four chapters, I thought it
was
good. I just don't care for gore up to my knees!

Then why are you pushing the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld carnage machine?
Or is it just, It's OK as long as it's up to somebody else's knees?
Thanks,
Rich


I was talking about a book.
WTH are you on?
Don't answer, I know!

---
You don't know shit.

--
John Fields

 

[Clarence]

"Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote in message
news:N5idd.16241$nj.14007@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nqabn0tv0pdbsnkajq8032qv2pqh63mega@4ax.com...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:08:51 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:


snip

I was talking about a book.
WTH are you on?
Don't answer, I know!

---
You don't know shit.

Gee, I KNOW you!
You are predictable and may have a heart attack any day.

11002 --- 78758-5426

The Heart Attack, is just a hop-skip-and-jump away!

Crawl back under the covers now, and take a nap.