I was watching the soccer results programme on TV this afternoon. Some player (I didn’t hear who) had obviously had a bad day; this was described by one of the studio pundits as:
He’s had a holocaust.
I was watching the soccer results programme on TV this afternoon. Some player (I didn’t hear who) had obviously had a bad day; this was described by one of the studio pundits as:
He’s had a holocaust.
Apparently the manual for servicing the keel-lifting mechanism of a Beneteau Oceanis 311 yacht advises:
Unscrew the bolt THM8 located at the end of the endless screw.
[New Scientist; 24/11/2007]
There’s an interview with SF author Arthur C Clarke in the current edition of BBC Focus magazine, which contains the following …
What’s the greatest threat humanity faces?
Organised religion polluting our minds as it pretends to deliver morality
and spiritual salvation. It’s spreading the most malevolent mind virus of
all. I hope our race can one day outgrow this primitive notion.
I couldn’t have put it better myself.
The great artists of the world are never Puritans and seldom respectable. No virtuous man – that is, virtuous in the YMCA sense – has ever painted a picture worth looking at, or written a symphony worth hearing, or a book worth reading.
[HL Mencken]
Two excellent quotes today from the Quotation of the Day; both perpetrated by President George W Bush:
You can’t be the president and the head of the military at the same time.
Phone conversation with Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf; 7 November 2007; reported by CBC
The power of the executive branch is vested in the President, who also serves as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.
White House document explaining the role of the President of the United States
It does make one wonder how good these peoples’ grip is on reality.
While we are sort-of on the subject of marriage, here’s an insightful quote from chapter two of Anthony Powell’s novel Casanova’s Chinese Restaurant:
A future marriage, or a past one, may be investigated and explained in terms of writing by one of its parties, but it is doubtful whether an existing marriage can ever be described directly in the first person and convey a sense of reality. Even those writers who suggest some of the substance of married life best, stylise heavily, losing the subtlety of the relationship at the price of a few accurately recorded, but isolated aspects. To think at all objectively about one’s own marriage is impossible, while a balanced view of other people’s marriage is almost equally hard to achieve with so much information available, so little to be believed. Objectivity is not, of course, everything in writing; but if one has cast objectivity aside, the difficulties of presenting marriage are inordinate. Its forms are at once so varied, providing a kaleidoscope, the colours of which are always changing, always the same. The moods of a love affair, the contradictions of friendship, the jealousy of business partners, the fellow feeling of opposed commanders in total war, these are all in their way to be charted. Marriage, partaking of such – and a thousand more – dual antagonisms and participations, finally defies definition.
New Scientist of 29 September reports the following announcement on Tiscali’s website:
Degradation of service has been restored by our network engineers
Even amoebas have downtime.
All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts.
[Dhammapada, Chapter 1:1-2]
… England’s burgeoning prosperity, carried on a tide of coal and woollens and overseas ventures, and London’s unassailable claim to be England’s only city worth a fart, … with a boom that drew thousands of new dwellers to the capital each year, from across the land and from across the seas. And so the monasteries had at last been cleared, or their better halls kept and taken over for use by the city’s wealthy … grand town houses of the nobility now stretched along the Strand, each with its private stairs down to the Thames, for boats were the fastest and least troublesome way to travel about the crowded city, … and Thomas Gresham’s Royal Exchange, with its great open piazza and arcaded colonnade and hundred shops for goldsmiths and armourers and financiers, had opened on the east end of Cheapside, heralding London’s arrival as the great centre of European trade and finance it had become.
And with the grandeur of prosperity came the squalor of prosperity, for each year the city burst a bit more to accommodate the destitute and the adventurers and the ambitious and the refugees drawn by hope or impelled by need. Within the city, hovels and tenements jostled with grand houses and merchants’ stalls; just beyond the gates, beyond the reach of the law of the good bourgeois aldermen, the filthy cottages of the poor crowded along the main roads to the north and the east, colonizing the fields where cattle had grazed but a few years before. Farther out, the brick kilns of Islington attracted the more desperate, the homeless unemployed looking for a warm place to sleep while they scrounged for work. And across the river, to the south, the suburb of Southwark teemed with shipwrights and sailors and semi-skilled craftsmen and foreigners and prostitutes, and with the crowds who frequented prostitutes and the bull-baitings and bear-baitings nearby.
The watermen who jammed the Thames calling “Westward ho!” and “Eastward ho!” for fares, and the carriers who carted in water to all who could afford to save themselves from the sickness and death of drinking right from the foul river; and the speculators who divided up some of the old decaying palaces of the wealthy into rude tenements, and the prostitutes, and the bull-baiters, and the butchers, and the tavern keepers, and the prison wardens, all saw little to choose between grandeur and squalor: demand was demand, and prosperity was prosperity.
It was not democracy; but London’s hugger-mugger jumbling together of rich and poor, merchants and seamen, aristocrats and tradesmen, cosmopolitans and vagabonds, foreigners and yokels, meant that all kinds of men crossed paths in London’s streets and alleys and churches. The parish register … lists them all in their succinct catalogue of baptisms, marriages, and burials: knight, parson, stranger; baker, cobbler, carpenter; gentleman, silkweaver, scrivener; merchant, blackamoor, vintner, broker, sugarmaker, porter. And so they all lived upon and walked upon the same streets, and rubbed elbows in the same taverns, and occasionally even the same prisons; and they heard things, and knew things, well outside the conventional stations that Elizabethan society assigned to men.
From: Stephen Budiansky, Her Majesty’s Spymaster: Elizabeth I, Sir Franis Walsingham and the Birth of Modern Espionage; Plume/Penguin; 2006; ISBN 0452287472