.
1/2
8 hours ago
.





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I hate Newlove's voice. Even after he manages a couple pages of great stuff, he goes and spoils it with some inane comment. He's the guy at parties you're desperate to avoid. Among other sins, he's pretentious, elitist and, well, just annoying. And this book, which is supposed to be filled with first paragraphs "written on Olympus," quoted very few openings that made me want to read the book. I was sold this book by clever book-club ad copy and began reading this "Handbook for the Soul" before my mission. I added a page or two here and there in the following years. A few months ago I recommended Mr. Fob check out the book's form out, warning him not to actually read it, however, and attempted to scare him off with terms like "barely readable" and "unreadable self-important nonesuch". This finish-books-already-started thing gave me motivation to finally get this albatross off me and into the sea, and I'm glad to be done with it. And although I still don't like the book, my hatred for it has lessened somewhat. I even tried rereading the first ten pages earlier today in a show of good faith, but no: couldn't handle it. So even if you won't take as long as I did, still: don't read it. Your soul deserves a better handbook.
Stephen Hawking is a character. It's impossible to read this book and not wonder what he is really like. Also: the line on particle accelerators in the last chapter is classic. I'm no physicist (alas), so I don't hold strong opinions on the theories presented in this book. I can follow the logic while I read the chapter, but as soon as I close it, I'm no wiser than I'd been thirty minutes earlier. But even so, I must say this: reading about hifalutin science like this is always a religious experience for me. There is no theory, no matter how self-evident or crazily impossible-seeming which does not mesh nicely with my understanding of God. I'm amazed by people who gleefully proclaim or hysterically stress that science is out to disprove deity. It's silly. As one hotshot scientist from earlier this century wrote
So I read it last November. Yes. But I didn't finish the appendices until early, early this morning. My main response to Dune is one of wonder: like Lord of the Rings
When I started reading it again in earnest, it was from the perspective of annoyance I had a decade ago, when my opinions on faith were different than they are now. Somehow (I'm not even sure which passages now) I got the idea that Cahill was dismissing faith in YHWH as silly and unscientific and I was offended by that. Reading the book now, later, I have no idea where I got that notion. Sure the book is "scientific" and not a strict literalist's friend, but it's fantastic. Cahill's thesis, in summary, is this: Before the Jews, all societies viewed time as a circle. No beginning, no end. Anything of note was a gift of the Gods from time out of mind. Then came Abraham, who spoke with a God unconstrained by mortal comprehension, who told him to go forth, that his seed would become a mighty nation. And with this first step, we have monotheism. We have a personal relationship with God. And if we have a personal relationship with God, we must be individuals. Individuals with individual destinies. In other words, everything we read in the Declaration of Independence, for instance. Or "justice". Or universal education. None of that was possible before Abraham met God. Obviously, there is much more to the book than that, but them's the barest bones. And I am wildly impressed by the book and love it dearly and am now anxious to pick up a copy of volume three
Lady Steed started reading it concurrently, then somehow she took the lead, then somehow she finished it and wanted to talk about the last story, but I kept getting stuck on the couple overlong, overdull entries, and finally the book was put aside, not picked up again until just this past week. I ripped through the final four stories and loved the journey and now this books is finally through. Ah, Dahl! What should we say of him? If ever Dahl comes up, my friend RC will immediately describe him as "twisted", twisting the word itself as he says it. And the delight he puts into torturing the word says it all. As anyone who's read Revolting RhymesThmazing's Thutopia is powered by Blogger and modeled after a template by template-godown
º
º
all content copyrighted by thmazing on the date indicated
(unless, of course, it wasn't his to copyright)
thmazing is happy to share his content
he just asks for credit and that you stay within the bounds of fair use
(regular stuff)
º
©
Eric W Jepson
©
ericwjepson
©
º
I AM THERIC
º
º