another claudia created template
Tuesday, August 30
wisevice:
grr 
oxford app has taken over half a day to finish; especially the payment method; there's supposed to be a credit card authorisation form, but no such thing - so have to buy a bank draft which is impossible now cos the banks are closed and stop selling at 4! and the credit card form online is just NOT LOADING although it's the oxford site itself, and overall a big big GAHHHH sums up my temperament nicely right now.
Monday, August 29
claud:
Rules for Clear Writing
Verbs has to agree with their subjects.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat.)
Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.
Be more or less specific.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary.
Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
No sentence fragments.
Contractions aren't necessary and shouldn't be used.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
One should never generalize.
Comparisons are as bad as clichés.
Don't use no double negatives.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
The passive voice is to be ignored.
Eliminate commas, that are, not necessary. Parenthetical words however should be enclosed in commas.
Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
Do not use multiple exclamation points NOR ALL CAPS for emphasis!!!
Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
Understatement is always the absolute best way to put forth earth shaking ideas.
Use the apostrophe in it's proper place and omit it when its not needed.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times: Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it correctly.
Puns are for children, not groan readers.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
The passive voice should never be used.
Do not put statements in the negative form.
A writer must not shift your point of view.
Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
Always pick on the correct idiom.
The adverb always follows the verb.
Be careful to use the rite homonym.
And last...
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat.)
Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.
Be more or less specific.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary.
Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
No sentence fragments.
Contractions aren't necessary and shouldn't be used.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
One should never generalize.
Comparisons are as bad as clichés.
Don't use no double negatives.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
The passive voice is to be ignored.
Eliminate commas, that are, not necessary. Parenthetical words however should be enclosed in commas.
Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
Do not use multiple exclamation points NOR ALL CAPS for emphasis!!!
Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
Understatement is always the absolute best way to put forth earth shaking ideas.
Use the apostrophe in it's proper place and omit it when its not needed.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times: Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it correctly.
Puns are for children, not groan readers.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
The passive voice should never be used.
Do not put statements in the negative form.
A writer must not shift your point of view.
Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
Always pick on the correct idiom.
The adverb always follows the verb.
Be careful to use the rite homonym.
And last...
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Sunday, August 28
wisevice:
for PC
a nice passage out of peckandcoyle, good to keep in mind (:
The instinctive critical reaction, particularly if one is just beginning to study poetry, is to search for a single meaning in a poem, a clear statement of what it is saying. Criticism is not, however, really concerned with searching for a simple, reductive interpretation of a poem, but instead acknowledges the complicating effect of imagery and the levels of ambiguity that can exist in a text. This is a matter of seeing how the poet uses language to indicated the complexity of the experience he or she is trying to understand. We should attempt to reverse our instinctive attitude of looking for one meaning in a peom in favour of seeing that the language of poetry is full of conflicting, ambiguous meanings. The danger in such an approach is that everything can be represented as ambiguous and the plain sense of the poem can disappear unless one remembers that ambiguity is concerned with complexity of meaning in the words, not with improbable meanings of the poem as a whole.
pretty good - i'd recommend the book too - Literary Terms and Criticism; the one mr p talked about last year.
The instinctive critical reaction, particularly if one is just beginning to study poetry, is to search for a single meaning in a poem, a clear statement of what it is saying. Criticism is not, however, really concerned with searching for a simple, reductive interpretation of a poem, but instead acknowledges the complicating effect of imagery and the levels of ambiguity that can exist in a text. This is a matter of seeing how the poet uses language to indicated the complexity of the experience he or she is trying to understand. We should attempt to reverse our instinctive attitude of looking for one meaning in a peom in favour of seeing that the language of poetry is full of conflicting, ambiguous meanings. The danger in such an approach is that everything can be represented as ambiguous and the plain sense of the poem can disappear unless one remembers that ambiguity is concerned with complexity of meaning in the words, not with improbable meanings of the poem as a whole.
pretty good - i'd recommend the book too - Literary Terms and Criticism; the one mr p talked about last year.
claud:
on poverty and inequality
A question of justice?
Mar 11th 2004
From The Economist print edition
The toll of global poverty is a scandal. But deploring economic "injustice" is no answer.
HUNDREDS of millions of people in the world are forced to endure lives of abject poverty-- poverty so acute that those fortunate enough to live in the United States, or Europe or the rich industrialised parts of Asia can scarcely comprehend its meaning. Surely there is no more commanding moral imperative for people in the West than to urge each other, and their governments, to bring relief to the world's poorest. And what a tragedy it is, therefore, that many of the kind souls who respond most eagerly to this imperative bring to the issue an analytical mindset that is almost wholly counterproductive. They are quite right, these champions of the world's poor, that poverty in an age of plenty is shameful and disgusting. But they are quite wrong to suppose, as so many of them do, that the rich enjoy their privileges at the expense of the poor-- that poverty, in other words, is inseparable from a system, capitalism, that thrives on injustice. This way of thinking is not just false. It entrenches the very problem it purports to address.
Symptomatic of this mindset is the widespread and debilitating preoccupation with "global inequality". Whenever the United Nations and its plethora of associated agencies opine about the scandal of world poverty, figures on inequality always pour forth. (Such figures, though, are always higher than the likely reality: see article) It is not bad enough, apparently, that enormous numbers of people have to subsist on less than a dollar a day. The claim that this makes in its own right on the compassion of the West for its fellow men is deemed, apparently, too puny. The real scandal, it seems, is that much of the world is vastly richer than that. The implication, and often enough the explicit claim, is that the one follows from the other: if only we in the West weren't so rich, so greedy for resources, so driven by material ambition—such purblind delinquent capitalists—the problem of global poverty would be half-way to being solved.
Equity at a price
Certain ideas about equality are woven into the fabric of the liberal state, and quite inseparable from it: first and foremost, equality before the law. But equality before the law, and some other kinds of liberal equality, can be universally granted without infringing anybody's rights. Economic equality cannot. A concern to level economic outcomes must express itself as policies that advance one group's interests at the expense of another's. This puts political and ethical limits on how far the drive for economic equality ought to go. (Strictly practical limits, as well, since too noble a determination to take from the rich to give to the poor will end up impoverishing everyone.) It also means that perfect economic equality should never be embraced, even implicitly, as an ideal. Perfect economic equality is a nightmare: nothing short of a totalitarian tyranny could ever hope to achieve it.
The preoccupation bordering on obsession with economic equality that one so often encounters at gatherings of anti-globalists, in the corridors of aid agencies and in socialist redoubts in backward parts of the world reflects a “lump of income” fallacy. This remarkably tenacious misconception is that there is only so much global income to go around. If the United States is consuming $10 trillion worth of goods and services each year, that is $10 trillion worth of goods and services that Africa cannot consume.
But goods and services are not just lying around waiting to be grabbed by the greediest or most muscular countries. Market economics is not a zero-sum game. America consumes $10 trillion worth of goods and services each year because it produces (not counting the current-account deficit of 5% or so of the total) $10 trillion of goods and services each year. Africa could produce and consume a lot more without America producing and consuming one jot less. It so happens that the case for more aid, provided of course that it is well spent, is strong—but the industrialised countries do not need to become any less rich before Africa can become a lot less poor. The wealth of the wealthy is not part of the problem.
To believe otherwise, however, is very much part of the problem. For much of the 20th century the developing countries were held back by an adapted socialist ideology that put global injustice, inequality and victimhood front and centre. Guided by this ideology, governments relied on planning, state monopolies, punitive taxes, grandiose programmes of public spending, and all the other apparatus of applied economic justice. They also repudiated liberal international trade, because the terms of global commerce were deemed exploitative and unfair. Concessions (that is, permission to retain trade barriers) were sought and granted in successive negotiating rounds of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. A kind of equity was thus deemed to have been achieved. The only drawback was that the countries stayed poor.
Towards the end of the century, many developing countries—China and India among them—finally threw off this victim's mantle and began to embrace wicked capitalism, both in the way they organised their domestic economies and in their approach to international trade. All of a sudden, they are a lot less poor, and it hasn't cost the West a cent. In Africa, too, minds are now changing, but far more slowly. Perhaps that has something to do with the chorus that goes up from Africa's supposed friends in the West, telling the region that its plight is all the fault of global inequality, "unfair trade" and an intrinsically unjust market system.
Heed the call
People and their governments in the West should heed the call of compassion, and respond with policies to help the world's poor, and indeed to advance the opportunities of the (much less desperately) poor in their own countries. Expressed that way, the egalitarian impulse is a good thing, worth nurturing. But a compassionate regard for the poor, as any good Marxist will tell you, is a very different thing from a zeal for economic "justice". That zeal, despite the exemplary fate of the socialist experiment at the end of the 20th century, guides a great deal of thinking still. And it continues to do nothing but harm.
Mar 11th 2004
From The Economist print edition
The toll of global poverty is a scandal. But deploring economic "injustice" is no answer.
HUNDREDS of millions of people in the world are forced to endure lives of abject poverty-- poverty so acute that those fortunate enough to live in the United States, or Europe or the rich industrialised parts of Asia can scarcely comprehend its meaning. Surely there is no more commanding moral imperative for people in the West than to urge each other, and their governments, to bring relief to the world's poorest. And what a tragedy it is, therefore, that many of the kind souls who respond most eagerly to this imperative bring to the issue an analytical mindset that is almost wholly counterproductive. They are quite right, these champions of the world's poor, that poverty in an age of plenty is shameful and disgusting. But they are quite wrong to suppose, as so many of them do, that the rich enjoy their privileges at the expense of the poor-- that poverty, in other words, is inseparable from a system, capitalism, that thrives on injustice. This way of thinking is not just false. It entrenches the very problem it purports to address.
Symptomatic of this mindset is the widespread and debilitating preoccupation with "global inequality". Whenever the United Nations and its plethora of associated agencies opine about the scandal of world poverty, figures on inequality always pour forth. (Such figures, though, are always higher than the likely reality: see article) It is not bad enough, apparently, that enormous numbers of people have to subsist on less than a dollar a day. The claim that this makes in its own right on the compassion of the West for its fellow men is deemed, apparently, too puny. The real scandal, it seems, is that much of the world is vastly richer than that. The implication, and often enough the explicit claim, is that the one follows from the other: if only we in the West weren't so rich, so greedy for resources, so driven by material ambition—such purblind delinquent capitalists—the problem of global poverty would be half-way to being solved.
Equity at a price
Certain ideas about equality are woven into the fabric of the liberal state, and quite inseparable from it: first and foremost, equality before the law. But equality before the law, and some other kinds of liberal equality, can be universally granted without infringing anybody's rights. Economic equality cannot. A concern to level economic outcomes must express itself as policies that advance one group's interests at the expense of another's. This puts political and ethical limits on how far the drive for economic equality ought to go. (Strictly practical limits, as well, since too noble a determination to take from the rich to give to the poor will end up impoverishing everyone.) It also means that perfect economic equality should never be embraced, even implicitly, as an ideal. Perfect economic equality is a nightmare: nothing short of a totalitarian tyranny could ever hope to achieve it.
The preoccupation bordering on obsession with economic equality that one so often encounters at gatherings of anti-globalists, in the corridors of aid agencies and in socialist redoubts in backward parts of the world reflects a “lump of income” fallacy. This remarkably tenacious misconception is that there is only so much global income to go around. If the United States is consuming $10 trillion worth of goods and services each year, that is $10 trillion worth of goods and services that Africa cannot consume.
But goods and services are not just lying around waiting to be grabbed by the greediest or most muscular countries. Market economics is not a zero-sum game. America consumes $10 trillion worth of goods and services each year because it produces (not counting the current-account deficit of 5% or so of the total) $10 trillion of goods and services each year. Africa could produce and consume a lot more without America producing and consuming one jot less. It so happens that the case for more aid, provided of course that it is well spent, is strong—but the industrialised countries do not need to become any less rich before Africa can become a lot less poor. The wealth of the wealthy is not part of the problem.
To believe otherwise, however, is very much part of the problem. For much of the 20th century the developing countries were held back by an adapted socialist ideology that put global injustice, inequality and victimhood front and centre. Guided by this ideology, governments relied on planning, state monopolies, punitive taxes, grandiose programmes of public spending, and all the other apparatus of applied economic justice. They also repudiated liberal international trade, because the terms of global commerce were deemed exploitative and unfair. Concessions (that is, permission to retain trade barriers) were sought and granted in successive negotiating rounds of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. A kind of equity was thus deemed to have been achieved. The only drawback was that the countries stayed poor.
Towards the end of the century, many developing countries—China and India among them—finally threw off this victim's mantle and began to embrace wicked capitalism, both in the way they organised their domestic economies and in their approach to international trade. All of a sudden, they are a lot less poor, and it hasn't cost the West a cent. In Africa, too, minds are now changing, but far more slowly. Perhaps that has something to do with the chorus that goes up from Africa's supposed friends in the West, telling the region that its plight is all the fault of global inequality, "unfair trade" and an intrinsically unjust market system.
Heed the call
People and their governments in the West should heed the call of compassion, and respond with policies to help the world's poor, and indeed to advance the opportunities of the (much less desperately) poor in their own countries. Expressed that way, the egalitarian impulse is a good thing, worth nurturing. But a compassionate regard for the poor, as any good Marxist will tell you, is a very different thing from a zeal for economic "justice". That zeal, despite the exemplary fate of the socialist experiment at the end of the 20th century, guides a great deal of thinking still. And it continues to do nothing but harm.
claud:
this may be useful for tomorrow
Why Atheism?
interesting article against religion that is arguably as unsympathetic as the sort of fundamentalism you get on the other end of the scale. nevertheless, a good overview of the arguments against religion/god and a bit about atheism/agnosticism/humanism at the end.
interesting article against religion that is arguably as unsympathetic as the sort of fundamentalism you get on the other end of the scale. nevertheless, a good overview of the arguments against religion/god and a bit about atheism/agnosticism/humanism at the end.
Friday, August 26
aparna:
HOLLYWOOD, CA—Lindsay Lohan has one. So does Meg Ryan. Jennifer Aniston is reportedly looking into getting one. And Brook Burns has three. What are these red hot celebrity accessories? Frozen embryos: portable fertilized egg cells that can be stored in a trendy Sub-Zero refrigeration unit or toted around town in a range of miniature carryalls.
Hollywood baby boom
In recent years, Hollywood has been caught up in a baby boom. America's sweetheart Julia Roberts is now the mother of twins, Gwyneth Paltrow has her very own apple, and everyone's favorite pop tart, Britney Spears, is scheduled to deliver a 'Baby Fed' this fall. And those actresses that aren't having babies of their own are importing them from other countries.
And embryo makes three
But not every starlet is ready to add an infant to her collection of Jimmy Choo shoes and Balenciaga bags. What's a girl to do? Finally there is an answer, say Hollywood insiders. A growing number of celebs are adopting pre-born babies: fertilized zygotes that are preserved in liquid nitrogen at a cool -196 degrees Celsius.
The coolest accessory
And while some shy celebs feel most comfortable leaving their embryos to chill in the privacy of their Hollywood homes, others are taking the cool cell clusters out on the town, tucked away in super-insulated bags, tiny pocketbooks, even lockets.
A little Nicole?
Reality star Nicole Richie has been spotted taking her "embryette" out for a spin at the uber-cool Tinsel Town night spot, Baked Potato. A source close to the actress and aspiring singer says that her decision to tote a zygote has nothing to do with politics. "She's proud of her genetic material and this is her way of saying 'watch out world. I've got something really special in her.'"
Wanted: eggs to go
While stars like Ms. Richie are brandishing their own frozen embryos, other actresses are flocking to super trendy Nightlight in search of zygotes. Actress Jennifer Love Hewitt was reportedly spotted zygote shopping at Nightlight last week, while American Idol winner Carrie Underwood is said to have placed several calls to the location, inquiring about embryo prices and features. Fave celeb shopping destination Kitson is even said to be thinking about adding a collection of frozen embryos and matching carrying cases to its fall and winter line up.
I'd like to thank
Celebrity watchers say that frozen embryos are already shaping up to be the must have accessory at this years award shows. "Last year everyone was wearing faux fur shrugs. This year you'll see a lot of miniature purses and lockets," predicts one stylist to the stars. "They're small but they're really well insulated to keep the contents cool."
Hollywood baby boom
In recent years, Hollywood has been caught up in a baby boom. America's sweetheart Julia Roberts is now the mother of twins, Gwyneth Paltrow has her very own apple, and everyone's favorite pop tart, Britney Spears, is scheduled to deliver a 'Baby Fed' this fall. And those actresses that aren't having babies of their own are importing them from other countries.
And embryo makes three
But not every starlet is ready to add an infant to her collection of Jimmy Choo shoes and Balenciaga bags. What's a girl to do? Finally there is an answer, say Hollywood insiders. A growing number of celebs are adopting pre-born babies: fertilized zygotes that are preserved in liquid nitrogen at a cool -196 degrees Celsius.
The coolest accessory
And while some shy celebs feel most comfortable leaving their embryos to chill in the privacy of their Hollywood homes, others are taking the cool cell clusters out on the town, tucked away in super-insulated bags, tiny pocketbooks, even lockets.
A little Nicole?
Reality star Nicole Richie has been spotted taking her "embryette" out for a spin at the uber-cool Tinsel Town night spot, Baked Potato. A source close to the actress and aspiring singer says that her decision to tote a zygote has nothing to do with politics. "She's proud of her genetic material and this is her way of saying 'watch out world. I've got something really special in her.'"
Wanted: eggs to go
While stars like Ms. Richie are brandishing their own frozen embryos, other actresses are flocking to super trendy Nightlight in search of zygotes. Actress Jennifer Love Hewitt was reportedly spotted zygote shopping at Nightlight last week, while American Idol winner Carrie Underwood is said to have placed several calls to the location, inquiring about embryo prices and features. Fave celeb shopping destination Kitson is even said to be thinking about adding a collection of frozen embryos and matching carrying cases to its fall and winter line up.
I'd like to thank
Celebrity watchers say that frozen embryos are already shaping up to be the must have accessory at this years award shows. "Last year everyone was wearing faux fur shrugs. This year you'll see a lot of miniature purses and lockets," predicts one stylist to the stars. "They're small but they're really well insulated to keep the contents cool."
'liane:
Poem with very beautiful last verse. Just to make people (temporarily) happy haha.
The Gateway --A.D. Hope
Now the heart sings with all its thousand voices
To hear this city of cells, my body, sing.
The tree through the stiff clay at long last forces
Its thin strong roots and taps the secret spring.
And the sweet waters without intermission
Climb to the tips of its green tenement;
The breasts have borne the grace of their possession,
The lips have felt the pressure of content.
Here I come home: in this expected country
They know my name and speak it with delight.
I am the dream and you my gates of entry,
The means by which I waken into light.
The Gateway --A.D. Hope
Now the heart sings with all its thousand voices
To hear this city of cells, my body, sing.
The tree through the stiff clay at long last forces
Its thin strong roots and taps the secret spring.
And the sweet waters without intermission
Climb to the tips of its green tenement;
The breasts have borne the grace of their possession,
The lips have felt the pressure of content.
Here I come home: in this expected country
They know my name and speak it with delight.
I am the dream and you my gates of entry,
The means by which I waken into light.
Wednesday, August 24
claud:
just as you think he has nothing to say...
shakespeare does have something to say on the end of /heart of darkness/.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors,
As I foretold you, were all spirits and
Are melted into air, into thin air:
And, like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself,
Ye all which it inherit, shall dissolve
And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on, and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep.
-- prospero, /the tempest/
YAY PROSPERO (and the long blondes) LOVE!
Our revels now are ended. These our actors,
As I foretold you, were all spirits and
Are melted into air, into thin air:
And, like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself,
Ye all which it inherit, shall dissolve
And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on, and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep.
-- prospero, /the tempest/
YAY PROSPERO (and the long blondes) LOVE!
Tuesday, August 23
claud:
I have (2) things to say.
- THE LONG BLONDES THE LONG BLONDES OMG.
- moving house this saturday. update yourselves with my Brand New (real-life) Address by asking me through email; in person, on msn; checking my LJ if you've access to my friends-only posts; texting me- in the order of efficacy. y-y-yes e'mail is be-tt-tt-ter than looking for m-m-me I amtw-tch-tching fromm-mugmug-ng.
Sunday, August 21
claud:
on personal statement writing
del.icio.us/claudacity/resume
bookmarked some things with my delicious, you may want to browse through the 3 sites there- they focus on resume writing, but it's easy to see how that can be applied to personal statements.
bookmarked some things with my delicious, you may want to browse through the 3 sites there- they focus on resume writing, but it's easy to see how that can be applied to personal statements.
Saturday, August 20
'liane:
You all -have- to read this, if only purely for entertainment purposes. Nils Olav has just been promoted! The Norwegian Army is rather mad and also rather endearing.
claud:
how cool is this?!
Can't Wait for a Book? Paris Can Help - Yahoo! News
PARIS - Readers craving Homer, Baudelaire or Lewis Carroll in the middle of the night can get a quick fix at one of the French capital's five newly installed book vending machines.
and this is hunter s thompson's funeral
his ashes, sent up in 34 fireworks.
PARIS - Readers craving Homer, Baudelaire or Lewis Carroll in the middle of the night can get a quick fix at one of the French capital's five newly installed book vending machines.
and this is hunter s thompson's funeral
his ashes, sent up in 34 fireworks.
Friday, August 19
aparna:
heh yes this colour's called pepto-bismol pink in american magazines, and pepto-bismol is a type of medicine. don't know if it's the same one kelly's talking about.
omg i just had the most distressing half-hour ever, just now. my internet connection died, inexplicably, stayed dead for a while, and then was resurrected, inexplicably.
anyway. i think it was admirable of sharon to pull out of gaza, but issuing a statement like that in his speech -- about palestine bearing the burden of proof, true though it may be -- seems as though he's challenging palestine to do something, because he knows that if palestine attacks in any form, they'll come off worse internationally whereas up till now they've sort of been the victims. it's a bit un-classier than if he hadn't said things that seem like a challenge to palestine, such as "The world is waiting for the Palestinian response - a hand stretched out to peace or the fire of terror. To an outstretched hand we shall respond with an olive branch, but we shall fight fire with the harshest fire ever."
it's a bit like nicole kidman refusing to say anything about tom cruise after their divorce, which was Teh Classy, whereas jennifer aniston is, well, she's the victim because it's pretty obvious that brad's happily cavorting with The Hottest Angelina Jolie, but it was relatively unclassy of her to give an interview in Vanity Fair and be all publicly wronged. you know what i mean?
but either way, the gaza thing is a huge deal and it's really very admirable. although at the ground level it's a bit sad to see the millions of jews having to pack up their whole lives and leave. i wonder if it's any consolation to them that they're part of a historic change. it probably doesn't make much of a difference to most of them. maybe p.urvis is getting to me. sounds like his sort of opinion.
oh and. i just read an article in Time by kishore mahbubani, and some of what he says disturbs me greatly. his overwhelming confidence in the amazingness of ASEAN, and in the benignity of the US. he attributes the rise of asian societies/economies partly to the rise of the US, "the most benign power in human history" -- a pretty damn controversial statement right now. and he doesn't even qualify it. although i guess discussing the benignity of the US is rather out of the scope of the article. but still, it's so contentious that it demands atleast a little bit!
on the other hand, his statements about the asian advance (or lack thereof) on the cultural front really struck a chord. in the sense that asia is really making a mark economically, with asian products constituting almost 40% of world GDP but there's hardly a proportional stake in cultural industries such as film, tv, print media etc. but then it's pretty well-acknowledged that "a full belly seems more important than a free press" (from another article in the issue, about Park Chee Hung's rule in South Korea) so i guess it's on its way. eventually, eventually. so he made a very insightful statement that asians have yet to explain themselves in their own terms to the rest of the world.
maybe that's where fundamentalist violence is trying to go -- to gain enough attention to express their needs/situation. except that it's a rather primal, aggressive way of communicating a message. and it's a depressing method to have to resort to, obviously. but then the modern asia the articles are talking about are primarily south asia, east asia etc. not really the middle east. apparently it'll take around 9 years to remove the insurgency in iraq. did bush know that's what he signed up for 2 years ago?
ugh. i have killed a moth and some other small insect today. my stack of rough paper is very useful to smash against small-ish irritants. and moths, when crushed, become this sort of silver crushed thing. maybe their blood's silver. how cool is that. it wasn't a large moth of course. it was the tiny sort or else i wouldn't have dared go near it.
omg i just had the most distressing half-hour ever, just now. my internet connection died, inexplicably, stayed dead for a while, and then was resurrected, inexplicably.
anyway. i think it was admirable of sharon to pull out of gaza, but issuing a statement like that in his speech -- about palestine bearing the burden of proof, true though it may be -- seems as though he's challenging palestine to do something, because he knows that if palestine attacks in any form, they'll come off worse internationally whereas up till now they've sort of been the victims. it's a bit un-classier than if he hadn't said things that seem like a challenge to palestine, such as "The world is waiting for the Palestinian response - a hand stretched out to peace or the fire of terror. To an outstretched hand we shall respond with an olive branch, but we shall fight fire with the harshest fire ever."
it's a bit like nicole kidman refusing to say anything about tom cruise after their divorce, which was Teh Classy, whereas jennifer aniston is, well, she's the victim because it's pretty obvious that brad's happily cavorting with The Hottest Angelina Jolie, but it was relatively unclassy of her to give an interview in Vanity Fair and be all publicly wronged. you know what i mean?
but either way, the gaza thing is a huge deal and it's really very admirable. although at the ground level it's a bit sad to see the millions of jews having to pack up their whole lives and leave. i wonder if it's any consolation to them that they're part of a historic change. it probably doesn't make much of a difference to most of them. maybe p.urvis is getting to me. sounds like his sort of opinion.
oh and. i just read an article in Time by kishore mahbubani, and some of what he says disturbs me greatly. his overwhelming confidence in the amazingness of ASEAN, and in the benignity of the US. he attributes the rise of asian societies/economies partly to the rise of the US, "the most benign power in human history" -- a pretty damn controversial statement right now. and he doesn't even qualify it. although i guess discussing the benignity of the US is rather out of the scope of the article. but still, it's so contentious that it demands atleast a little bit!
on the other hand, his statements about the asian advance (or lack thereof) on the cultural front really struck a chord. in the sense that asia is really making a mark economically, with asian products constituting almost 40% of world GDP but there's hardly a proportional stake in cultural industries such as film, tv, print media etc. but then it's pretty well-acknowledged that "a full belly seems more important than a free press" (from another article in the issue, about Park Chee Hung's rule in South Korea) so i guess it's on its way. eventually, eventually. so he made a very insightful statement that asians have yet to explain themselves in their own terms to the rest of the world.
maybe that's where fundamentalist violence is trying to go -- to gain enough attention to express their needs/situation. except that it's a rather primal, aggressive way of communicating a message. and it's a depressing method to have to resort to, obviously. but then the modern asia the articles are talking about are primarily south asia, east asia etc. not really the middle east. apparently it'll take around 9 years to remove the insurgency in iraq. did bush know that's what he signed up for 2 years ago?
ugh. i have killed a moth and some other small insect today. my stack of rough paper is very useful to smash against small-ish irritants. and moths, when crushed, become this sort of silver crushed thing. maybe their blood's silver. how cool is that. it wasn't a large moth of course. it was the tiny sort or else i wouldn't have dared go near it.
'liane:
So after a long absence...
WE HAVE BEEN REVIVED.
Of sorts. I think the new template is incentive to post. Or maybe the fact that I'm sick at home and bored (no, I Did Not Pon). Anyway it is a nasty flu so I have been out of action for pretty much all of today--in fact I think I spent most of today sleeping. That or drinking barley. My mom had a tea party thing to celebrate one of her friend's 49th birthday (!!!!) but I have been unable to eat the chocolate cake. It's from Lana's bakery! So upsetting.
Anyhow the colour of the blog reminded me of the fever medicine I used to have when I was younger (the kids' sort... cherry flavoured I think but tasting terrible) hence this post. Sorry, Claud, I don't mean it as an insult. ;p
This is a poem by Louis Macneice, called "Prayer Before Birth".
In other news. Why is there so little to post about nowadays? =( Oh well anyway for all you applying-to-Cambridge people the equivalent of the Oxford Norrington Table is the Tompkins Table; google it and it should turn up.
Do you think that the word 'google' will start appearing in dictionaries any time soon?
This is Ariel Sharon's speech on the Gaza pullout, which I think it pretty admirable.
"With God's help this path shall be one of unity and not division, and not animosity between brothers, of unconditional love and not hatred."
WE HAVE BEEN REVIVED.
Of sorts. I think the new template is incentive to post. Or maybe the fact that I'm sick at home and bored (no, I Did Not Pon). Anyway it is a nasty flu so I have been out of action for pretty much all of today--in fact I think I spent most of today sleeping. That or drinking barley. My mom had a tea party thing to celebrate one of her friend's 49th birthday (!!!!) but I have been unable to eat the chocolate cake. It's from Lana's bakery! So upsetting.
Anyhow the colour of the blog reminded me of the fever medicine I used to have when I was younger (the kids' sort... cherry flavoured I think but tasting terrible) hence this post. Sorry, Claud, I don't mean it as an insult. ;p
This is a poem by Louis Macneice, called "Prayer Before Birth".
In other news. Why is there so little to post about nowadays? =( Oh well anyway for all you applying-to-Cambridge people the equivalent of the Oxford Norrington Table is the Tompkins Table; google it and it should turn up.
Do you think that the word 'google' will start appearing in dictionaries any time soon?
This is Ariel Sharon's speech on the Gaza pullout, which I think it pretty admirable.
"With God's help this path shall be one of unity and not division, and not animosity between brothers, of unconditional love and not hatred."
Thursday, August 18
claud:
norrington table updated
Norrington Table 2000-2005
here you go, from your resident oxford-watcher. disclaimer that the source is not official and could be some fellow fudging around with statistics for fun.
here you go, from your resident oxford-watcher. disclaimer that the source is not official and could be some fellow fudging around with statistics for fun.
Saturday, August 13
claud:
trying out a colour scheme generator.
claud:
from my post on the yahoogroups.
thanks to project gutenburg, three of our texts are available online in txt form- so quotation searching has become that much easier!
silas marner
return of the native
heart of darkness
and the eserver drama collection brings you antony & cleopatra
for robert frost's poetry, ordered by publication.
unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate a txt copy of who's afraid of virginia woolf, this is probably because it is too new (like 1960's new) to have been released into the public domain. hope this helps, and good luck. :)
EDIT: as grace and vivien were thoroughly puzzled as to why I'd sent out those links, the advantage of an e-text is that it can be searched for keywords by using the aptly named Find function (ctrl+f). so if you're looking for quotes on fate, just enter fate and hit search- it will take you to the first instance of fate, then 'find next' will take you to the next, and so on. this is obviously no substitute for plowing through the text like we've been advised to do, but if you're compiling a soft copy of quotes it may be easier to just copy and paste rather than retype whole bits. just searching fate won't get you all the quotes on fate, because hardy/conrad never considered signposting their clever bits with keywords! so for best results, plow. (and she cropped, bah.)
silas marner
return of the native
heart of darkness
and the eserver drama collection brings you antony & cleopatra
for robert frost's poetry, ordered by publication.
unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate a txt copy of who's afraid of virginia woolf, this is probably because it is too new (like 1960's new) to have been released into the public domain. hope this helps, and good luck. :)
EDIT: as grace and vivien were thoroughly puzzled as to why I'd sent out those links, the advantage of an e-text is that it can be searched for keywords by using the aptly named Find function (ctrl+f). so if you're looking for quotes on fate, just enter fate and hit search- it will take you to the first instance of fate, then 'find next' will take you to the next, and so on. this is obviously no substitute for plowing through the text like we've been advised to do, but if you're compiling a soft copy of quotes it may be easier to just copy and paste rather than retype whole bits. just searching fate won't get you all the quotes on fate, because hardy/conrad never considered signposting their clever bits with keywords! so for best results, plow. (and she cropped, bah.)
Tuesday, August 2
claud:
for oxford applicants
Oxford University Student Union : Prospective Students: Alternative Prospectus
"The Alternative Prospectus is THE definitive guide to student life at Oxford - written by current students, it provides an unrivalled insight into what its really like to study and live here. By reading it, you'll gain an honest and first-hand insight into student life...."
"The Alternative Prospectus is THE definitive guide to student life at Oxford - written by current students, it provides an unrivalled insight into what its really like to study and live here. By reading it, you'll gain an honest and first-hand insight into student life...."
Monday, August 1
claud:
Pratchett takes swipe at Rowling