Pavilion Digest: May 2006

A plethora of perplexing pavilion posts. The Pavilion Annex thread, the Pavilion Discussion thread, and monthly digests of all messages from the Pavilion.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Barney Dannelke
Posts: 894
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 10:16 pm
Location: Allentown, PA.

New horrors!

Postby Barney Dannelke » Wed May 31, 2006 6:55 pm

Name: Barney Dannelke
Source: unca20060606.htm
Hey gang,

Here is today's extraordinarily bad idea. ;-)

- Barney

Granfaloon, PA.

p.s. - and thank you for the kind words Rob. YOU can be my friend. "Friend" should be heard as spoken by Karloff in The Bride of Frankenstein. ;-)

Posts: 386
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 3:42 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Postby BrianSiano » Wed May 31, 2006 7:19 pm

Name: Brian Siano
Source: unca20060606.htm
I finally read _Lolita_, and I posted a mini-essay over at my blog:
Utterly amazing book.

Re that soldier who's suing Michael Moore. I don't know the particulars, but I have no respect for Michael Moore anymore. I _used_ to: I wrote a good review of his book "Downsize This!" for the _Inquirer_. But _Farenheit 911_ was a severely dishonest film, avoiding real _politics_ to pander to conspiracy fans and radical poseurs.

So Barney's got a Blog. I'm not exactly certain what blogs are supposed to be. They're a neat way for all of us Must-Write-Or-Go-Mad types to broadcast out thoughts, and maybe find an appreciative audience. But it's easy to get drowned out, and depending on the system, they don't lend themselves to extended conversations or even entertaining arguments. (Sometimes, this can interfere with their social function, but that'd take too long to explain.) The "news" blogs tend to be ideological echo chambers, and while there's a clinical interest in seeing how rumors get started, and which "witty" remarks occur to nearly everybody, they're only of use as pointers to substantial material.

Re Alex Krislov's comments on unfinished or incomplete works: Right on.

User avatar
Bud Webster
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 4:28 pm
Location: Virginia


Postby Bud Webster » Wed May 31, 2006 7:19 pm

Name: Bud Webster
Source: unca20060606.htm
No. The specific problem here is NOT that the plaintiff charges he was offended, but that Moore deliberately cut the sequence of the film to indicate that his opinions were other than what they really are.

And yeah, if this is the case, the guy has every right to be offended AND to take action, if only for slander. If I were offended, I could bitch about it, but am not entitled to legal action.

Return to “The Art Deco Dining Pavilion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests