Ishmael!

PissBottleMan

decides2dream wrote:

yea..i got that...but that STILL doesn't hold true to me. a 'magnificent piece of literature' NEEDS no other sources to make it so. it simply is.

I agree with that statement.

However, I enjoyed the read...it helped cement things that I believed to be true and opened my eyes to others.

Your literary standards are obviously higher and, apparently, more advanced.

Cheers,

PBM

Juberoo

Helen I'm curious what you thought about Daniel Quinn's well voiced opinion that we shouldn't be offering aid to food impoverished countries because we are just holding off the inevitable. He feels that if we let these cultures die out naturally from starvation, we will help the earth recover quicker from the damage mankind does to it.

I'm listening with anticipation for your response.

catefrances

Juberoo wrote:

Helen I'm curious what you thought about Daniel Quinn's well voiced opinion that we shouldn't be offering aid to food impoverished countries because we are just holding off the inevitable. He feels that if we let these cultures die out naturally from starvation, we will help the earth recover quicker from the damage mankind does to it.

I'm listening with anticipation for your response.

might i suggest that if quinn is so concerned about unsustainable population growth that he stop eating right now.

dunkman

decides2dream wrote:

for me, a book should be well-written period. particularly if you are writing fiction, there should be something to engage the reader. i had heard/read a lot of hype about this book. i was expecting it to have some 'profound message' and/or be brilliantly written. i hoped for both...i got neither.

you written many books then?

Heineken Helen

skyeriverwinter wrote:

strange... i just started reading this book and was going to post about it...

I won't give anything away then so.

Heineken Helen

AllNiteThing wrote:

Amazing book, amazing artist. Don't understand how some people can talk down about it, but to each their own I guess. If you're looking for 'solutions', at least from Quinn, look at some of his other work, especially 'Beyond Civilization' (think that's it). It kind of builds on Ishmael/MyIshmael/Story of B. I actually MUCH prefer 'Story of B'. Ishmael kind of introduces you to the ideas and opens your eyes to things you may never have thought of. B really extrapolates on that and takes it to the next level.

Oh gimme time, lol. I'm already halfway through another book already which I only started going home from work yesterday 'call of the wild' by Guy Grieves... it's absolutely FANTASTIC!!!!!

Heineken Helen

AllNiteThing wrote:

HH....check out this site if you haven't already.

http://www.ishmael.com/welcome.cfm

Take a look at the 'questions and answers' section. DQ answers all kinds of questions on population, war, health, environmentalism, religion, etc etc. A wealth of information to follow up on the themes from his books and to get his take on all kinds of pertinent topics.

Thank you, I'll have a look at that later.

Heineken Helen

AllNiteThing wrote:

You are SOOO off-base, blah blah blah. j/k I actually completely agree with everything you just said...amazing, eh? For me and probably most of his supporters, this was the first time it was all 'put together', per se. Probably for the fact that it is fairly simple to grasp and not boring (yet normally thorough) non-fiction. As I've tried expanding my horizons in the literary sense in this line of thought, I can look back and see how basic Ishmael/DQ is. But I also look at it fondly as one of those life changing books. Without it I don't know if it would have sparked me to do further research on certain topics or be as passionate about some things.

It probably holds more value as a starting-off point than it would to someone who's already been exploring those themes on their own.

To be honest, when I started the book... I was REALLY really excited about it. I was reading 'on the road' before it but had to rush through that cos I knew Ishmael was waiting for me . I thought 'this is the book that's going to change my life'. I was slightly disappointed when it finished... cos it didn't. It's made me more determined to find the one that will though so maybe in that way, it will.

Heineken Helen

Juberoo wrote:

Helen I'm curious what you thought about Daniel Quinn's well voiced opinion that we shouldn't be offering aid to food impoverished countries because we are just holding off the inevitable. He feels that if we let these cultures die out naturally from starvation, we will help the earth recover quicker from the damage mankind does to it.

I'm listening with anticipation for your response.

good question... sorry for leaving you listening with anticipation for almost 8 hours... you must be STARVING :eek:

Anyway, it DOES bring up a good point... and one that challenges everything I've always believed. I'm not quite sure. I think it's quite a conflicting thing to say though... because as 'takers' surely we wouldn't be overly willing to help out others? And, if you think about it, it's generally the wannabe LEAVERS who are more charitable.

Hmm... it's quite interesting actually. One I'll have to consider further. How about you Jubaroo? What do you think about it?

Heineken Helen

http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/0892818662/102-9122555-0716129?SubscriptionId=0AM07842GGE1QVDN6KR2

Anyone read that one? Sounds interesting if ya read the first review.

decides2dream

dunkman wrote:

you written many books then?

have you?

are you of the belief that if you personally have not done the same one is not allowed to have a critical or informed opinion?


if i HAD written a book and had it published, my work would be under the same scrutiny and rightly so. i do believe one gets PAID for writing books, and as any 'employment' one's work does get scrutinized...and as i have paid my own hard-earned money for said book....yes, i believe that allows me to have an opinion. hell, even if i borrowed the damn thing...when one put's their work out into the world...it is there to ben enjoyed, and absolutely, critiqued. like all artists......visual, musical, literary or otherwise.

Juberoo

Heineken Helen wrote:

good question... sorry for leaving you listening with anticipation for almost 8 hours... you must be STARVING :eek:

Anyway, it DOES bring up a good point... and one that challenges everything I've always believed. I'm not quite sure. I think it's quite a conflicting thing to say though... because as 'takers' surely we wouldn't be overly willing to help out others? And, if you think about it, it's generally the wannabe LEAVERS who are more charitable.

Hmm... it's quite interesting actually. One I'll have to consider further. How about you Jubaroo? What do you think about it?

I think it is absurd. We have come too far as a species to ignore simple solutions. The earth is meant to be filled. It is a large planet. It has a purpose. We are not a species that lives by an inherent "survival of the fittest". We are a species that thinks, solves and is connected. Feeding people in less fruitfull areas is not the problem. Society's breakdown is.

Heineken Helen

Juberoo wrote:

I think it is absurd. We have come too far as a species to ignore simple solutions. The earth is meant to be filled. It is a large planet. It has a purpose. We are not a species that lives by an inherent "survival of the fittest". We are a species that thinks, solves and is connected. Feeding people in less fruitfull areas is not the problem. Society's breakdown is.

the earth is meant to be filled? And you think the earths purpose is for US to fill it? hence you follow the belief that the world, the universe and everything in it was 'created'/'evolved'/whatever for us?

So how is society's breakdown as you put it the problem? And what solution do YOU suggest?

AllNiteThing

Juberoo wrote:

I think it is absurd. We have come too far as a species to ignore simple solutions. The earth is meant to be filled.

Not by human mass it's not. The earth has the ability to sustain a varied, diverse cross section of life. The composite earth ecosystem cannot support JUST humans just as it cannot support JUST sharks or JUST bees. To say the earth is meant to filled is quite arbitrary, but if you mean the earth is meant to be filled with humans (or human mass), then I strongly disagree.

Juberoo wrote:

It is a large planet. It has a purpose.

What (divine?) purpose may that be???

Juberoo wrote:

We are not a species that lives by an inherent "survival of the fittest". We are a species that thinks, solves and is connected. Feeding people in less fruitfull areas is not the problem.

I think for the greater part of our existence and evolution, a couple million years at least, we DID live by the survival of the fittest. I think we have also always used thinking and problem solving as tools to survive. That and mother nature's survival of the fittest aren't mutually exclusive as you try to make them out to be. Part of what made us unique was our problem solving. Hell, that's the only thing that could give us a leg up in hunting woolly mammoths and the like back in the day. It was the 'taker' culture developed in Mesopotamia that violently overtook the tribal ones of the day (and presently). It is this culture, which Quinn says, that will eventually lead to our species' extinction. It is unfit and unhealthy within our ecosystem. Tribal society was what worked and had worked for hundreds of thousands of years.

Juberoo wrote:

Society's breakdown is.

Please explain further.

AllNiteThing

Heineken Helen wrote:

the earth is meant to be filled? And you think the earths purpose is for US to fill it? hence you follow the belief that the world, the universe and everything in it was 'created'/'evolved'/whatever for us?

So how is society's breakdown as you put it the problem? And what solution do YOU suggest?

Beat me to it.

AllNiteThing

catefrances wrote:

might i suggest that if quinn is so concerned about unsustainable population growth that he stop eating right now.

That doesn't make sense (not sure if you're serious here). What you should say is that he shouldn't have any children, at least not more than two so as not to contribute to the problem.

dunkman

decides2dream wrote:

have you?

are you of the belief that if you personally have not done the same one is not allowed to have a critical or informed opinion?


if i HAD written a book and had it published, my work would be under the same scrutiny and rightly so. i do believe one gets PAID for writing books, and as any 'employment' one's work does get scrutinized...and as i have paid my own hard-earned money for said book....yes, i believe that allows me to have an opinion. hell, even if i borrowed the damn thing...when one put's their work out into the world...it is there to ben enjoyed, and absolutely, critiqued. like all artists......visual, musical, literary or otherwise.

the work you do gets scrutinised by your employers does it not.. peers, people with similar skills and experience? not say a shoe salesmen or chemist.

i.e. it wouldnt be right for me to scrutinise the work of a nano-technologist, but i agree it would be ok for his colleagues to do so.

i get what your saying though, i really do


p.s. i've written 9 books... all of them are filthy and lewd.

Heineken Helen

dunkman wrote:

the work you do gets scrutinised by your employers does it not.. peers, people with similar skills and experience? not say a shoe salesmen or chemist.

i.e. it wouldnt be right for me to scrutinise the work of a nano-technologist, but i agree it would be ok for his colleagues to do so.

i get what your saying though, i really do


p.s. i've written 9 books... all of them are filthy and lewd.

and crap more than likely

decides2dream

dunkman wrote:

the work you do gets scrutinised by your employers does it not.. peers, people with similar skills and experience? not say a shoe salesmen or chemist.

i.e. it wouldnt be right for me to scrutinise the work of a nano-technologist, but i agree it would be ok for his colleagues to do so.

i get what your saying though, i really do


p.s. i've written 9 books... all of them are filthy and lewd.

sure. although none the less, when diswcussing the arts...they DO get scrutinized, and again, rightly so...by their 'audience.' paintins, drawings, photographs, music, films, theatre...and on and on....ALL get srutinized/critiqued by their audience/general public who choose to view/listen. some may be more knowledgeable than others to offer said critiques, but none the less, each and evry one of us have a right to an opinion...and the right to express this opinion.

i do find it interesting that you of all people make such comments, b/c i do know how much you so enjoy to 'critique' a certain place and it's people....with sure, lots of general knowledge, but none firsthand. hehehe.


point being, we ALL have that right. we also have the right to disregard and/or disagree with others' opinions as well.

Blackeyedangel

I can already tell I would greatly detest this book.