May 01, 2004
To the person who keeps
To the person who keeps finding their way here whilst looking for a translation for 'de recta non tolerandum sunt,' it means NO ASSHOLES WILL BE TOLERATED.
That, of course, is a loose translation. In Latin 'Recta' actually means this. This is the motto the Python Lads and if you look carefully at the picture,
you can clearly get the gist of what they were going after. If the
Pythons were looking for a literal translation, they would have gone
for something like "intestinum."
(Realize that not everything in our modern world has a Latin name
simply because most of the stuff in our modern world---like
rectums---weren't thought to exist back then. Back then your intestine
covered everything from your gullet to your bum.) But intestinum a. is
a stupid word and b. doesn't make any sense and isn't easy to get the
gist of if you're not fluent in Latin, right? You probably sussed out
"tolerandum" as the Latin word for "tolerate" and you knew "non"
probably meant that something would not be tolerated, but what? If they
used intestinum, you'd be thinking, "Intestines will not be tolerated?"
What the hell does that mean? Here's the Etymology Yellow Brick Road:
recta=rectum=lower part of your intestine=assholes. That's what
wouldn't be tolerated. There is no Latin word for assholes. They
improvised.
I like Monty Python, and I laughed when I read it, soooo, I took their
motto for my own. I'm a plagiarist, I know, but hell, this is the Internet.
Did you honestly expect any better?
There's an email link over on the left hand side-- next time click on
it and ASK.
That, of course, is a loose translation. In Latin 'Recta' actually means this. This is the motto the Python Lads and if you look carefully at the picture,
you can clearly get the gist of what they were going after. If the
Pythons were looking for a literal translation, they would have gone
for something like "intestinum."
(Realize that not everything in our modern world has a Latin name
simply because most of the stuff in our modern world---like
rectums---weren't thought to exist back then. Back then your intestine
covered everything from your gullet to your bum.) But intestinum a. is
a stupid word and b. doesn't make any sense and isn't easy to get the
gist of if you're not fluent in Latin, right? You probably sussed out
"tolerandum" as the Latin word for "tolerate" and you knew "non"
probably meant that something would not be tolerated, but what? If they
used intestinum, you'd be thinking, "Intestines will not be tolerated?"
What the hell does that mean? Here's the Etymology Yellow Brick Road:
recta=rectum=lower part of your intestine=assholes. That's what
wouldn't be tolerated. There is no Latin word for assholes. They
improvised.
I like Monty Python, and I laughed when I read it, soooo, I took their
motto for my own. I'm a plagiarist, I know, but hell, this is the Internet.
Did you honestly expect any better?
There's an email link over on the left hand side-- next time click on
it and ASK.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.
To the person who keeps
To the person who keeps finding their way here whilst looking for a translation for 'de recta non tolerandum sunt,' it means NO ASSHOLES WILL BE TOLERATED.
That, of course, is a loose translation. In Latin 'Recta' actually means this. This is the motto the Python Lads and if you look carefully at the picture,
you can clearly get the gist of what they were going after. If the
Pythons were looking for a literal translation, they would have gone
for something like "intestinum."
(Realize that not everything in our modern world has a Latin name
simply because most of the stuff in our modern world---like
rectums---weren't thought to exist back then. Back then your intestine
covered everything from your gullet to your bum.) But intestinum a. is
a stupid word and b. doesn't make any sense and isn't easy to get the
gist of if you're not fluent in Latin, right? You probably sussed out
"tolerandum" as the Latin word for "tolerate" and you knew "non"
probably meant that something would not be tolerated, but what? If they
used intestinum, you'd be thinking, "Intestines will not be tolerated?"
What the hell does that mean? Here's the Etymology Yellow Brick Road:
recta=rectum=lower part of your intestine=assholes. That's what
wouldn't be tolerated. There is no Latin word for assholes. They
improvised.
I like Monty Python, and I laughed when I read it, soooo, I took their
motto for my own. I'm a plagiarist, I know, but hell, this is the Internet.
Did you honestly expect any better?
There's an email link over on the left hand side-- next time click on
it and ASK.
That, of course, is a loose translation. In Latin 'Recta' actually means this. This is the motto the Python Lads and if you look carefully at the picture,
you can clearly get the gist of what they were going after. If the
Pythons were looking for a literal translation, they would have gone
for something like "intestinum."
(Realize that not everything in our modern world has a Latin name
simply because most of the stuff in our modern world---like
rectums---weren't thought to exist back then. Back then your intestine
covered everything from your gullet to your bum.) But intestinum a. is
a stupid word and b. doesn't make any sense and isn't easy to get the
gist of if you're not fluent in Latin, right? You probably sussed out
"tolerandum" as the Latin word for "tolerate" and you knew "non"
probably meant that something would not be tolerated, but what? If they
used intestinum, you'd be thinking, "Intestines will not be tolerated?"
What the hell does that mean? Here's the Etymology Yellow Brick Road:
recta=rectum=lower part of your intestine=assholes. That's what
wouldn't be tolerated. There is no Latin word for assholes. They
improvised.
I like Monty Python, and I laughed when I read it, soooo, I took their
motto for my own. I'm a plagiarist, I know, but hell, this is the Internet.
Did you honestly expect any better?
There's an email link over on the left hand side-- next time click on
it and ASK.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.
The full transcript can be
The full transcript can be found here.
My favorite bit:
{Emphasis mine}
Cringe-inducing bit that I'm sure the media will be ALL over:
Bush said "Abu Ghraib" three times and used three different
pronounciations. He only got it right on the last time---barely. As the
husband commented: "That's positively Freudian." I agree. Overall, it
was a good speech that outlined the plan quite clearly. It's lacking in
specifics, but those specifics, like the planned handover and the new
Iraqi leadership, have yet to be determined. They're coming down to the
wire, of course, but it would be foolhardy for Bush to line his ducks
up, announce them to the public only to have them change. And with
that, I bid you a'dieu for the evening.
My favorite bit:
Our enemies in Iraq are good at filling hospitals, but they don't build any.
They can incite men to murder and suicide, but they cannot inspire men
to live in hope and add to the progress of their country. The
terrorists only influence is violence and their only agenda is death.
Our agenda, in contrast, is freedom and independence, security and
prosperity for the Iraqi people.
{Emphasis mine}
Cringe-inducing bit that I'm sure the media will be ALL over:
A new Iraq will also need a humane, well-supervised prison
system. Under the dictator, prisons like Abu Ghraib were symbols of
death and torture. That same prison became a symbol of disgraceful
conduct by a few American troops who dishonored our country and
disregarded our values. America will fund the construction of a modern
maximum security prison. When that prison is completed, detainees at
Abu Ghraib will be relocated. Then with the approval of the Iraqi
government, we will demolish the Abu Ghraib Prison as a fitting symbol
of Iraq's new beginning.
Bush said "Abu Ghraib" three times and used three different
pronounciations. He only got it right on the last time---barely. As the
husband commented: "That's positively Freudian." I agree. Overall, it
was a good speech that outlined the plan quite clearly. It's lacking in
specifics, but those specifics, like the planned handover and the new
Iraqi leadership, have yet to be determined. They're coming down to the
wire, of course, but it would be foolhardy for Bush to line his ducks
up, announce them to the public only to have them change. And with
that, I bid you a'dieu for the evening.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:30 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.
The full transcript can be
The full transcript can be found here.
My favorite bit:
{Emphasis mine}
Cringe-inducing bit that I'm sure the media will be ALL over:
Bush said "Abu Ghraib" three times and used three different
pronounciations. He only got it right on the last time---barely. As the
husband commented: "That's positively Freudian." I agree. Overall, it
was a good speech that outlined the plan quite clearly. It's lacking in
specifics, but those specifics, like the planned handover and the new
Iraqi leadership, have yet to be determined. They're coming down to the
wire, of course, but it would be foolhardy for Bush to line his ducks
up, announce them to the public only to have them change. And with
that, I bid you a'dieu for the evening.
My favorite bit:
Our enemies in Iraq are good at filling hospitals, but they don't build any.
They can incite men to murder and suicide, but they cannot inspire men
to live in hope and add to the progress of their country. The
terrorists only influence is violence and their only agenda is death.
Our agenda, in contrast, is freedom and independence, security and
prosperity for the Iraqi people.
{Emphasis mine}
Cringe-inducing bit that I'm sure the media will be ALL over:
A new Iraq will also need a humane, well-supervised prison
system. Under the dictator, prisons like Abu Ghraib were symbols of
death and torture. That same prison became a symbol of disgraceful
conduct by a few American troops who dishonored our country and
disregarded our values. America will fund the construction of a modern
maximum security prison. When that prison is completed, detainees at
Abu Ghraib will be relocated. Then with the approval of the Iraqi
government, we will demolish the Abu Ghraib Prison as a fitting symbol
of Iraq's new beginning.
Bush said "Abu Ghraib" three times and used three different
pronounciations. He only got it right on the last time---barely. As the
husband commented: "That's positively Freudian." I agree. Overall, it
was a good speech that outlined the plan quite clearly. It's lacking in
specifics, but those specifics, like the planned handover and the new
Iraqi leadership, have yet to be determined. They're coming down to the
wire, of course, but it would be foolhardy for Bush to line his ducks
up, announce them to the public only to have them change. And with
that, I bid you a'dieu for the evening.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:30 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.
Hmmph. I know. It sounds
Hmmph.
I know. It sounds like I'm ticked. Well, I was. Here I was completely
adept at futzing around with this thing---and it had taken me months to
get to a competent level---and they go and change everything. Well,
FINE! Go and change everything, why don't you? Fiddle with the
templates and all that! See if I care! {slams door}
But, the thing is, now that I've looked around a wee bit, well, much
like a spouse on the erroneous end of an argument, I've decided I like
some of the changes. They've now enabled comments, so I don't have to
have this Haloscan stuff anymore (far be it from me to criticize a free
service, but, dudes, it's about friggin' time!). They also have regular
permalinks available for every post! Woohoo. Hit the little # sign next
to my name at the end of this post and voila!
that specific post will appear on a fresh page. Maybe someone will
finally link me as a result. They also have a boatload of new
templates, so we'll have to see if I get rid of this hideous orange and
red concotion and pick something different. Still, there are some
drawbacks. There's no trackback, so I'll probably keep that feature
from Haloscan if that's possible. I don't think I'll be able to ban
anyone if they leave a nasty comment. There's no 'main' link, unless I
add one---somehow. And, yes, it's still
a Blogger blog. But it's free and until the server issue is resolved,
there's no sense in moving over to a different software package. I'm
still scared of Moveable Type. I'm breaking out in hives just thinking
about switching over. Ugh. Anyway, expect some changes over the next
little while. I'll try to keep the upheaval to a minimum.
I know. It sounds like I'm ticked. Well, I was. Here I was completely
adept at futzing around with this thing---and it had taken me months to
get to a competent level---and they go and change everything. Well,
FINE! Go and change everything, why don't you? Fiddle with the
templates and all that! See if I care! {slams door}
But, the thing is, now that I've looked around a wee bit, well, much
like a spouse on the erroneous end of an argument, I've decided I like
some of the changes. They've now enabled comments, so I don't have to
have this Haloscan stuff anymore (far be it from me to criticize a free
service, but, dudes, it's about friggin' time!). They also have regular
permalinks available for every post! Woohoo. Hit the little # sign next
to my name at the end of this post and voila!
that specific post will appear on a fresh page. Maybe someone will
finally link me as a result. They also have a boatload of new
templates, so we'll have to see if I get rid of this hideous orange and
red concotion and pick something different. Still, there are some
drawbacks. There's no trackback, so I'll probably keep that feature
from Haloscan if that's possible. I don't think I'll be able to ban
anyone if they leave a nasty comment. There's no 'main' link, unless I
add one---somehow. And, yes, it's still
a Blogger blog. But it's free and until the server issue is resolved,
there's no sense in moving over to a different software package. I'm
still scared of Moveable Type. I'm breaking out in hives just thinking
about switching over. Ugh. Anyway, expect some changes over the next
little while. I'll try to keep the upheaval to a minimum.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.
Hmmph. I know. It sounds
Hmmph.
I know. It sounds like I'm ticked. Well, I was. Here I was completely
adept at futzing around with this thing---and it had taken me months to
get to a competent level---and they go and change everything. Well,
FINE! Go and change everything, why don't you? Fiddle with the
templates and all that! See if I care! {slams door}
But, the thing is, now that I've looked around a wee bit, well, much
like a spouse on the erroneous end of an argument, I've decided I like
some of the changes. They've now enabled comments, so I don't have to
have this Haloscan stuff anymore (far be it from me to criticize a free
service, but, dudes, it's about friggin' time!). They also have regular
permalinks available for every post! Woohoo. Hit the little # sign next
to my name at the end of this post and voila!
that specific post will appear on a fresh page. Maybe someone will
finally link me as a result. They also have a boatload of new
templates, so we'll have to see if I get rid of this hideous orange and
red concotion and pick something different. Still, there are some
drawbacks. There's no trackback, so I'll probably keep that feature
from Haloscan if that's possible. I don't think I'll be able to ban
anyone if they leave a nasty comment. There's no 'main' link, unless I
add one---somehow. And, yes, it's still
a Blogger blog. But it's free and until the server issue is resolved,
there's no sense in moving over to a different software package. I'm
still scared of Moveable Type. I'm breaking out in hives just thinking
about switching over. Ugh. Anyway, expect some changes over the next
little while. I'll try to keep the upheaval to a minimum.
I know. It sounds like I'm ticked. Well, I was. Here I was completely
adept at futzing around with this thing---and it had taken me months to
get to a competent level---and they go and change everything. Well,
FINE! Go and change everything, why don't you? Fiddle with the
templates and all that! See if I care! {slams door}
But, the thing is, now that I've looked around a wee bit, well, much
like a spouse on the erroneous end of an argument, I've decided I like
some of the changes. They've now enabled comments, so I don't have to
have this Haloscan stuff anymore (far be it from me to criticize a free
service, but, dudes, it's about friggin' time!). They also have regular
permalinks available for every post! Woohoo. Hit the little # sign next
to my name at the end of this post and voila!
that specific post will appear on a fresh page. Maybe someone will
finally link me as a result. They also have a boatload of new
templates, so we'll have to see if I get rid of this hideous orange and
red concotion and pick something different. Still, there are some
drawbacks. There's no trackback, so I'll probably keep that feature
from Haloscan if that's possible. I don't think I'll be able to ban
anyone if they leave a nasty comment. There's no 'main' link, unless I
add one---somehow. And, yes, it's still
a Blogger blog. But it's free and until the server issue is resolved,
there's no sense in moving over to a different software package. I'm
still scared of Moveable Type. I'm breaking out in hives just thinking
about switching over. Ugh. Anyway, expect some changes over the next
little while. I'll try to keep the upheaval to a minimum.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.
--- Ritalin Backlash in Cake
--- Ritalin Backlash in Cake Eater Country.
Sidewalk chalk is a wonderful thing. It gives the children the chance
to hone their fine sense of chiaroscuro on hopscotch squares while they
get a bit of fresh air at the same time. A great thing for parents and
for their wee ones. Today, however, on our walk through Cake Eater
Country, it seems someone had decided that sidewalk chalk was as good a
tool as spray paint for starting a movement. What phrase was scribbled
across the pavement? No, it wasn't "All Your Base Belong Are Belong To
Us." It was Hyper is Good!
UPDATE: 05/01/2004 The husband informs me that I screwed up the "All Your
Base" thing. And Yeah, upon further review it does look as if I goofed
it pretty badly---but for a sentence with numerous grammatical errors,
how the hell was I supposed to know and why should I care? I don't keep
up on obscure movements. "All your base are belong to us." is what it's supposed to be.
Forgive me Father, I am a worm...
Sidewalk chalk is a wonderful thing. It gives the children the chance
to hone their fine sense of chiaroscuro on hopscotch squares while they
get a bit of fresh air at the same time. A great thing for parents and
for their wee ones. Today, however, on our walk through Cake Eater
Country, it seems someone had decided that sidewalk chalk was as good a
tool as spray paint for starting a movement. What phrase was scribbled
across the pavement? No, it wasn't "All Your Base Belong Are Belong To
Us." It was Hyper is Good!
UPDATE: 05/01/2004 The husband informs me that I screwed up the "All Your
Base" thing. And Yeah, upon further review it does look as if I goofed
it pretty badly---but for a sentence with numerous grammatical errors,
how the hell was I supposed to know and why should I care? I don't keep
up on obscure movements. "All your base are belong to us." is what it's supposed to be.
Forgive me Father, I am a worm...
Posted by: Kathy at
09:11 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.
--- Ritalin Backlash in Cake
--- Ritalin Backlash in Cake Eater Country.
Sidewalk chalk is a wonderful thing. It gives the children the chance
to hone their fine sense of chiaroscuro on hopscotch squares while they
get a bit of fresh air at the same time. A great thing for parents and
for their wee ones. Today, however, on our walk through Cake Eater
Country, it seems someone had decided that sidewalk chalk was as good a
tool as spray paint for starting a movement. What phrase was scribbled
across the pavement? No, it wasn't "All Your Base Belong Are Belong To
Us." It was Hyper is Good!
UPDATE: 05/01/2004 The husband informs me that I screwed up the "All Your
Base" thing. And Yeah, upon further review it does look as if I goofed
it pretty badly---but for a sentence with numerous grammatical errors,
how the hell was I supposed to know and why should I care? I don't keep
up on obscure movements. "All your base are belong to us." is what it's supposed to be.
Forgive me Father, I am a worm...
Sidewalk chalk is a wonderful thing. It gives the children the chance
to hone their fine sense of chiaroscuro on hopscotch squares while they
get a bit of fresh air at the same time. A great thing for parents and
for their wee ones. Today, however, on our walk through Cake Eater
Country, it seems someone had decided that sidewalk chalk was as good a
tool as spray paint for starting a movement. What phrase was scribbled
across the pavement? No, it wasn't "All Your Base Belong Are Belong To
Us." It was Hyper is Good!
UPDATE: 05/01/2004 The husband informs me that I screwed up the "All Your
Base" thing. And Yeah, upon further review it does look as if I goofed
it pretty badly---but for a sentence with numerous grammatical errors,
how the hell was I supposed to know and why should I care? I don't keep
up on obscure movements. "All your base are belong to us." is what it's supposed to be.
Forgive me Father, I am a worm...
Posted by: Kathy at
09:11 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.
God, I've been trolling for
God, I've been trolling for a Silly German story for a while now. And thanks to Electric Venom and Apropos of Something, I have one!
Wow. Talk about sheltered.
Childless couple told to try sex
A German couple who went to a fertility clinic after eight years of
marriage have found out why they are still childless - they weren't
having sex.
The University Clinic of Lubek said they had never heard of a case like
it after examining the couple who went to see them last month for
fertility tests.
Doctors subjected them to a series of examinations and found they were
both apparently fertile, and should have had no trouble conceiving.
A clinic spokesman said: "When we asked them how often they had had
sex, they looked blank, and said: "What do you mean?".
"We are not talking retarded people here, but a couple who were brought
up in a religious environment who were simply unaware, after eight
years of marriage, of the physical requirements necessary to
procreate."
Wow. Talk about sheltered.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.
God, I've been trolling for
God, I've been trolling for a Silly German story for a while now. And thanks to Electric Venom and Apropos of Something, I have one!
Wow. Talk about sheltered.
Childless couple told to try sex
A German couple who went to a fertility clinic after eight years of
marriage have found out why they are still childless - they weren't
having sex.
The University Clinic of Lubek said they had never heard of a case like
it after examining the couple who went to see them last month for
fertility tests.
Doctors subjected them to a series of examinations and found they were
both apparently fertile, and should have had no trouble conceiving.
A clinic spokesman said: "When we asked them how often they had had
sex, they looked blank, and said: "What do you mean?".
"We are not talking retarded people here, but a couple who were brought
up in a religious environment who were simply unaware, after eight
years of marriage, of the physical requirements necessary to
procreate."
Wow. Talk about sheltered.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.
I'll be damned if I
I'll be damned if I ever buy another Tom Clancy book.
The last person I ever expected a lack of foresight from was Tom Clancy. This is the guy who actually wrote a novel usingNATO's Cold War strategies regarding
a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. This is a guy who can look
simultaneously at the big picture and at the minute details and make
them come together to tell a compelling story. But after reading Executive Orders
I never expected something like this from him. In case you hadn't read
the book, Jack Ryan is fresh into his accidental presidency, the
Iranian president smells weakness and hooks up with the PRC and India
to cause trouble. He also invades Iraq and forms the United Islamic
Republic and also unleashes an airborne strain of Ebola in the United
States, murdering thousands to distract America from the war he is
about to launch against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. When the illness and
the war is beaten back, Ryan decides to go preemptive.
So, what's good for Clancy's fiction, what makes it compelling, what makes the people who read his books cheer and say yes! that's how it ought to be!
isn't good enough for the United States of America in reality. And
that's fine. It's fiction, after all. But Clancy---staunch supporter of
America and her Armed Services---had better step up to the plate and
explain his actions by using more words than just that the casus belli
we did have wasn't enough before someone takes his words and uses them
against the war effort---and gets someone killed. Because it will
happen, sooner rather than later. People take what Clancy has to say
seriously. He's a first rate analyst and strategist. This bothers me to
say this because I have a great respect for Clancy. Zinni's interview
with 60 Minutes the other night bothered me and I cringed the moment I
heard he'd coauthored the book with Clancy. Here was the former
commander of CENTCOM ripping the Pentagon a new one over what he saw
was faulty planning. But let's be clear about Zinni's and Clancy's
motivations here: they want to make money. They're not giving a speech
at the War College. They're not presenting their findings in an Op-Ed
in the Times
or the Post. They wrote a book about Zinni's career and his opposition
to the war in Iraq takes up a portion of that book. And guess what,
given the current media mood about the war in Iraq, the publishers made
the decision that the best way to sell this book was based on Zinni's
critique of it. That's what's going to shoot it to #1 on the NYT
Bestseller List. Not because Zinni was another Napoleon and people are
really, really anxious to read what he has to say about military
matters and to read about his career. They're going to read it because
he critiqued the war. Zinni, after all, had street cred; this will
bolster their arguments against the war. This was a calculated move on
Zinni's and Clancy's part. They're out to profit from this. I generally
wouldn't hesitate to say that no one has more respect for the men and
women of our Armed Forces than Tom Clancy. But hell. This certainly
gets one to wondering doesn't it, about what he really thinks about war
and casus belli?
It's pretty clear from reading his novels that he likes everything to
be very, very neat. All the loose ends---and invariably there are many
of them---are tied up with a spectacular bow. I can see where this war
in Iraq would go against the grain for him. The causes of war are
always specific in nature. It's how his hero--Jack Ryan---reacts that's
unusual. As a character, Ryan is an unlikely hero. Hell, you've seen
the movies---you know what I'm talking about. But Ryan is a man who
believes in sending messages with your actions---for actions to mean
something other than a pure difference from inertia. Ryan's beliefs are
so ingrained, so forthright, they lead you to wonder about the
author's. Particularly when Clancy dedicates Executive Orders
to Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President of the United States. "The Man
Who Won The War." Clancy is a good writer. Moreover he is extremely
knowledgeable about all things military. He has less patience for
politics and that is obvious just from picking up his later works where
Ryan is President. I love reading his books. I'm not debating that
point, and sometime in the future I will probably pick up a book of his
at the library. But I won't buy one and I own all of his books. No more
will I contribute to his financial empire. He just doesn't fucking
deserve it. To coauthor a book with a critic of the war while there are still boots on the ground in Iraq
is just beyond me. What's worse is that the man who has profited from
glorfying the Armed Forces, will now profit (435,000 copies on the
first run---that's a lot of coin)from criticizing them and their
actions. What a fucking traitor. And that's not a word I throw around
lightly. Is that nasty divorce really affecting his finances? Is the
new wife looking for some nice rocks or a house on the beach in
Bermuda? What the hell is wrong with him? Clancy and Zinni say that
they're allowed to dissent, and they've made it very, very clear that
you find the fault with the Pentagon, not with the soldiers on the
ground, but what the hell are they to expect? Clancy has been their
biggest fan for years and now he's turned his back on them to coauthor
a book with a man who got up on 60 Minutes the other night and said
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz have to go; you make it clear that the soldiers
are following orders, that they have no control over the plan; it's the
planners who need to be shown the door. The soldiers are following
their plan. You criticize the plan, you criticize them. Normally you
could say, yeah, the planners goofed and the soldiers on the ground
would agree with you and shrug it off. You can't do that right now. The
soldiers in Iraq are besieged. They're criticized at every turn for
just doing their job and there is no egghead difference between the
planners at the Pentagon and the soldiers on the ground at present when
it comes to the media. They are one in the same as far as the media's
concerned. Or hasn't Clancy noticed that the media tries to present the
soldiers in as bad a light as much as they possibly can? But Clancy
thinks the casus belli wasn't clear enough. What the hell is not clear
about the fact that Saddam Hussein ignored UN resolutions to disarm?
What the hell isn't clear about the fact that Al Qaeda stepped up to
the plate on 9/11, hit a goddamn homer, and it was simply a matter of
time before Saddam started giving them bigger bats and urged them to do
it again? What is not clear about our national security? While I know Tom likes things nice and neat, the War on Terrorism isn't
nice and neat. This bothers him, I think. It wasn't nice and neat when
nineteen men slammed airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon
because they weren't acting as official representatives of a state. If
they had been members of the Saudi Army, for instance, well, then Tom
would have been advocating invading The Kingdom. That would have meant
two conventional armies going up against each other, tanks shooting at
tanks, subs shooting at subs---you know, old fashioned war,
fought in lines, replete with scouts and flanking maneuvers, with the
Generals directing the show from the back of the battlefield. Or from
CENTCOM at MacDill AFB in Florida via satellite. But the War on
Terrorism isn't tidy enough for Clancy. It's messy and it's confusing
and he isn't sure that we had casus belli. Well, Tom, far be it from me
to instruct you on anything, but you need to come into the 21st Century
and deal with the realities of the situation. Read your Kissinger. Read
your Weber. Read your Machiavelli. In other words, get real. Preemptive
war may not have been the optimal solution, but damn, did we have
another choice given what we knew of Saddam's capabilities? Did we have
to wait until Saddam did something really repulsive, like sell Sarin
gas to Al-Qaeda and it's allies to be released in the New York City
subway system? Would that make it neat enough for you? Despite the
civilian lives lost? Would it have been clear
enough for you, then, Tom? I thought you would have had the eagle's eye
view on this one, as is your normal habit, but apparently not. You
can't see the forest for the damn trees.
Tom just threw his ante into the pot. He's in the game now, whether he
likes it or not. And I sincerely hope, now that he's in the game, that
his incompetence doesn't get people killed.
The hawkish master of such million-selling thrillers as
Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October has added his own name to
critics of the Iraq war, and not only through his own comments.
His latest book, Battle Ready, is a collaboration with another war
critic, retired Marine General Anthony Zinni.
Battle Ready looks at Zinni's long military career, dating back to the
Vietnam War, and includes harsh remarks by Zinni about the current
conflict.
In an interview today with The Associated Press, Clancy and Zinni sat
side by side in a hotel conference room in Manhattan, mutual admirers
who said they agreed on most issues, despite "one or two" spirited
"discussions" during the book's planning.
Zinni has openly attacked the war, but Clancy reluctantly acknowledged
his own concerns. He declined repeatedly to comment on the war, before
saying that it lacked a "casus belli," or suitable provocation.
"It troubles me greatly to say that, because I've met President (George
W) Bush," Clancy said. "He's a good guy. ... I think he's
well-grounded, both morally and philosophically. But good men make
mistakes."
The last person I ever expected a lack of foresight from was Tom Clancy. This is the guy who actually wrote a novel usingNATO's Cold War strategies regarding
a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. This is a guy who can look
simultaneously at the big picture and at the minute details and make
them come together to tell a compelling story. But after reading Executive Orders
I never expected something like this from him. In case you hadn't read
the book, Jack Ryan is fresh into his accidental presidency, the
Iranian president smells weakness and hooks up with the PRC and India
to cause trouble. He also invades Iraq and forms the United Islamic
Republic and also unleashes an airborne strain of Ebola in the United
States, murdering thousands to distract America from the war he is
about to launch against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. When the illness and
the war is beaten back, Ryan decides to go preemptive.
Chapter 63. The Ryan Doctrine. Copyright 1996 by Jack Ryan Limited Partnership
"My Fellow Americans. I am here to give you an updated report on the
situation in the Middle East," the President said without preamble.
"Approximately four hours ago, organized resistance ceased among the
forces of the United Islamic Republic which invaded the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia. Saudi, Kuwaiti and American forces, working together,
have destroyed six divisions in a battle which raged through a night
and a day. {...}"Ground combat in the area has, for the moment concluded.
I say 'for the moment' because this war is unlike any most of us have
known in the past fifty years. An attack was made directly upon our
citizens, on our soil. It was an attack deliberately made upon
civilians. It was an attack made using weapons of mass destruction. The
violations of international law are too numerous to list," the
President went on, "but it would be wrong to say that this attack was
made by the people of the United Islamic Republic upon America.
"Peoples do not make war. The decision to start a war is most
often made by one man. They used to be kings, or princes, or barbarian
chiefs, but throughout history it's usually one man who decides, and
never is the decision to start a war of aggression the result of the
democratic process.
"We Americans have no quarrel with the people of the form Iran and
Iraq. Their religion may be different from ours, but we are a country
which protects freedom of religion. Their languages may be different,
but America has welcomed people of many languages. If America has
proven anything to the world, it is that all men are the same, and
given the same freedom and the same opportunity, they will all prosper
to the limit only of their own abilities.
"In the last twenty-four hours, we killed at least ten thousand
soldiers of the UIR. Probably many more. We do not know and probably
will never know the total number of enemy deaths, and we need to remind
ourselves that they did not choose their fates. Those fates were chosen
for them by others, and ultimately by one person." Ryan clasped his
hands together theatrically. It seemed a very awkward gesture to all
who watched. ***
"There it goes," Chavez said, his face to the camera's small eyepiece
screen, which was not showing the download from the orbiting satellite.
"Start the music."
Clark thumbed the laser transmitter, careful to see that it was in the
invisible infra-red setting. A check through his eyepiece put the dot
on the building's cornice---or parapet, he couldn't remember the
difference. Whatever, there was a guard standing there, his foot on the
structure.
Diggs in Riyadh:"Final check."
"Bandit-Two-Five-One," he heard in reply---
"Two-Five-Two."
"Throughout history, kinds and princes have made war at their whim,
sending people off to die. To the kings, they were just peasants, and
the wars were just grabs for power and riches, a kind of entertainment,
and if people died, nobody much cared, and when it was all over, for
the most part the kings were still kings, whether they won or lost,
because they were above it all. All the way into this century, it was
assumed that a chief of state had a right
to make war. At Nuremberg, after the Second World War, we changed that
rule by trying and executing some of those responsible. But, getting to
that point, arresting the criminals, as it were, cost the lives of
twenty million Russians, six million Jews, so many lives lost that
historians don't even know..." Ryan looked up to see Andrea Price wave
to him. She didn't smile. It was not a smiling matter. But she gave the
signal anyway.
The ground-based laser was only insurance. They could have gone in
without it, but picking out exactly the right house in the city would
have been difficult, and they wanted to limit collateral damage. This
way, also, the aircraft could drop their weapons from higher altitude.
Simple ballistics would guarantee a drop to within a hundred yards, and
the improved optics systems on the guidance packages cut that figure to
one. Exactly on time, both BANDIT aircraft ("Bandit" was the
semi-official call sign for the pilots of the Black Jets) opened their
bomb-bay doors. Each aircraft carried a single five-hundred pound
weapon, the smallest that could take a PAVEWAY guidance package. These
hung from a trapeze while the seeker heads looked for a modulated laser
signal. Bot acquired the laser dot, and so informed the pilots, who
executed the release. Then they both did something neither had ever
done before on a Stealth mission.
"Bandit-Two-Five-One, bomb away!"
"Two-Five-Two, bomb gone!"
"Every idea in the history of man, good or bad, has started in a single
human mind, and wars begin because one mind thinks it is profitable to
kill and steal. This time it's happened to us in a particularly cruel
way. This time, we can be exactly sure who did it---and more"
Worldwide, in every country with a satellite dish and TV cable, in over
a billion homes, the picture changed from the Oval Office of the White
House to a three-story building on a city street. Most viewers thought
it some mad error, something from a movie, a bad connection---
A handful knew different, even before the President went on. Daryaei,
too, was watching the President's speech, as much from pure curiosity
as political advantage. What sort of man was this Ryan, really? he'd
wondered for so long. Too late, he found out.
"This is where he lives, Mahmoud Haji Daryaei, the man who attacked our
country with disease, the man who attacked my child, the man who tried
to attack me, the man who sent his army on a mission of conquest that
turned into a mission of death. He is a man who has defiled his
religion and the laws of men and nations, and now, Mr. Daryaei, here is
the reply of the United States of America."
The President's voice stopped, and a second or two later, so did
translations all over the world, replaced only by silence, as eyes
watched an ordinary black-and-white picture of a quite ordinary
building---and yet everyone knew that something extraordinary was about
to happen. Those looking very closely saw a light go on in a window,
and the front door open, but no one would ever know the indentity of
the person who might have been attempting to leave, because both
weapons fell true, struck the roof of the building and went off a
hundredth of a second later.
The noise was awful. The passing pressure wave was the worst. Both men
watched, ignorning the danger. The echoes were punctuated by the tinkle
of glass from half a mile around. "You okay?" Ding asked.
"Yeah. Time to boogie, partner."
"Fuckin' A, Mr. C."
They got down to the bedroom level as quickley as possible. Chavez cut
most of his way through the cords with a pocket knife. He figured it
would take them about five minutes to work themselves free. The alleys
allwoed them to drive from the area, and keep out of the way of
emergency vehicles, which screamed their way to the remains of the
three buildings. Half an hour later, they were back in the safety of
the Russian embassy. Vodka was offered. Vodka was drunk. Chavez had
never experienced so bad a case of the shakes. Clark had. The vodka
helped.
"To the people of the United Islamic Republic, the United States of
America says this:
"First we know the exact location of the germ-warfare factory. We have
asked for and received the help of the Russian Federation. They are
neutrals in this dispute, but they have knowledge of this type of
weapon. A team of technical experts is not on its way to Teheran. They
will land and and you will take them immediately to the facility to
supervise its neutralization. They will be accompanied by journalists
for independent verification of the facts. If this does not happen,
then twelve hours from now we will destroy the site with a low-yield
nuclear bomb to be delivered by a Stealth aircraft. Do not make the
mistake of thinking that I am unwilling to give that order. The United
States of America will not tolerate the existence of that facility and
its inhuman weapons/ The twelve-hour period starts now." {...}
"Finally, and I say this to all nations who may wish us ill, the United
States of America will not tolerate attacks on our country, our
possessions, or our citizens. From this day forward, whoever executes
or orders such an attack, no matter who you are, no matter where you
might hide, no matter how long it may take, we will come for you. I
have sworn an oath before God to execute my duties as President. That I
will do. To those who wish to be our friends, you will find no more
faithful friend than we. To those who would be our enemies, remember
that we can be faithful at that, too.{...}
So, what's good for Clancy's fiction, what makes it compelling, what makes the people who read his books cheer and say yes! that's how it ought to be!
isn't good enough for the United States of America in reality. And
that's fine. It's fiction, after all. But Clancy---staunch supporter of
America and her Armed Services---had better step up to the plate and
explain his actions by using more words than just that the casus belli
we did have wasn't enough before someone takes his words and uses them
against the war effort---and gets someone killed. Because it will
happen, sooner rather than later. People take what Clancy has to say
seriously. He's a first rate analyst and strategist. This bothers me to
say this because I have a great respect for Clancy. Zinni's interview
with 60 Minutes the other night bothered me and I cringed the moment I
heard he'd coauthored the book with Clancy. Here was the former
commander of CENTCOM ripping the Pentagon a new one over what he saw
was faulty planning. But let's be clear about Zinni's and Clancy's
motivations here: they want to make money. They're not giving a speech
at the War College. They're not presenting their findings in an Op-Ed
in the Times
or the Post. They wrote a book about Zinni's career and his opposition
to the war in Iraq takes up a portion of that book. And guess what,
given the current media mood about the war in Iraq, the publishers made
the decision that the best way to sell this book was based on Zinni's
critique of it. That's what's going to shoot it to #1 on the NYT
Bestseller List. Not because Zinni was another Napoleon and people are
really, really anxious to read what he has to say about military
matters and to read about his career. They're going to read it because
he critiqued the war. Zinni, after all, had street cred; this will
bolster their arguments against the war. This was a calculated move on
Zinni's and Clancy's part. They're out to profit from this. I generally
wouldn't hesitate to say that no one has more respect for the men and
women of our Armed Forces than Tom Clancy. But hell. This certainly
gets one to wondering doesn't it, about what he really thinks about war
and casus belli?
It's pretty clear from reading his novels that he likes everything to
be very, very neat. All the loose ends---and invariably there are many
of them---are tied up with a spectacular bow. I can see where this war
in Iraq would go against the grain for him. The causes of war are
always specific in nature. It's how his hero--Jack Ryan---reacts that's
unusual. As a character, Ryan is an unlikely hero. Hell, you've seen
the movies---you know what I'm talking about. But Ryan is a man who
believes in sending messages with your actions---for actions to mean
something other than a pure difference from inertia. Ryan's beliefs are
so ingrained, so forthright, they lead you to wonder about the
author's. Particularly when Clancy dedicates Executive Orders
to Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President of the United States. "The Man
Who Won The War." Clancy is a good writer. Moreover he is extremely
knowledgeable about all things military. He has less patience for
politics and that is obvious just from picking up his later works where
Ryan is President. I love reading his books. I'm not debating that
point, and sometime in the future I will probably pick up a book of his
at the library. But I won't buy one and I own all of his books. No more
will I contribute to his financial empire. He just doesn't fucking
deserve it. To coauthor a book with a critic of the war while there are still boots on the ground in Iraq
is just beyond me. What's worse is that the man who has profited from
glorfying the Armed Forces, will now profit (435,000 copies on the
first run---that's a lot of coin)from criticizing them and their
actions. What a fucking traitor. And that's not a word I throw around
lightly. Is that nasty divorce really affecting his finances? Is the
new wife looking for some nice rocks or a house on the beach in
Bermuda? What the hell is wrong with him? Clancy and Zinni say that
they're allowed to dissent, and they've made it very, very clear that
you find the fault with the Pentagon, not with the soldiers on the
ground, but what the hell are they to expect? Clancy has been their
biggest fan for years and now he's turned his back on them to coauthor
a book with a man who got up on 60 Minutes the other night and said
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz have to go; you make it clear that the soldiers
are following orders, that they have no control over the plan; it's the
planners who need to be shown the door. The soldiers are following
their plan. You criticize the plan, you criticize them. Normally you
could say, yeah, the planners goofed and the soldiers on the ground
would agree with you and shrug it off. You can't do that right now. The
soldiers in Iraq are besieged. They're criticized at every turn for
just doing their job and there is no egghead difference between the
planners at the Pentagon and the soldiers on the ground at present when
it comes to the media. They are one in the same as far as the media's
concerned. Or hasn't Clancy noticed that the media tries to present the
soldiers in as bad a light as much as they possibly can? But Clancy
thinks the casus belli wasn't clear enough. What the hell is not clear
about the fact that Saddam Hussein ignored UN resolutions to disarm?
What the hell isn't clear about the fact that Al Qaeda stepped up to
the plate on 9/11, hit a goddamn homer, and it was simply a matter of
time before Saddam started giving them bigger bats and urged them to do
it again? What is not clear about our national security? While I know Tom likes things nice and neat, the War on Terrorism isn't
nice and neat. This bothers him, I think. It wasn't nice and neat when
nineteen men slammed airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon
because they weren't acting as official representatives of a state. If
they had been members of the Saudi Army, for instance, well, then Tom
would have been advocating invading The Kingdom. That would have meant
two conventional armies going up against each other, tanks shooting at
tanks, subs shooting at subs---you know, old fashioned war,
fought in lines, replete with scouts and flanking maneuvers, with the
Generals directing the show from the back of the battlefield. Or from
CENTCOM at MacDill AFB in Florida via satellite. But the War on
Terrorism isn't tidy enough for Clancy. It's messy and it's confusing
and he isn't sure that we had casus belli. Well, Tom, far be it from me
to instruct you on anything, but you need to come into the 21st Century
and deal with the realities of the situation. Read your Kissinger. Read
your Weber. Read your Machiavelli. In other words, get real. Preemptive
war may not have been the optimal solution, but damn, did we have
another choice given what we knew of Saddam's capabilities? Did we have
to wait until Saddam did something really repulsive, like sell Sarin
gas to Al-Qaeda and it's allies to be released in the New York City
subway system? Would that make it neat enough for you? Despite the
civilian lives lost? Would it have been clear
enough for you, then, Tom? I thought you would have had the eagle's eye
view on this one, as is your normal habit, but apparently not. You
can't see the forest for the damn trees.
Tom just threw his ante into the pot. He's in the game now, whether he
likes it or not. And I sincerely hope, now that he's in the game, that
his incompetence doesn't get people killed.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:47 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 3255 words, total size 19 kb.
I'll be damned if I
I'll be damned if I ever buy another Tom Clancy book.
The last person I ever expected a lack of foresight from was Tom Clancy. This is the guy who actually wrote a novel usingNATO's Cold War strategies regarding
a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. This is a guy who can look
simultaneously at the big picture and at the minute details and make
them come together to tell a compelling story. But after reading Executive Orders
I never expected something like this from him. In case you hadn't read
the book, Jack Ryan is fresh into his accidental presidency, the
Iranian president smells weakness and hooks up with the PRC and India
to cause trouble. He also invades Iraq and forms the United Islamic
Republic and also unleashes an airborne strain of Ebola in the United
States, murdering thousands to distract America from the war he is
about to launch against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. When the illness and
the war is beaten back, Ryan decides to go preemptive.
So, what's good for Clancy's fiction, what makes it compelling, what makes the people who read his books cheer and say yes! that's how it ought to be!
isn't good enough for the United States of America in reality. And
that's fine. It's fiction, after all. But Clancy---staunch supporter of
America and her Armed Services---had better step up to the plate and
explain his actions by using more words than just that the casus belli
we did have wasn't enough before someone takes his words and uses them
against the war effort---and gets someone killed. Because it will
happen, sooner rather than later. People take what Clancy has to say
seriously. He's a first rate analyst and strategist. This bothers me to
say this because I have a great respect for Clancy. Zinni's interview
with 60 Minutes the other night bothered me and I cringed the moment I
heard he'd coauthored the book with Clancy. Here was the former
commander of CENTCOM ripping the Pentagon a new one over what he saw
was faulty planning. But let's be clear about Zinni's and Clancy's
motivations here: they want to make money. They're not giving a speech
at the War College. They're not presenting their findings in an Op-Ed
in the Times
or the Post. They wrote a book about Zinni's career and his opposition
to the war in Iraq takes up a portion of that book. And guess what,
given the current media mood about the war in Iraq, the publishers made
the decision that the best way to sell this book was based on Zinni's
critique of it. That's what's going to shoot it to #1 on the NYT
Bestseller List. Not because Zinni was another Napoleon and people are
really, really anxious to read what he has to say about military
matters and to read about his career. They're going to read it because
he critiqued the war. Zinni, after all, had street cred; this will
bolster their arguments against the war. This was a calculated move on
Zinni's and Clancy's part. They're out to profit from this. I generally
wouldn't hesitate to say that no one has more respect for the men and
women of our Armed Forces than Tom Clancy. But hell. This certainly
gets one to wondering doesn't it, about what he really thinks about war
and casus belli?
It's pretty clear from reading his novels that he likes everything to
be very, very neat. All the loose ends---and invariably there are many
of them---are tied up with a spectacular bow. I can see where this war
in Iraq would go against the grain for him. The causes of war are
always specific in nature. It's how his hero--Jack Ryan---reacts that's
unusual. As a character, Ryan is an unlikely hero. Hell, you've seen
the movies---you know what I'm talking about. But Ryan is a man who
believes in sending messages with your actions---for actions to mean
something other than a pure difference from inertia. Ryan's beliefs are
so ingrained, so forthright, they lead you to wonder about the
author's. Particularly when Clancy dedicates Executive Orders
to Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President of the United States. "The Man
Who Won The War." Clancy is a good writer. Moreover he is extremely
knowledgeable about all things military. He has less patience for
politics and that is obvious just from picking up his later works where
Ryan is President. I love reading his books. I'm not debating that
point, and sometime in the future I will probably pick up a book of his
at the library. But I won't buy one and I own all of his books. No more
will I contribute to his financial empire. He just doesn't fucking
deserve it. To coauthor a book with a critic of the war while there are still boots on the ground in Iraq
is just beyond me. What's worse is that the man who has profited from
glorfying the Armed Forces, will now profit (435,000 copies on the
first run---that's a lot of coin)from criticizing them and their
actions. What a fucking traitor. And that's not a word I throw around
lightly. Is that nasty divorce really affecting his finances? Is the
new wife looking for some nice rocks or a house on the beach in
Bermuda? What the hell is wrong with him? Clancy and Zinni say that
they're allowed to dissent, and they've made it very, very clear that
you find the fault with the Pentagon, not with the soldiers on the
ground, but what the hell are they to expect? Clancy has been their
biggest fan for years and now he's turned his back on them to coauthor
a book with a man who got up on 60 Minutes the other night and said
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz have to go; you make it clear that the soldiers
are following orders, that they have no control over the plan; it's the
planners who need to be shown the door. The soldiers are following
their plan. You criticize the plan, you criticize them. Normally you
could say, yeah, the planners goofed and the soldiers on the ground
would agree with you and shrug it off. You can't do that right now. The
soldiers in Iraq are besieged. They're criticized at every turn for
just doing their job and there is no egghead difference between the
planners at the Pentagon and the soldiers on the ground at present when
it comes to the media. They are one in the same as far as the media's
concerned. Or hasn't Clancy noticed that the media tries to present the
soldiers in as bad a light as much as they possibly can? But Clancy
thinks the casus belli wasn't clear enough. What the hell is not clear
about the fact that Saddam Hussein ignored UN resolutions to disarm?
What the hell isn't clear about the fact that Al Qaeda stepped up to
the plate on 9/11, hit a goddamn homer, and it was simply a matter of
time before Saddam started giving them bigger bats and urged them to do
it again? What is not clear about our national security? While I know Tom likes things nice and neat, the War on Terrorism isn't
nice and neat. This bothers him, I think. It wasn't nice and neat when
nineteen men slammed airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon
because they weren't acting as official representatives of a state. If
they had been members of the Saudi Army, for instance, well, then Tom
would have been advocating invading The Kingdom. That would have meant
two conventional armies going up against each other, tanks shooting at
tanks, subs shooting at subs---you know, old fashioned war,
fought in lines, replete with scouts and flanking maneuvers, with the
Generals directing the show from the back of the battlefield. Or from
CENTCOM at MacDill AFB in Florida via satellite. But the War on
Terrorism isn't tidy enough for Clancy. It's messy and it's confusing
and he isn't sure that we had casus belli. Well, Tom, far be it from me
to instruct you on anything, but you need to come into the 21st Century
and deal with the realities of the situation. Read your Kissinger. Read
your Weber. Read your Machiavelli. In other words, get real. Preemptive
war may not have been the optimal solution, but damn, did we have
another choice given what we knew of Saddam's capabilities? Did we have
to wait until Saddam did something really repulsive, like sell Sarin
gas to Al-Qaeda and it's allies to be released in the New York City
subway system? Would that make it neat enough for you? Despite the
civilian lives lost? Would it have been clear
enough for you, then, Tom? I thought you would have had the eagle's eye
view on this one, as is your normal habit, but apparently not. You
can't see the forest for the damn trees.
Tom just threw his ante into the pot. He's in the game now, whether he
likes it or not. And I sincerely hope, now that he's in the game, that
his incompetence doesn't get people killed.
The hawkish master of such million-selling thrillers as
Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October has added his own name to
critics of the Iraq war, and not only through his own comments.
His latest book, Battle Ready, is a collaboration with another war
critic, retired Marine General Anthony Zinni.
Battle Ready looks at Zinni's long military career, dating back to the
Vietnam War, and includes harsh remarks by Zinni about the current
conflict.
In an interview today with The Associated Press, Clancy and Zinni sat
side by side in a hotel conference room in Manhattan, mutual admirers
who said they agreed on most issues, despite "one or two" spirited
"discussions" during the book's planning.
Zinni has openly attacked the war, but Clancy reluctantly acknowledged
his own concerns. He declined repeatedly to comment on the war, before
saying that it lacked a "casus belli," or suitable provocation.
"It troubles me greatly to say that, because I've met President (George
W) Bush," Clancy said. "He's a good guy. ... I think he's
well-grounded, both morally and philosophically. But good men make
mistakes."
The last person I ever expected a lack of foresight from was Tom Clancy. This is the guy who actually wrote a novel usingNATO's Cold War strategies regarding
a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. This is a guy who can look
simultaneously at the big picture and at the minute details and make
them come together to tell a compelling story. But after reading Executive Orders
I never expected something like this from him. In case you hadn't read
the book, Jack Ryan is fresh into his accidental presidency, the
Iranian president smells weakness and hooks up with the PRC and India
to cause trouble. He also invades Iraq and forms the United Islamic
Republic and also unleashes an airborne strain of Ebola in the United
States, murdering thousands to distract America from the war he is
about to launch against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. When the illness and
the war is beaten back, Ryan decides to go preemptive.
Chapter 63. The Ryan Doctrine. Copyright 1996 by Jack Ryan Limited Partnership
"My Fellow Americans. I am here to give you an updated report on the
situation in the Middle East," the President said without preamble.
"Approximately four hours ago, organized resistance ceased among the
forces of the United Islamic Republic which invaded the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia. Saudi, Kuwaiti and American forces, working together,
have destroyed six divisions in a battle which raged through a night
and a day. {...}"Ground combat in the area has, for the moment concluded.
I say 'for the moment' because this war is unlike any most of us have
known in the past fifty years. An attack was made directly upon our
citizens, on our soil. It was an attack deliberately made upon
civilians. It was an attack made using weapons of mass destruction. The
violations of international law are too numerous to list," the
President went on, "but it would be wrong to say that this attack was
made by the people of the United Islamic Republic upon America.
"Peoples do not make war. The decision to start a war is most
often made by one man. They used to be kings, or princes, or barbarian
chiefs, but throughout history it's usually one man who decides, and
never is the decision to start a war of aggression the result of the
democratic process.
"We Americans have no quarrel with the people of the form Iran and
Iraq. Their religion may be different from ours, but we are a country
which protects freedom of religion. Their languages may be different,
but America has welcomed people of many languages. If America has
proven anything to the world, it is that all men are the same, and
given the same freedom and the same opportunity, they will all prosper
to the limit only of their own abilities.
"In the last twenty-four hours, we killed at least ten thousand
soldiers of the UIR. Probably many more. We do not know and probably
will never know the total number of enemy deaths, and we need to remind
ourselves that they did not choose their fates. Those fates were chosen
for them by others, and ultimately by one person." Ryan clasped his
hands together theatrically. It seemed a very awkward gesture to all
who watched. ***
"There it goes," Chavez said, his face to the camera's small eyepiece
screen, which was not showing the download from the orbiting satellite.
"Start the music."
Clark thumbed the laser transmitter, careful to see that it was in the
invisible infra-red setting. A check through his eyepiece put the dot
on the building's cornice---or parapet, he couldn't remember the
difference. Whatever, there was a guard standing there, his foot on the
structure.
Diggs in Riyadh:"Final check."
"Bandit-Two-Five-One," he heard in reply---
"Two-Five-Two."
"Throughout history, kinds and princes have made war at their whim,
sending people off to die. To the kings, they were just peasants, and
the wars were just grabs for power and riches, a kind of entertainment,
and if people died, nobody much cared, and when it was all over, for
the most part the kings were still kings, whether they won or lost,
because they were above it all. All the way into this century, it was
assumed that a chief of state had a right
to make war. At Nuremberg, after the Second World War, we changed that
rule by trying and executing some of those responsible. But, getting to
that point, arresting the criminals, as it were, cost the lives of
twenty million Russians, six million Jews, so many lives lost that
historians don't even know..." Ryan looked up to see Andrea Price wave
to him. She didn't smile. It was not a smiling matter. But she gave the
signal anyway.
The ground-based laser was only insurance. They could have gone in
without it, but picking out exactly the right house in the city would
have been difficult, and they wanted to limit collateral damage. This
way, also, the aircraft could drop their weapons from higher altitude.
Simple ballistics would guarantee a drop to within a hundred yards, and
the improved optics systems on the guidance packages cut that figure to
one. Exactly on time, both BANDIT aircraft ("Bandit" was the
semi-official call sign for the pilots of the Black Jets) opened their
bomb-bay doors. Each aircraft carried a single five-hundred pound
weapon, the smallest that could take a PAVEWAY guidance package. These
hung from a trapeze while the seeker heads looked for a modulated laser
signal. Bot acquired the laser dot, and so informed the pilots, who
executed the release. Then they both did something neither had ever
done before on a Stealth mission.
"Bandit-Two-Five-One, bomb away!"
"Two-Five-Two, bomb gone!"
"Every idea in the history of man, good or bad, has started in a single
human mind, and wars begin because one mind thinks it is profitable to
kill and steal. This time it's happened to us in a particularly cruel
way. This time, we can be exactly sure who did it---and more"
Worldwide, in every country with a satellite dish and TV cable, in over
a billion homes, the picture changed from the Oval Office of the White
House to a three-story building on a city street. Most viewers thought
it some mad error, something from a movie, a bad connection---
A handful knew different, even before the President went on. Daryaei,
too, was watching the President's speech, as much from pure curiosity
as political advantage. What sort of man was this Ryan, really? he'd
wondered for so long. Too late, he found out.
"This is where he lives, Mahmoud Haji Daryaei, the man who attacked our
country with disease, the man who attacked my child, the man who tried
to attack me, the man who sent his army on a mission of conquest that
turned into a mission of death. He is a man who has defiled his
religion and the laws of men and nations, and now, Mr. Daryaei, here is
the reply of the United States of America."
The President's voice stopped, and a second or two later, so did
translations all over the world, replaced only by silence, as eyes
watched an ordinary black-and-white picture of a quite ordinary
building---and yet everyone knew that something extraordinary was about
to happen. Those looking very closely saw a light go on in a window,
and the front door open, but no one would ever know the indentity of
the person who might have been attempting to leave, because both
weapons fell true, struck the roof of the building and went off a
hundredth of a second later.
The noise was awful. The passing pressure wave was the worst. Both men
watched, ignorning the danger. The echoes were punctuated by the tinkle
of glass from half a mile around. "You okay?" Ding asked.
"Yeah. Time to boogie, partner."
"Fuckin' A, Mr. C."
They got down to the bedroom level as quickley as possible. Chavez cut
most of his way through the cords with a pocket knife. He figured it
would take them about five minutes to work themselves free. The alleys
allwoed them to drive from the area, and keep out of the way of
emergency vehicles, which screamed their way to the remains of the
three buildings. Half an hour later, they were back in the safety of
the Russian embassy. Vodka was offered. Vodka was drunk. Chavez had
never experienced so bad a case of the shakes. Clark had. The vodka
helped.
"To the people of the United Islamic Republic, the United States of
America says this:
"First we know the exact location of the germ-warfare factory. We have
asked for and received the help of the Russian Federation. They are
neutrals in this dispute, but they have knowledge of this type of
weapon. A team of technical experts is not on its way to Teheran. They
will land and and you will take them immediately to the facility to
supervise its neutralization. They will be accompanied by journalists
for independent verification of the facts. If this does not happen,
then twelve hours from now we will destroy the site with a low-yield
nuclear bomb to be delivered by a Stealth aircraft. Do not make the
mistake of thinking that I am unwilling to give that order. The United
States of America will not tolerate the existence of that facility and
its inhuman weapons/ The twelve-hour period starts now." {...}
"Finally, and I say this to all nations who may wish us ill, the United
States of America will not tolerate attacks on our country, our
possessions, or our citizens. From this day forward, whoever executes
or orders such an attack, no matter who you are, no matter where you
might hide, no matter how long it may take, we will come for you. I
have sworn an oath before God to execute my duties as President. That I
will do. To those who wish to be our friends, you will find no more
faithful friend than we. To those who would be our enemies, remember
that we can be faithful at that, too.{...}
So, what's good for Clancy's fiction, what makes it compelling, what makes the people who read his books cheer and say yes! that's how it ought to be!
isn't good enough for the United States of America in reality. And
that's fine. It's fiction, after all. But Clancy---staunch supporter of
America and her Armed Services---had better step up to the plate and
explain his actions by using more words than just that the casus belli
we did have wasn't enough before someone takes his words and uses them
against the war effort---and gets someone killed. Because it will
happen, sooner rather than later. People take what Clancy has to say
seriously. He's a first rate analyst and strategist. This bothers me to
say this because I have a great respect for Clancy. Zinni's interview
with 60 Minutes the other night bothered me and I cringed the moment I
heard he'd coauthored the book with Clancy. Here was the former
commander of CENTCOM ripping the Pentagon a new one over what he saw
was faulty planning. But let's be clear about Zinni's and Clancy's
motivations here: they want to make money. They're not giving a speech
at the War College. They're not presenting their findings in an Op-Ed
in the Times
or the Post. They wrote a book about Zinni's career and his opposition
to the war in Iraq takes up a portion of that book. And guess what,
given the current media mood about the war in Iraq, the publishers made
the decision that the best way to sell this book was based on Zinni's
critique of it. That's what's going to shoot it to #1 on the NYT
Bestseller List. Not because Zinni was another Napoleon and people are
really, really anxious to read what he has to say about military
matters and to read about his career. They're going to read it because
he critiqued the war. Zinni, after all, had street cred; this will
bolster their arguments against the war. This was a calculated move on
Zinni's and Clancy's part. They're out to profit from this. I generally
wouldn't hesitate to say that no one has more respect for the men and
women of our Armed Forces than Tom Clancy. But hell. This certainly
gets one to wondering doesn't it, about what he really thinks about war
and casus belli?
It's pretty clear from reading his novels that he likes everything to
be very, very neat. All the loose ends---and invariably there are many
of them---are tied up with a spectacular bow. I can see where this war
in Iraq would go against the grain for him. The causes of war are
always specific in nature. It's how his hero--Jack Ryan---reacts that's
unusual. As a character, Ryan is an unlikely hero. Hell, you've seen
the movies---you know what I'm talking about. But Ryan is a man who
believes in sending messages with your actions---for actions to mean
something other than a pure difference from inertia. Ryan's beliefs are
so ingrained, so forthright, they lead you to wonder about the
author's. Particularly when Clancy dedicates Executive Orders
to Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President of the United States. "The Man
Who Won The War." Clancy is a good writer. Moreover he is extremely
knowledgeable about all things military. He has less patience for
politics and that is obvious just from picking up his later works where
Ryan is President. I love reading his books. I'm not debating that
point, and sometime in the future I will probably pick up a book of his
at the library. But I won't buy one and I own all of his books. No more
will I contribute to his financial empire. He just doesn't fucking
deserve it. To coauthor a book with a critic of the war while there are still boots on the ground in Iraq
is just beyond me. What's worse is that the man who has profited from
glorfying the Armed Forces, will now profit (435,000 copies on the
first run---that's a lot of coin)from criticizing them and their
actions. What a fucking traitor. And that's not a word I throw around
lightly. Is that nasty divorce really affecting his finances? Is the
new wife looking for some nice rocks or a house on the beach in
Bermuda? What the hell is wrong with him? Clancy and Zinni say that
they're allowed to dissent, and they've made it very, very clear that
you find the fault with the Pentagon, not with the soldiers on the
ground, but what the hell are they to expect? Clancy has been their
biggest fan for years and now he's turned his back on them to coauthor
a book with a man who got up on 60 Minutes the other night and said
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz have to go; you make it clear that the soldiers
are following orders, that they have no control over the plan; it's the
planners who need to be shown the door. The soldiers are following
their plan. You criticize the plan, you criticize them. Normally you
could say, yeah, the planners goofed and the soldiers on the ground
would agree with you and shrug it off. You can't do that right now. The
soldiers in Iraq are besieged. They're criticized at every turn for
just doing their job and there is no egghead difference between the
planners at the Pentagon and the soldiers on the ground at present when
it comes to the media. They are one in the same as far as the media's
concerned. Or hasn't Clancy noticed that the media tries to present the
soldiers in as bad a light as much as they possibly can? But Clancy
thinks the casus belli wasn't clear enough. What the hell is not clear
about the fact that Saddam Hussein ignored UN resolutions to disarm?
What the hell isn't clear about the fact that Al Qaeda stepped up to
the plate on 9/11, hit a goddamn homer, and it was simply a matter of
time before Saddam started giving them bigger bats and urged them to do
it again? What is not clear about our national security? While I know Tom likes things nice and neat, the War on Terrorism isn't
nice and neat. This bothers him, I think. It wasn't nice and neat when
nineteen men slammed airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon
because they weren't acting as official representatives of a state. If
they had been members of the Saudi Army, for instance, well, then Tom
would have been advocating invading The Kingdom. That would have meant
two conventional armies going up against each other, tanks shooting at
tanks, subs shooting at subs---you know, old fashioned war,
fought in lines, replete with scouts and flanking maneuvers, with the
Generals directing the show from the back of the battlefield. Or from
CENTCOM at MacDill AFB in Florida via satellite. But the War on
Terrorism isn't tidy enough for Clancy. It's messy and it's confusing
and he isn't sure that we had casus belli. Well, Tom, far be it from me
to instruct you on anything, but you need to come into the 21st Century
and deal with the realities of the situation. Read your Kissinger. Read
your Weber. Read your Machiavelli. In other words, get real. Preemptive
war may not have been the optimal solution, but damn, did we have
another choice given what we knew of Saddam's capabilities? Did we have
to wait until Saddam did something really repulsive, like sell Sarin
gas to Al-Qaeda and it's allies to be released in the New York City
subway system? Would that make it neat enough for you? Despite the
civilian lives lost? Would it have been clear
enough for you, then, Tom? I thought you would have had the eagle's eye
view on this one, as is your normal habit, but apparently not. You
can't see the forest for the damn trees.
Tom just threw his ante into the pot. He's in the game now, whether he
likes it or not. And I sincerely hope, now that he's in the game, that
his incompetence doesn't get people killed.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:47 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 3255 words, total size 19 kb.
WASHINGTON, May 26 (UPI) --
According to Amnesty International, this is what the math looks like:
I think not. It's off to summer school for Amnesty International. While
every other kid is out having fun, they should be stuck in an
unairconditioned class room, learning how to add.
(Apologies for the crappy graphic job. I don't have photoshop...sue me)
WASHINGTON, May 26 (UPI)
-- The U.S.-led war on terror is "bankrupt of vision and bereft of
principle," and has made the world more dangerous, the human rights
group Amnesty International said in its latest report Wednesday.
The group's 2004 report criticizes the United States and its allies,
along with militant groups worldwide, for what it calls "the most
sustained attack on human rights and international humanitarian law in
the last 50 years."
Over the past four years, 177 armed groups have operated in 65
countries, which make-up one-third of the world's population, the
report said. Fifty-five percent of these groups killed civilians and 20
percent committed rape and other sexual violence. One-third of
governments responded to this violence by killing civilians; 36 percent
by torturing and ill-treating people; and 28 percent through sexual
violence, including rape, the report added. The report comes down
heavily on both governments and militant groups. It details torture and
ill-treatment in 132 countries, political killings in 47, and
detainments without trial or charge in 58 nations. It also detailed
killings and attacks by militants in 34 countries, torture or ill
treatment in 18, and hostage-takings and abductions in 16.
"This is to say that the war on terror has evolved into a global street
brawl with governments and armed groups duking it out, and innocent
civilians suffering severely," William Schulz, executive director of
Amnesty International USA, at a news conference in Washington.
According to Amnesty International, this is what the math looks like:
I think not. It's off to summer school for Amnesty International. While
every other kid is out having fun, they should be stuck in an
unairconditioned class room, learning how to add.
(Apologies for the crappy graphic job. I don't have photoshop...sue me)
Posted by: Kathy at
08:41 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
WASHINGTON, May 26 (UPI) --
According to Amnesty International, this is what the math looks like:
I think not. It's off to summer school for Amnesty International. While
every other kid is out having fun, they should be stuck in an
unairconditioned class room, learning how to add.
(Apologies for the crappy graphic job. I don't have photoshop...sue me)
WASHINGTON, May 26 (UPI)
-- The U.S.-led war on terror is "bankrupt of vision and bereft of
principle," and has made the world more dangerous, the human rights
group Amnesty International said in its latest report Wednesday.
The group's 2004 report criticizes the United States and its allies,
along with militant groups worldwide, for what it calls "the most
sustained attack on human rights and international humanitarian law in
the last 50 years."
Over the past four years, 177 armed groups have operated in 65
countries, which make-up one-third of the world's population, the
report said. Fifty-five percent of these groups killed civilians and 20
percent committed rape and other sexual violence. One-third of
governments responded to this violence by killing civilians; 36 percent
by torturing and ill-treating people; and 28 percent through sexual
violence, including rape, the report added. The report comes down
heavily on both governments and militant groups. It details torture and
ill-treatment in 132 countries, political killings in 47, and
detainments without trial or charge in 58 nations. It also detailed
killings and attacks by militants in 34 countries, torture or ill
treatment in 18, and hostage-takings and abductions in 16.
"This is to say that the war on terror has evolved into a global street
brawl with governments and armed groups duking it out, and innocent
civilians suffering severely," William Schulz, executive director of
Amnesty International USA, at a news conference in Washington.
According to Amnesty International, this is what the math looks like:
I think not. It's off to summer school for Amnesty International. While
every other kid is out having fun, they should be stuck in an
unairconditioned class room, learning how to add.
(Apologies for the crappy graphic job. I don't have photoshop...sue me)
Posted by: Kathy at
08:41 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
This guy better watch it.
This guy better watch it.
He might get bubbles up his whoops-a-daisy.
He might get bubbles up his whoops-a-daisy.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:39 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.
This guy better watch it.
This guy better watch it.
He might get bubbles up his whoops-a-daisy.
He might get bubbles up his whoops-a-daisy.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:39 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.
101 Great Books List recommended
101 Great Books List recommended by the College Board. (Hat Tip: Michele)
The books in bold are the ones I, just like Michele (I'm all about
originality here), read either in high school or in college. Or during
some point in time during my adult life.
I should probably note that the English department at my high school
was the largest department within the entire school. More than a few of
the teachers had their MA's and had started work on their PhD's and
were teaching literature at the college level, but were sick and tired
of the "publish or perish" business so prevalent in universities that
they came and taught at my school. These teachers, of course, had some
rather unorthodox views about classic literature and passed these ideas
along. You'll notice them when you come to them in my list. Achebe,
Chinua - Things Fall Apart Agee, James - A Death in the Family Austin, Jane - Pride and Prejudice Note that the misspelling of Austen's
last name is done by the people who force your kids to study their
asses off for the SAT. I love Austen. This is my favorite novel of
hers. Baldwin, James - Go Tell It on the Mountain Beckett, Samuel -
Waiting for Godot Bellow, Saul - The Adventures of Augie March Bronte, Charlotte Jane Eyre Honestly. What 17 year old girl hasn't read this one?
Bronte, Emily - Wuthering Heights Ditto.
Camus, Albert - The Stranger Still don't know what it was about.
Cather, Willa - Death Comes for the Archbishop I grew up in Nebraska. She's our most famous author. I liked My Antonia better, though. I was told the public school kids had to read "O Pioneers," but we never had to.
Cervantes, Miguel de - Don Quixote I'd rather watch The Man From La Mancha
Chaucer, Geoffrey - The Canterbury Tales
Chekhov, Anton - The Cherry Orchard
Chopin, Kate - The Awakening
Conrad, Joseph - Heart of Darkness Never read this, but I did read Lord Jim We went through it sentence by sentence and deconstructed the language. Oy.
Cooper, James Fenimore - The Last of the Mohicans American Lit.
If I'm remembering correctly, it was the first American novel. Or was
Fenimore Cooper the first American novelist? Ah, who cares. Best
character name that SO didn't fit the character---Natty Bumppo! Crane, Stephen - The Red Badge of Courage
Dante - Inferno And people worry that their kids see too much
violence on TV. Hmmph. Yeah, yeah, I know. Morality tale. Still, one of
the goriest books I've ever read.
Defoe, Daniel-Robinson Crusoe Dickens, Charles - A Tale of Two Cities Dostoyevsky, Fyodor - Crime and Punishment Convinced me at age seventeen I wanted nothing whatsoever to do with Russians. Ever.
Douglass, Frederick - Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Dreiser, Theodore - An American Tragedy
Dumas, Alexandre - The Three Musketeers
Eliot, George - The Mill on the Floss
Ellison, Ralph - Invisible Man
Emerson, Ralph Waldo - Selected Essays Yawn.
Faulkner, William - As I Lay Dying
Faulkner, William - The Sound and the Fury
Fielding, Henry - Tom Jones
Fitzgerald, F. Scott - The Great Gatsby
Flaubert, Gustave - Madame Bovary
Ford, Ford Madox - The Good Soldier
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von - Faust
Golding, William - Lord of the Flies I never had to read this
for class. This book was for the level three girls (translation: not
the brightest bulbs in the box) But my friend was level three and
needed help so I read it to help her.
Hardy, Thomas - Tess of the d'Urbervilles Hawthorne, Nathaniel - The Scarlet Letter
Heller, Joseph Catch 22
Hemingway, Ernest - A Farewell to Arms Gag. I hate Hemingway.
Always have. I'd only read a few of his short stories, and one of them
described this WWI Vet camping, all of his buddies were dead, he was
sad. I remember he was opening a can of oranges to go with his fish
supper and it took FOREVER for this guy to put one in his mouth. This
overly described slice of orange was supposedly a metaphor for loss and
war being horrible and all of that bullshit. But I also hate that I was
enough of a spineless sap at age seventeen to have read this book to
please a boy who wanted to get into my pants. I told him I loved it,
even though I thought it was crap. He thought that Henry's love for
Catherine was "the ideal." Henry was an idiot. Ugh. I tried to disagree
with him, but in the end he was just SO in favor of this book that I
didn't want to disappoint him. Like I said, SPINELESS SAP! (And no, he
didn't get into my pants. Not so spineless after all, I suppose.) Homer - The Iliad
Homer - The Odyssey Both of these. In Latin. Impressive, no? Heh.
Hugo, Victor The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Hurston, Zora Neale Their Eyes Were Watching God
Huxley, Aldous Brave New World
Ibsen, Henrik - A Doll's House Did anyone ever get out of reading this one?
James, Henry - The Portrait of a Lady
James, Henry The Turn of the Screw
Joyce, James - A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man If you're ever to read Joyce, this is the book to attempt. Forget Finnegan's Wake and Ulysses.
Kafka, Franz - The Metamorphosis
Kingston, Maxine Hong - The Woman Warrior
Lee, Harper - To Kill a Mockingbird
Lewis, Sinclair - Babbitt
London, Jack - The Call of the Wild Never read this actually, but I did read To Build a Fire. I've never been so cold in all my life as when I read that.
Mann, Thomas - The Magic Mountain
Marquez, Gabriel Garcia - One Hundred Years of Solitude
Melville, Herman - Bartleby the Scrivener A Story of Wall Street. One of the best short stories I've ever read.
Melville, Herman - Moby Dick
Miller, Arthur - The Crucible
Morrison, Toni - Beloved
O'Connor, Flannery - A Good Man is Hard to Find
O'Neill, Eugene - Long Day's Journey into Night
Orwell, George - Animal Farm The husband tells me that I'm missing something rather good by not having read this. We read <1>1984 instead.
Pasternak, Boris - Doctor Zhivago
Plath, Sylvia - The Bell Jar What? Are they trying to get young girls to off themselves?
Poe, Edgar Allen - Selected Tales Fall of the House of Usher.
Scariest. Story. Ever.
Proust, Marcel - Swann's Way Pynchon, Thomas - The Crying of Lot 49
Remarque, Erich Maria - All Quiet on the Western Front (The English
department apparently wasn't too fond of this book. Everyone I know has
read it. I haven't.) Rostand, Edmond - Cyrano de Bergerac The schnozz!
Roth, Henry - Call It Sleep
Salinger, J.D. - The Catcher in the Rye
Shakespeare, William - Hamlet I only read Macbeth in high school. The rest I read at other times. We didn't read Romeo and Juliet
at my high school. I found out why from Mrs. H.---she said that
Shakespeare was good, but the English department felt there was too
much emphasis paid to the man's works and that other, perfectly good
works were ignored in his favor. Hence, we read Macbeth instead of R&J (they wanted to envoke the "what the hell?" aspect that Macbeth
does so well) She was also highly invested in the argument that
Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed to him. She
believed Christopher Marlowe was the true author and she didn't feel
like "perpetuating a fraud" until the matter was settled. Shakespeare, William - Macbeth
Shakespeare, William - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Shakespeare, William - Romeo and Juliet
Shaw, George Bernard - Pygmalion
Shelley, Mary - Frankenstein
Silko, Leslie - Marmon Ceremony
Solzhenitsyn, Alexander One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
Sophocles - Antigone I know I read it, but for the life of me, I can't remember a thing about it.
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex What first walks on four legs, then on two, then on three? Ugh. Sick, sick, sick.
Steinbeck, John - The Grapes of Wrath
Stevenson, Robert Louis - Treasure Island
Stowe, Harriet Beecher - Uncle Tom's Cabin I like Tuptim's adaptation better.
Swift, Jonathan - Gulliver's Travels
Thackeray, William - Vanity Fair
Thoreau, Henry David - Walden Yawn.
Tolstoy, Leo - War and Peace
Turgenev, Ivan - Fathers and Sons
Twain, Mark - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Voltaire - Candide Ah, the good old days of political theory class.
Vonnegut, Kurt Jr. - Slaughterhouse-Five
Walker, Alice - The Color Purple
Warton, Edith - The House of Mirth
Welty, Eudora - Collected Stories
Whitman, Walt Leaves of Grass Yawn. I know, I'm showing a
distinct lack of appreciation for American poets of the
transcendentalist movement. Which seems particularly neglectful and
unappreciative given my own views. Well, pfft. Wilde, Oscar - The
Picture of Dorian Gray Williams, Tennessee - The Glass Menagerie Woolf,
Virginia - To the Lighthouse Wright, Richard - Native Son
The books in bold are the ones I, just like Michele (I'm all about
originality here), read either in high school or in college. Or during
some point in time during my adult life.
I should probably note that the English department at my high school
was the largest department within the entire school. More than a few of
the teachers had their MA's and had started work on their PhD's and
were teaching literature at the college level, but were sick and tired
of the "publish or perish" business so prevalent in universities that
they came and taught at my school. These teachers, of course, had some
rather unorthodox views about classic literature and passed these ideas
along. You'll notice them when you come to them in my list. Achebe,
Chinua - Things Fall Apart Agee, James - A Death in the Family Austin, Jane - Pride and Prejudice Note that the misspelling of Austen's
last name is done by the people who force your kids to study their
asses off for the SAT. I love Austen. This is my favorite novel of
hers. Baldwin, James - Go Tell It on the Mountain Beckett, Samuel -
Waiting for Godot Bellow, Saul - The Adventures of Augie March Bronte, Charlotte Jane Eyre Honestly. What 17 year old girl hasn't read this one?
Bronte, Emily - Wuthering Heights Ditto.
Camus, Albert - The Stranger Still don't know what it was about.
Cather, Willa - Death Comes for the Archbishop I grew up in Nebraska. She's our most famous author. I liked My Antonia better, though. I was told the public school kids had to read "O Pioneers," but we never had to.
Cervantes, Miguel de - Don Quixote I'd rather watch The Man From La Mancha
Chaucer, Geoffrey - The Canterbury Tales
Chekhov, Anton - The Cherry Orchard
Chopin, Kate - The Awakening
Conrad, Joseph - Heart of Darkness Never read this, but I did read Lord Jim We went through it sentence by sentence and deconstructed the language. Oy.
Cooper, James Fenimore - The Last of the Mohicans American Lit.
If I'm remembering correctly, it was the first American novel. Or was
Fenimore Cooper the first American novelist? Ah, who cares. Best
character name that SO didn't fit the character---Natty Bumppo! Crane, Stephen - The Red Badge of Courage
Dante - Inferno And people worry that their kids see too much
violence on TV. Hmmph. Yeah, yeah, I know. Morality tale. Still, one of
the goriest books I've ever read.
Defoe, Daniel-Robinson Crusoe Dickens, Charles - A Tale of Two Cities Dostoyevsky, Fyodor - Crime and Punishment Convinced me at age seventeen I wanted nothing whatsoever to do with Russians. Ever.
Douglass, Frederick - Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Dreiser, Theodore - An American Tragedy
Dumas, Alexandre - The Three Musketeers
Eliot, George - The Mill on the Floss
Ellison, Ralph - Invisible Man
Emerson, Ralph Waldo - Selected Essays Yawn.
Faulkner, William - As I Lay Dying
Faulkner, William - The Sound and the Fury
Fielding, Henry - Tom Jones
Fitzgerald, F. Scott - The Great Gatsby
Flaubert, Gustave - Madame Bovary
Ford, Ford Madox - The Good Soldier
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von - Faust
Golding, William - Lord of the Flies I never had to read this
for class. This book was for the level three girls (translation: not
the brightest bulbs in the box) But my friend was level three and
needed help so I read it to help her.
Hardy, Thomas - Tess of the d'Urbervilles Hawthorne, Nathaniel - The Scarlet Letter
Heller, Joseph Catch 22
Hemingway, Ernest - A Farewell to Arms Gag. I hate Hemingway.
Always have. I'd only read a few of his short stories, and one of them
described this WWI Vet camping, all of his buddies were dead, he was
sad. I remember he was opening a can of oranges to go with his fish
supper and it took FOREVER for this guy to put one in his mouth. This
overly described slice of orange was supposedly a metaphor for loss and
war being horrible and all of that bullshit. But I also hate that I was
enough of a spineless sap at age seventeen to have read this book to
please a boy who wanted to get into my pants. I told him I loved it,
even though I thought it was crap. He thought that Henry's love for
Catherine was "the ideal." Henry was an idiot. Ugh. I tried to disagree
with him, but in the end he was just SO in favor of this book that I
didn't want to disappoint him. Like I said, SPINELESS SAP! (And no, he
didn't get into my pants. Not so spineless after all, I suppose.) Homer - The Iliad
Homer - The Odyssey Both of these. In Latin. Impressive, no? Heh.
Hugo, Victor The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Hurston, Zora Neale Their Eyes Were Watching God
Huxley, Aldous Brave New World
Ibsen, Henrik - A Doll's House Did anyone ever get out of reading this one?
James, Henry - The Portrait of a Lady
James, Henry The Turn of the Screw
Joyce, James - A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man If you're ever to read Joyce, this is the book to attempt. Forget Finnegan's Wake and Ulysses.
Kafka, Franz - The Metamorphosis
Kingston, Maxine Hong - The Woman Warrior
Lee, Harper - To Kill a Mockingbird
Lewis, Sinclair - Babbitt
London, Jack - The Call of the Wild Never read this actually, but I did read To Build a Fire. I've never been so cold in all my life as when I read that.
Mann, Thomas - The Magic Mountain
Marquez, Gabriel Garcia - One Hundred Years of Solitude
Melville, Herman - Bartleby the Scrivener A Story of Wall Street. One of the best short stories I've ever read.
Melville, Herman - Moby Dick
Miller, Arthur - The Crucible
Morrison, Toni - Beloved
O'Connor, Flannery - A Good Man is Hard to Find
O'Neill, Eugene - Long Day's Journey into Night
Orwell, George - Animal Farm The husband tells me that I'm missing something rather good by not having read this. We read <1>1984 instead.
Pasternak, Boris - Doctor Zhivago
Plath, Sylvia - The Bell Jar What? Are they trying to get young girls to off themselves?
Poe, Edgar Allen - Selected Tales Fall of the House of Usher.
Scariest. Story. Ever.
Proust, Marcel - Swann's Way Pynchon, Thomas - The Crying of Lot 49
Remarque, Erich Maria - All Quiet on the Western Front (The English
department apparently wasn't too fond of this book. Everyone I know has
read it. I haven't.) Rostand, Edmond - Cyrano de Bergerac The schnozz!
Roth, Henry - Call It Sleep
Salinger, J.D. - The Catcher in the Rye
Shakespeare, William - Hamlet I only read Macbeth in high school. The rest I read at other times. We didn't read Romeo and Juliet
at my high school. I found out why from Mrs. H.---she said that
Shakespeare was good, but the English department felt there was too
much emphasis paid to the man's works and that other, perfectly good
works were ignored in his favor. Hence, we read Macbeth instead of R&J (they wanted to envoke the "what the hell?" aspect that Macbeth
does so well) She was also highly invested in the argument that
Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed to him. She
believed Christopher Marlowe was the true author and she didn't feel
like "perpetuating a fraud" until the matter was settled. Shakespeare, William - Macbeth
Shakespeare, William - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Shakespeare, William - Romeo and Juliet
Shaw, George Bernard - Pygmalion
Shelley, Mary - Frankenstein
Silko, Leslie - Marmon Ceremony
Solzhenitsyn, Alexander One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
Sophocles - Antigone I know I read it, but for the life of me, I can't remember a thing about it.
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex What first walks on four legs, then on two, then on three? Ugh. Sick, sick, sick.
Steinbeck, John - The Grapes of Wrath
Stevenson, Robert Louis - Treasure Island
Stowe, Harriet Beecher - Uncle Tom's Cabin I like Tuptim's adaptation better.
Swift, Jonathan - Gulliver's Travels
Thackeray, William - Vanity Fair
Thoreau, Henry David - Walden Yawn.
Tolstoy, Leo - War and Peace
Turgenev, Ivan - Fathers and Sons
Twain, Mark - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Voltaire - Candide Ah, the good old days of political theory class.
Vonnegut, Kurt Jr. - Slaughterhouse-Five
Walker, Alice - The Color Purple
Warton, Edith - The House of Mirth
Welty, Eudora - Collected Stories
Whitman, Walt Leaves of Grass Yawn. I know, I'm showing a
distinct lack of appreciation for American poets of the
transcendentalist movement. Which seems particularly neglectful and
unappreciative given my own views. Well, pfft. Wilde, Oscar - The
Picture of Dorian Gray Williams, Tennessee - The Glass Menagerie Woolf,
Virginia - To the Lighthouse Wright, Richard - Native Son
Posted by: Kathy at
08:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1526 words, total size 9 kb.
101 Great Books List recommended
101 Great Books List recommended by the College Board. (Hat Tip: Michele)
The books in bold are the ones I, just like Michele (I'm all about
originality here), read either in high school or in college. Or during
some point in time during my adult life.
I should probably note that the English department at my high school
was the largest department within the entire school. More than a few of
the teachers had their MA's and had started work on their PhD's and
were teaching literature at the college level, but were sick and tired
of the "publish or perish" business so prevalent in universities that
they came and taught at my school. These teachers, of course, had some
rather unorthodox views about classic literature and passed these ideas
along. You'll notice them when you come to them in my list. Achebe,
Chinua - Things Fall Apart Agee, James - A Death in the Family Austin, Jane - Pride and Prejudice Note that the misspelling of Austen's
last name is done by the people who force your kids to study their
asses off for the SAT. I love Austen. This is my favorite novel of
hers. Baldwin, James - Go Tell It on the Mountain Beckett, Samuel -
Waiting for Godot Bellow, Saul - The Adventures of Augie March Bronte, Charlotte Jane Eyre Honestly. What 17 year old girl hasn't read this one?
Bronte, Emily - Wuthering Heights Ditto.
Camus, Albert - The Stranger Still don't know what it was about.
Cather, Willa - Death Comes for the Archbishop I grew up in Nebraska. She's our most famous author. I liked My Antonia better, though. I was told the public school kids had to read "O Pioneers," but we never had to.
Cervantes, Miguel de - Don Quixote I'd rather watch The Man From La Mancha
Chaucer, Geoffrey - The Canterbury Tales
Chekhov, Anton - The Cherry Orchard
Chopin, Kate - The Awakening
Conrad, Joseph - Heart of Darkness Never read this, but I did read Lord Jim We went through it sentence by sentence and deconstructed the language. Oy.
Cooper, James Fenimore - The Last of the Mohicans American Lit.
If I'm remembering correctly, it was the first American novel. Or was
Fenimore Cooper the first American novelist? Ah, who cares. Best
character name that SO didn't fit the character---Natty Bumppo! Crane, Stephen - The Red Badge of Courage
Dante - Inferno And people worry that their kids see too much
violence on TV. Hmmph. Yeah, yeah, I know. Morality tale. Still, one of
the goriest books I've ever read.
Defoe, Daniel-Robinson Crusoe Dickens, Charles - A Tale of Two Cities Dostoyevsky, Fyodor - Crime and Punishment Convinced me at age seventeen I wanted nothing whatsoever to do with Russians. Ever.
Douglass, Frederick - Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Dreiser, Theodore - An American Tragedy
Dumas, Alexandre - The Three Musketeers
Eliot, George - The Mill on the Floss
Ellison, Ralph - Invisible Man
Emerson, Ralph Waldo - Selected Essays Yawn.
Faulkner, William - As I Lay Dying
Faulkner, William - The Sound and the Fury
Fielding, Henry - Tom Jones
Fitzgerald, F. Scott - The Great Gatsby
Flaubert, Gustave - Madame Bovary
Ford, Ford Madox - The Good Soldier
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von - Faust
Golding, William - Lord of the Flies I never had to read this
for class. This book was for the level three girls (translation: not
the brightest bulbs in the box) But my friend was level three and
needed help so I read it to help her.
Hardy, Thomas - Tess of the d'Urbervilles Hawthorne, Nathaniel - The Scarlet Letter
Heller, Joseph Catch 22
Hemingway, Ernest - A Farewell to Arms Gag. I hate Hemingway.
Always have. I'd only read a few of his short stories, and one of them
described this WWI Vet camping, all of his buddies were dead, he was
sad. I remember he was opening a can of oranges to go with his fish
supper and it took FOREVER for this guy to put one in his mouth. This
overly described slice of orange was supposedly a metaphor for loss and
war being horrible and all of that bullshit. But I also hate that I was
enough of a spineless sap at age seventeen to have read this book to
please a boy who wanted to get into my pants. I told him I loved it,
even though I thought it was crap. He thought that Henry's love for
Catherine was "the ideal." Henry was an idiot. Ugh. I tried to disagree
with him, but in the end he was just SO in favor of this book that I
didn't want to disappoint him. Like I said, SPINELESS SAP! (And no, he
didn't get into my pants. Not so spineless after all, I suppose.) Homer - The Iliad
Homer - The Odyssey Both of these. In Latin. Impressive, no? Heh.
Hugo, Victor The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Hurston, Zora Neale Their Eyes Were Watching God
Huxley, Aldous Brave New World
Ibsen, Henrik - A Doll's House Did anyone ever get out of reading this one?
James, Henry - The Portrait of a Lady
James, Henry The Turn of the Screw
Joyce, James - A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man If you're ever to read Joyce, this is the book to attempt. Forget Finnegan's Wake and Ulysses.
Kafka, Franz - The Metamorphosis
Kingston, Maxine Hong - The Woman Warrior
Lee, Harper - To Kill a Mockingbird
Lewis, Sinclair - Babbitt
London, Jack - The Call of the Wild Never read this actually, but I did read To Build a Fire. I've never been so cold in all my life as when I read that.
Mann, Thomas - The Magic Mountain
Marquez, Gabriel Garcia - One Hundred Years of Solitude
Melville, Herman - Bartleby the Scrivener A Story of Wall Street. One of the best short stories I've ever read.
Melville, Herman - Moby Dick
Miller, Arthur - The Crucible
Morrison, Toni - Beloved
O'Connor, Flannery - A Good Man is Hard to Find
O'Neill, Eugene - Long Day's Journey into Night
Orwell, George - Animal Farm The husband tells me that I'm missing something rather good by not having read this. We read <1>1984 instead.
Pasternak, Boris - Doctor Zhivago
Plath, Sylvia - The Bell Jar What? Are they trying to get young girls to off themselves?
Poe, Edgar Allen - Selected Tales Fall of the House of Usher.
Scariest. Story. Ever.
Proust, Marcel - Swann's Way Pynchon, Thomas - The Crying of Lot 49
Remarque, Erich Maria - All Quiet on the Western Front (The English
department apparently wasn't too fond of this book. Everyone I know has
read it. I haven't.) Rostand, Edmond - Cyrano de Bergerac The schnozz!
Roth, Henry - Call It Sleep
Salinger, J.D. - The Catcher in the Rye
Shakespeare, William - Hamlet I only read Macbeth in high school. The rest I read at other times. We didn't read Romeo and Juliet
at my high school. I found out why from Mrs. H.---she said that
Shakespeare was good, but the English department felt there was too
much emphasis paid to the man's works and that other, perfectly good
works were ignored in his favor. Hence, we read Macbeth instead of R&J (they wanted to envoke the "what the hell?" aspect that Macbeth
does so well) She was also highly invested in the argument that
Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed to him. She
believed Christopher Marlowe was the true author and she didn't feel
like "perpetuating a fraud" until the matter was settled. Shakespeare, William - Macbeth
Shakespeare, William - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Shakespeare, William - Romeo and Juliet
Shaw, George Bernard - Pygmalion
Shelley, Mary - Frankenstein
Silko, Leslie - Marmon Ceremony
Solzhenitsyn, Alexander One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
Sophocles - Antigone I know I read it, but for the life of me, I can't remember a thing about it.
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex What first walks on four legs, then on two, then on three? Ugh. Sick, sick, sick.
Steinbeck, John - The Grapes of Wrath
Stevenson, Robert Louis - Treasure Island
Stowe, Harriet Beecher - Uncle Tom's Cabin I like Tuptim's adaptation better.
Swift, Jonathan - Gulliver's Travels
Thackeray, William - Vanity Fair
Thoreau, Henry David - Walden Yawn.
Tolstoy, Leo - War and Peace
Turgenev, Ivan - Fathers and Sons
Twain, Mark - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Voltaire - Candide Ah, the good old days of political theory class.
Vonnegut, Kurt Jr. - Slaughterhouse-Five
Walker, Alice - The Color Purple
Warton, Edith - The House of Mirth
Welty, Eudora - Collected Stories
Whitman, Walt Leaves of Grass Yawn. I know, I'm showing a
distinct lack of appreciation for American poets of the
transcendentalist movement. Which seems particularly neglectful and
unappreciative given my own views. Well, pfft. Wilde, Oscar - The
Picture of Dorian Gray Williams, Tennessee - The Glass Menagerie Woolf,
Virginia - To the Lighthouse Wright, Richard - Native Son
The books in bold are the ones I, just like Michele (I'm all about
originality here), read either in high school or in college. Or during
some point in time during my adult life.
I should probably note that the English department at my high school
was the largest department within the entire school. More than a few of
the teachers had their MA's and had started work on their PhD's and
were teaching literature at the college level, but were sick and tired
of the "publish or perish" business so prevalent in universities that
they came and taught at my school. These teachers, of course, had some
rather unorthodox views about classic literature and passed these ideas
along. You'll notice them when you come to them in my list. Achebe,
Chinua - Things Fall Apart Agee, James - A Death in the Family Austin, Jane - Pride and Prejudice Note that the misspelling of Austen's
last name is done by the people who force your kids to study their
asses off for the SAT. I love Austen. This is my favorite novel of
hers. Baldwin, James - Go Tell It on the Mountain Beckett, Samuel -
Waiting for Godot Bellow, Saul - The Adventures of Augie March Bronte, Charlotte Jane Eyre Honestly. What 17 year old girl hasn't read this one?
Bronte, Emily - Wuthering Heights Ditto.
Camus, Albert - The Stranger Still don't know what it was about.
Cather, Willa - Death Comes for the Archbishop I grew up in Nebraska. She's our most famous author. I liked My Antonia better, though. I was told the public school kids had to read "O Pioneers," but we never had to.
Cervantes, Miguel de - Don Quixote I'd rather watch The Man From La Mancha
Chaucer, Geoffrey - The Canterbury Tales
Chekhov, Anton - The Cherry Orchard
Chopin, Kate - The Awakening
Conrad, Joseph - Heart of Darkness Never read this, but I did read Lord Jim We went through it sentence by sentence and deconstructed the language. Oy.
Cooper, James Fenimore - The Last of the Mohicans American Lit.
If I'm remembering correctly, it was the first American novel. Or was
Fenimore Cooper the first American novelist? Ah, who cares. Best
character name that SO didn't fit the character---Natty Bumppo! Crane, Stephen - The Red Badge of Courage
Dante - Inferno And people worry that their kids see too much
violence on TV. Hmmph. Yeah, yeah, I know. Morality tale. Still, one of
the goriest books I've ever read.
Defoe, Daniel-Robinson Crusoe Dickens, Charles - A Tale of Two Cities Dostoyevsky, Fyodor - Crime and Punishment Convinced me at age seventeen I wanted nothing whatsoever to do with Russians. Ever.
Douglass, Frederick - Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Dreiser, Theodore - An American Tragedy
Dumas, Alexandre - The Three Musketeers
Eliot, George - The Mill on the Floss
Ellison, Ralph - Invisible Man
Emerson, Ralph Waldo - Selected Essays Yawn.
Faulkner, William - As I Lay Dying
Faulkner, William - The Sound and the Fury
Fielding, Henry - Tom Jones
Fitzgerald, F. Scott - The Great Gatsby
Flaubert, Gustave - Madame Bovary
Ford, Ford Madox - The Good Soldier
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von - Faust
Golding, William - Lord of the Flies I never had to read this
for class. This book was for the level three girls (translation: not
the brightest bulbs in the box) But my friend was level three and
needed help so I read it to help her.
Hardy, Thomas - Tess of the d'Urbervilles Hawthorne, Nathaniel - The Scarlet Letter
Heller, Joseph Catch 22
Hemingway, Ernest - A Farewell to Arms Gag. I hate Hemingway.
Always have. I'd only read a few of his short stories, and one of them
described this WWI Vet camping, all of his buddies were dead, he was
sad. I remember he was opening a can of oranges to go with his fish
supper and it took FOREVER for this guy to put one in his mouth. This
overly described slice of orange was supposedly a metaphor for loss and
war being horrible and all of that bullshit. But I also hate that I was
enough of a spineless sap at age seventeen to have read this book to
please a boy who wanted to get into my pants. I told him I loved it,
even though I thought it was crap. He thought that Henry's love for
Catherine was "the ideal." Henry was an idiot. Ugh. I tried to disagree
with him, but in the end he was just SO in favor of this book that I
didn't want to disappoint him. Like I said, SPINELESS SAP! (And no, he
didn't get into my pants. Not so spineless after all, I suppose.) Homer - The Iliad
Homer - The Odyssey Both of these. In Latin. Impressive, no? Heh.
Hugo, Victor The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Hurston, Zora Neale Their Eyes Were Watching God
Huxley, Aldous Brave New World
Ibsen, Henrik - A Doll's House Did anyone ever get out of reading this one?
James, Henry - The Portrait of a Lady
James, Henry The Turn of the Screw
Joyce, James - A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man If you're ever to read Joyce, this is the book to attempt. Forget Finnegan's Wake and Ulysses.
Kafka, Franz - The Metamorphosis
Kingston, Maxine Hong - The Woman Warrior
Lee, Harper - To Kill a Mockingbird
Lewis, Sinclair - Babbitt
London, Jack - The Call of the Wild Never read this actually, but I did read To Build a Fire. I've never been so cold in all my life as when I read that.
Mann, Thomas - The Magic Mountain
Marquez, Gabriel Garcia - One Hundred Years of Solitude
Melville, Herman - Bartleby the Scrivener A Story of Wall Street. One of the best short stories I've ever read.
Melville, Herman - Moby Dick
Miller, Arthur - The Crucible
Morrison, Toni - Beloved
O'Connor, Flannery - A Good Man is Hard to Find
O'Neill, Eugene - Long Day's Journey into Night
Orwell, George - Animal Farm The husband tells me that I'm missing something rather good by not having read this. We read <1>1984 instead.
Pasternak, Boris - Doctor Zhivago
Plath, Sylvia - The Bell Jar What? Are they trying to get young girls to off themselves?
Poe, Edgar Allen - Selected Tales Fall of the House of Usher.
Scariest. Story. Ever.
Proust, Marcel - Swann's Way Pynchon, Thomas - The Crying of Lot 49
Remarque, Erich Maria - All Quiet on the Western Front (The English
department apparently wasn't too fond of this book. Everyone I know has
read it. I haven't.) Rostand, Edmond - Cyrano de Bergerac The schnozz!
Roth, Henry - Call It Sleep
Salinger, J.D. - The Catcher in the Rye
Shakespeare, William - Hamlet I only read Macbeth in high school. The rest I read at other times. We didn't read Romeo and Juliet
at my high school. I found out why from Mrs. H.---she said that
Shakespeare was good, but the English department felt there was too
much emphasis paid to the man's works and that other, perfectly good
works were ignored in his favor. Hence, we read Macbeth instead of R&J (they wanted to envoke the "what the hell?" aspect that Macbeth
does so well) She was also highly invested in the argument that
Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed to him. She
believed Christopher Marlowe was the true author and she didn't feel
like "perpetuating a fraud" until the matter was settled. Shakespeare, William - Macbeth
Shakespeare, William - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Shakespeare, William - Romeo and Juliet
Shaw, George Bernard - Pygmalion
Shelley, Mary - Frankenstein
Silko, Leslie - Marmon Ceremony
Solzhenitsyn, Alexander One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
Sophocles - Antigone I know I read it, but for the life of me, I can't remember a thing about it.
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex What first walks on four legs, then on two, then on three? Ugh. Sick, sick, sick.
Steinbeck, John - The Grapes of Wrath
Stevenson, Robert Louis - Treasure Island
Stowe, Harriet Beecher - Uncle Tom's Cabin I like Tuptim's adaptation better.
Swift, Jonathan - Gulliver's Travels
Thackeray, William - Vanity Fair
Thoreau, Henry David - Walden Yawn.
Tolstoy, Leo - War and Peace
Turgenev, Ivan - Fathers and Sons
Twain, Mark - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Voltaire - Candide Ah, the good old days of political theory class.
Vonnegut, Kurt Jr. - Slaughterhouse-Five
Walker, Alice - The Color Purple
Warton, Edith - The House of Mirth
Welty, Eudora - Collected Stories
Whitman, Walt Leaves of Grass Yawn. I know, I'm showing a
distinct lack of appreciation for American poets of the
transcendentalist movement. Which seems particularly neglectful and
unappreciative given my own views. Well, pfft. Wilde, Oscar - The
Picture of Dorian Gray Williams, Tennessee - The Glass Menagerie Woolf,
Virginia - To the Lighthouse Wright, Richard - Native Son
Posted by: Kathy at
08:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1526 words, total size 9 kb.
Golddiggers beware. HAMBURG, Germany (AFP)
Golddiggers beware.
Might want to stick with the guy who drives the Toyota.
HAMBURG, Germany (AFP) - Drivers of high-performance
Porsche sports cars are more likely to play fast and loose by having
extra-marital sex, according to a poll in the May edition of German
motoring magazine Men's Car.
Might want to stick with the guy who drives the Toyota.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
Golddiggers beware. HAMBURG, Germany (AFP)
Golddiggers beware.
Might want to stick with the guy who drives the Toyota.
HAMBURG, Germany (AFP) - Drivers of high-performance
Porsche sports cars are more likely to play fast and loose by having
extra-marital sex, according to a poll in the May edition of German
motoring magazine Men's Car.
Might want to stick with the guy who drives the Toyota.
Posted by: Kathy at
08:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
111kb generated in CPU 0.0346, elapsed 0.162 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1372 seconds, 179 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
48 queries taking 0.1372 seconds, 179 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
