Caraccioli

I think a true master would recognize that he is not a true master and be humbled even by the excelling athlete. (Sounds a bit cockeyed, but you know.) What is truth, anyway? I was half expecting Duchess to call BS on me and she dinna.' So you are filling in for her? Ok, I was sort of reviewing this whole thing in my head and decided that I move freely through all four, behaving as one type sometimes and another at other times - largely depending on the context (And mood. And skills relative to the situation. And certain other things.) So that makes it somewhat context dependent. In some things, we are one and in other things we are another, depending on our learning. But that waters the whole thing down. I am reminded of speaking with someone (who is typically quite sensible and rational, so I had some faith in their opinion) who had met the Dalai Lama and could not put across to me in words how calm and serene he made them feel. They didn't have faith in him or believe in what he believed, yet he gave off some sort of aura of calm or something. Perhaps he's a true master? Is mastery controlling yourself so that your principles are intact? Or is it surrendering yourself while keeping your principles in the front of your mind? The older I get the more I think it's the latter. If so, the true master probably wouldn't care who was recognized as the true master. Besides, if they're debating that, they're behaving like warriors. Or course, some might say that you become a master when you master "life", but here's the curious discovery I've made (or expanded upon) since we last discussed such things a year or two ago: everyone lives in their own individual world. Your world (dear reader) is not the same as my world. At all. And if you and I were to switch lives (via some silly Disney vehicle), we would be completely lost in each others' world. We would eventually come to understand how to function in the new world in which we found ourselves, but we would function in a completely different way. This, I submit, would be due to our past experiences up to the point where we became functional. So, stepping back, no one's world is like anyone else's world and they never will be. So, at best, you can be a master in your own world and your own life and this will most likely not transfer well to another person's world/life. It's all about your perceptive world. (This is why there can be no absolute universal truth. Even the ones we have stumbled across (killing is bad for ex.) are rife with shades of grey (Unless you're in a war. Unless you're about to be killed by someone other. Never. Unless it's an accident. Unless you won't get caught. Unless, unless, unless. It's different for everyone based upon (guess) your perception.)

Death of a Salesman?

What the hell is that thing? The Chattanooga Chew Chew? I think it was in a movie. (I really think it was some pet project of H.R. Giger's that he showed to a director who said, "Oh, what the hell. Let's put it in the movie.") Giger is probably best known for his design of the aliens from the movies of the same name(s) and Sil from the Species' movies. (And yet, while I know all this, I've only seen the movie Aliens from either of those series of movies.) Giger is into the whole cyborg, exoskeleton, scaly monster kit-bashing thing. I had a friend who had a book of his sketches. Weird. Just plain weird.

That reason never even occurred to me, but it makes perfect sense. Google ranks sites on their page based on the number of links it can find to your page. The more popular the site containing the link, the more it boosts their rating. (Thanks for the clear insight!)

That reminds me of this: and it sort of reminds me of this (H.R. Giger is so weird):

I don't work at one, but I completely understand.

I'm curious -- how many of you made choices (either consciously or subconsciously) based on characters who had traits similar to your own? I find that when I consciously and theoretically choose the "ideal" mate, I tend the think about traits that I have and mentally search for people with similar traits. When I find people I actually like and am attracted to, however, this is not quite as strongly the case.

Hey, if you guys see them somewhere, report them to the mods. (We try to catch this stuff, but help is usually appreciated. There was one in the maps sticky thread that I failed to catch for almost a month. ) Oh, and FYI - as a mod, I can only modify posts in THIS forum. I cannot go into Way to a Pyrate's Heart and change anything there. Only Iron Bess can do that. The best way to report a felonious thread is to use the "Report" button in the upper right hand corner of the post. That way the concern will be routed to the right moderator with a handy-dandy link that allows us to zero in on the thing. Thanks!!

Good point. Here's to reality (or what passes for it.)

I want one! My friend had a '57 when he was in college. It really wasn't all that much different than the modern Beetles. (I think the Beetles built in the early 50s and before had that split rear window that is shown on the logo for the Old Bug site.) If I remember correctly, the reason they stopped building them in the US was due to emissions regulations. They couldn't make that air cooled rear engine fit very well in the wee engine compartment with all the emission crap on it or it was too expensive for the acceptable sticker price of the car or some such. So they started making them in Mexico where no one cared about emissions.

Well, it's not my philosophy, so all I can do is explain it as I understand it. The Master realizes that charity is not actually helping people, it is simply prolonging the inevitable in most cases. So the master teaches others to become self-sufficient masters. It's sort of a variation on the "Give a man a fish..." philosophy as I see it. But again, that's my conceptualization. This would be a good time to plug a very interesting book by Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame): God's Debris.

What a strange (to me) way to measure who you'd want to spend time with. (No offense meant here.) Have you ever seen one photo of a person that makes them look ok and then seen another that makes them look fantastic? It may even be a picture of them taken on the same day at the same place, wearing the same kit. Photographs (and all appearances for that matter) can disguise an awful lot. I think it's a pretty poor tool for making such a decision. This reminds me of a philosophy I like (and I'm not sure who came up with it) that people can go through four stages in their life. The first is the Athlete - where you show your talents off. The second is the Warrior - where you pit your talent against others. The third is the Statesman/Stateswoman - where you use your talents as a benefactor, working on others' behalf . The fourth is the Master - where you teach others what you have learned. Some people get stuck and never go beyond a particular level. Appearance is down there at level one. I'll take a higher order mate over a lower order one any day.

Actually, having only seen the movie and still pondering my foray into the show, my opinion may not count as highly as some others who are so well-versed in this bit of fiction, but I really liked River the best of all the characters. She was creepy, but she was also the most complex one of the lot. Hidden depths and all that. Now, would I choose to be on a desert island with such a person? Possibly. She'd probably be the most interesting person to philosophize with. So I'll take River and the professor for interesting desert island companions. If you're going to be stuck on a desert island with someone (which is not actually the conditions of this question, but I'm good at wandering OT), it may as well be someone you can have interesting discussions with. (I know some of you may disagree with me here, but we all view the world in our own ways, eh?) [Edit: I had not yet read blackjohn's follow up post to the above-quoted post when I posted this. We agree yet again. Weren't you going to buy me a scotch when we met? Maybe we should buy each other a scotch... ]

Good answer.

Say, does anyone have a picture of Venezuelan Beaver Cheese?

Eliciting us to go to a cheese site? That's Spam! (Er, no, that's it's not...Edam? Gouda? Stilton? Japanese Sage Darby? Venezuelan Beaver Cheese?) SHUT THAT BLOODY BAZOUKI OFF!

Yes, SciFi/Western/Soap Opera have worked for me before. I actually purchased some of the Cowboy Bebop DVDs after I rented it on Duchess's recommendation. It sort of depends if I like one of the characters. In the case of Bebop, it was the character of Ed...and Ein the hyper-intelligent Welsh Corgi dog. (Ed - another fictional female of fine report, although she's only 13.)

Well, not usually. There's your and blackjohn's concerted opinions working here. Plus if Patrick liked it...well, I guess selected peer pressure may be working. I have this whole system of movie recommendation checks and balances working in my head. I wish I could explain it, but... My natural skepticism is still at work here. I have a learned bias against SciFi for some reason I can't explain. (Could it have been that night in Montana when I was abducted by aliens? Nah... ) So it's on my list, but I'm going to finish Season 1 of McLeod's Daughters before I consider the four Firefly discs. You're so right. Based on your comments now I'm really worried about those last three episodes. I know Eric's wife returns, so what happens to poor Jaye? Don't tell me... (Say, I forgot Jaye in my list of cool fictional females.) Ah, but Netflix will solve that for me. It takes a week to turn a disc around and there are four of them, so this will take me a month from the point at which I begin. I really do have an acquired bias against the more pure strains of SciFi and this may dampen my opinion somewhat. Hard to say. OTOH, Men in Black is a minor favorite movie of mine, so I guess it could go either way.

As you and I have discussed off-line, my ambiguity tolerance level is pretty low. With the series being so short and what I saw in the movie...well, I fear for having to keep wondering what happened. (I still have not watched the last three episodes of the magnificent series Wonderfalls or the last season finale episode of The Pretender for this reason (And I'm complaining about 15 hours. ). Ironically enough, this puts me in the doubly ambiguous situation of not having completed these two series and still wondering what happened. I think about that from time to time - it gnaws away like a little trapped squirrel.) Alright, fine. I'll put it on my Netflix list. Maybe I can watch it while I'm building my antique POTC dioramas...probably not, though. I get too involved.

Finished The Big Bounce up and started on The Thin Man by Dashiell Hammett. It's pretty good so far - a very sharp and witty detective novel. I may have to go back and watch the movies again (they're loads of fun).

Well, I still haven't watched this series (15 hours of time watching old TV that hasn't quite captured my imagination for some reason...), so I can't call that one. As for Ginger/Mary Ann, my choice is: Isolation on the other side of the island. Maybe I'd come back to talk to the professor, but the rest of them...definitely isolation. If I'm picking amongst fictional women, I definitely want more options. (Tiffany Case from the book (not the movie...gawd) Diamonds are Forever? Possibly. Moxie Mooney from the books Fletch's Moxie and Fletch and the Widow Bradley? Could be. It's difficult to say, since I only have glimpses. This is also assuming, of course, that any of them would put up with me. (How's that for an answer? ))

Not to get OT (oh, what the heck), but I always thought it was funny that they occasionally used curse words in German in the Indy movies that they didn't (and probably wouldn't) use in American (back then there was no PG-13 rating and the taboos were a slightly different). I wonder if that's because the censors figured few people would get it?

I don't know if it still runs, but if I were loaded, I'd hunt down the owner and buy it from him, have it all running, and bug about town in it. Oh, the looks I'd get! Oh, the insects you'd be picking out of your clothes...and hair...and probably teeth! (I've read about what it was like before they had the modern enclosed cars with the modern sloping windshields...you just have no idea.) With Herbie and the trolley sitting across the aisle, I'd guess it's in some sort of museum or public showcase somewhere.

Red Cat Jenny has made me aware that I haven't ever explained what the Caraccioli username means. So I should remedy that. First, I am a Mission in Caraccioli's clothing. I switched user IDs when Mission reached 1000 posts and earned the coveted Since I don't want it to ever change, I rarely post as Mission anymore. That way his post count doesn't increase to the point where he graduates to the next icon. My alternate ID at another pirate forum was Caraccioli, so I just dragged it over when I realized I needed a new ID. (I don't know what will happen when Caraccioli reaches that level.) Why Caraccioli? Because he was Captain Misson's ex-priest muse, after a fashion. Caraccioli was the thinking side of the Misson fairy tale and Misson was the action side. Who is Captain Misson? He was a fictional pirate that made it into The General History of Pyrates by Captain Charles Johnson. Misson's story was also released as standalone book under the name Of Captain Misson. Since it's no longer copyrighted, you can read the whole book here. It's basically a story about pirates as free-thinking libertarians (as well as Socialists, oddly enough) and the source of a lot of the romantic "Pirates were actually people seeking freedom from tyranny" myths.

My avatar? Never judge me (or Blackjohn) by the avatar you see. I like weird things and I like to change my avatar to reflect that. (See the new version of What does your avatar mean? for more on that.) Besides, I created the The Brain, Chaos and Whatnot thread under my other user name - shouldn't that have been warning enough about the weird stuff I ponder? I believe How to Lie With Statistics is less of a guidebook than an expose of how people misuse statistics. (So maybe it could be used as a guidebook after all.) I think it's just a catchy title the author came up with to attract attention to his book. (It worked, too. It was first published in 1956.) Now, as for Caraccioli, well perhaps I've never explained that. To remedy this oversight, I will do so in the What does your username mean? thread.