Caraccioli

Er, the cartoon. If you're going to publish things like that for mass consumption, it seems to me that the least you can do is write it properly. That was intentially written incorrectly. (Sorry, pet peeve. Don't even get me started on e.e. cummings...)

Aiiiieee! Such awful use of punctuation and capitalization!

I don't know about that. The success and multiple printings of General History and other pamphlets on the same topic from the time might suggest that there was some popular interest in the pirates. Even today, we sometimes make heroes (or at least anti-heroes) out of criminals.

So...what does your wife think of that, blackjohn? Although you would think tigers would be more popular as pets if that were true. Love - at least as near as my analytical mind can make of it - is really something completely other than the bill of goods we're sold. It's about understanding, companionship, learning and partnership.

Ah, John DeLorean. Sorry, Patrick, he was pretty much a crook in his own right. And I owned one of his cars and thought pretty well of it. DeLorean's biggest problem was that he was on the public dole - the UK's, not ours. He was burning through cash at an tremendous rate. He was trying to get more money from Mother England and Thatcher wouldn't give it to him; she felt the public trust had already been abused enough. So he pulled that cocaine stunt - a classic case of the ends justify the means. Of course, the investigators botched the sting badly enough to allow him to get off. Shame on them. The car wasn't that bad. It had a some bugs initially, but what car platform from the late 70's (when it was designed) didn't? Especially one that had such a revolutionary design. (It is vastly different than the Bricklin - a car to which it is often compared. And, contrary to popular belief, there wasn't a GM component in the thing. GM hated DeLorean for writing a tell-all book about their corporate culture. He was a nasty piece of work sometimes...) Once all the safety bulletins were fulfilled, the car was reasonably reliable. More reliable than many cars released in the early 80s. And mine was still running fine when in sold it in 2003 - 21 years after it was manufactured. How many other cars from that era can say likewise? It's biggest flaw was that it was underpowered. For such an expensive, flashy car, all it had was a V6. And despite my comments, I never had a problem with the mechanical fuel injection in 11 years. (I always worried about it, though. I didn't really understand it.) It was also slightly overpriced. The Corvette cost something around $19K when the DMC came out in 1981 and the DeLorean retailed for $25K. The economy was also in bad shape in 1980/81 when the first ones became available. Not a good harbinger for an expensive sports car. If only it had come out in 1984, the whole story might have been different. I still think it's a beautiful car.

Actually, there is an Auburn/Cord/Duesenberg museum not far from me in Auburn, Indiana. I have never been there, but have always wanted to see it. They are all beautiful examples of Art Deco automobiles. http://www.acdmuseum.org/

What a fright and maiming bunch they were? We had a good time at Disneyworld proper, we did. The number and variety of rides you can ride in six hours with Cpt. Sophia is equal to the number you will ride in three days trying to navigate that place on your own. She actually took the photo I am using as my avatar during our sojourn. (I was quite taken with the idea of pirate skeletons playing chess. I wish they'd make a model of it in scale with the old POTC Zap Action! models... Zap Action! chess. Whoo.) Someday I'm intending to meet Foxe, Blackjohn and Duchess as well. (Ed - co-birthday celebrations in the old country next year? )

Hey, hey! HEY! It's a beautiful piece of art that unfortunately was given mechanical fuel injection and a six cylinder engine. "It's like an airplane...without wings!" (Beauty is, naturally, in the eye of the beholder.) Close. It's an Auburn Boattail Speedster. Yes, exactly. Of all the more esoteric styles (other than Art Deco), I have long enjoyed, and even tried my had at, Impressionism. It can be most amazing. On a certain level, I appreciate Cubism as well, but for the most part it just didn't click with me. At least it's somewhat challenging to render, if done properly.

Art. (Art Deco, actually) More art. All depends on how you interpret it.

I was going to put this in Random Topics, but that seems to be off in another direction just now, so I thought I'd give it a chance at life on its own. They have the Rodin/Claudelle exhibit on view at the Detroit Institute of Arts - apparently it's the only museum in the US where this will appear. Having read somewhat extensively on Rodin (quite a character, really), I wanted to see it. I was going to give it a pass until I recently came across someone who was like-minded in their desire. It was interesting to compare the works to the history and the things I knew about them. I was awed by the startling amount of detail and expressiveness in the figures. Rodin and Claudelle put literally years into sculpting some of the larger figures. I don't know if it would be possible for an artist to do likewise today without almost becoming a hermit. A cynical part of me wonders if that isn't why large parts of the art world has embraced modern art - which often vastly simplifies form. In its defense, I have rather gone on about Art Deco in the past - a style which greatly simplifies form. So I admit that I can enjoy that as well. Still, this display was quite entrancing. I was particularly struck by Rodin's Danaid - a female form half buried in rock. Willfully ignoring the story of the piece, I wondered at the idea I took from it. Was she sinking into the rock in despair as her posture suggests? Or was she struggling to emerge from it? I locked the description on the placard of the true meaning Rodin imparted into the sculpture away and refuse to entertain it any further. Let it find its own entertainment! Isn't that is what good art is about? Providing some message to the observer, no matter how far away from the intentions of the artist that meaning is? I once drew a coloured-pencil sketch of a girl sitting on a surfboard looking rather moodily aside. It is actually one of my favorite pieces. I have a meaning that I originally assigned to it, but others who have seen it have explained its meaning to them quite differently. (Sometimes much better than the meaning I had designed if for, actually.) This often reminds me of (of all things) the Neil Diamond song Turn on Your Heartlight. My sister was a huge fan of Neil's and I was delighted to discover that this song, as Neil envisioned it, was about...E.T.! Of course, many people who have heard the song and who can appreciate Neil (like my sister) assign a completely different meaning to it and appreciate it at their level of understanding. So in a way, that may representitive of great art. (Although you will never see me put Neil in the same sentence as "great art." Well, except for that last sentence, you won't.)

I'll take the scent of fresh ground coffee, thanks...

Most of mine were in the balanced arena. I did pretty badly on recognizing the line angles, but I was really strong in the rotated shapes (engineer) and the word questions. My empathy score was 2 out of 20. That'd be about right...

A friend of mine has a book the explains what sex your brain is (ie - more female or more male). It's creatively called (what else?) Brain Sex. It has to do with right/left brain stuff - creativity vs. logic and all that jazz.) As in all these theories, it only makes complete sense if you read the book. And, to be honest, I've never read the book. But my friend talks about it all the time and had wanted me to take the test. Today I found an on-line version of the test at the BBC site. It has 6 parts and is pretty intricate - in fact, it takes a good 10-15 minutes to do, so be warned. You need a metric ruler to to measure the length of each of your ring and index fingers for part of it as well. Brain Sex Test I came out as having a slightly female brain (like a 15 or so). My friend (with the book) said he thought I probably had a fairly balanced brain sex ratio and I suppose this agrees with that assessment. (The scale is 100 female to 0 Balanced (center) to 100 male.)

You're talking about Through the Looking Glass. (Although a looking glass is indeed a mirror.) `Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe: All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe. "Beware the Jabberwock, my son! The jaws that bite, the claws that catch! Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun The frumious Bandersnatch!" He took his vorpal sword in hand: Long time the manxome foe he sought -- So rested he by the Tumtum tree, And stood awhile in thought. And, as in uffish thought he stood, The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame, Came whiffling through the tulgey wood, And burbled as it came! One, two! One, two! And through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack! He left it dead, and with its head He went galumphing back. "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. `Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe; All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe. (And all you D&D folks thought Vorpal swords were something that Gygax came up with...) You should try reading the odd poetry books that John Lennon wrote if you can find one. (Well, you should try it if you like this stuff. Never could make head nor tail of it myself. Except the vorpal blades, of course.) _____________________ "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." -The Red Queen

What? *Looking around* What? It's not my turn to come up with a quote and there's nothing to guess. I'm just having a nice conversation in one of my favorite posts. What?!

Ah, but if they'd have said "She's German?" it would have had double meanings. Personally, I would have found that even more entertaining.

Oh yes. How did they get 'Italian' out of 'Nosferatu' (which I believe is actually German)?

Actually, you're supposed to respond with the first thing that comes into your head. (The, er, "gut" response.) The reason the test usually fails to work properly is because people are trying to portray themselves in a way they would not normally behave. It is, by definition, a behavioral test, so answering in a way that sought a desired, idealized version of your behavior would confuse it. Well, if it were animate, it would confuse it.

Now, that is interesting. My parents are both Ss. My one sister is an ISTJ (which sort of makes sense), but my other sister is an ENFP. Bunch of Ns springing from the loins of Ss. What does your mom do?

Forii?

An attractive freshman student lingered in the classroom after all the final exams had been handed in. The professor looked at her and asked, "Were you waiting to see me?" "Yes," she answered, "I'm really worried about my grade and I would just do anything to make sure I pass." "Really?" the professor replied incredulously. "Anything?" "Oh yes," the student assured him, smiling demurely, "I really would. Just name it." "Okay." The professor leaned close and asked in a confidential whisper, "Would you study?"

That was the first time you took it? I thought you were familiar with the test the way you talked about it. Lessee...Blackjohn is an ENFP or an ENTP and Duchess is an INTP. (Whereever they've gotten to lately.) I hope they don't mind me tattling, although there are verifying posts on the board here somewheres...

Rumba, I'd guess you were an ESFP. But it's just a guess.

I actually have a training session I give on this material. Anyone who has ever taken the Colors test is basically taking a simplified Myers-Briggs personality test. (The Keirsey Temperament test is based on the Myers-Briggs Temperament Indicator test.) The notion that there are four basic personality types goes all the way back to Hippocrates. Carl Jung most recently brought the idea into the popular consciousness again in the 1920s and Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs used that to come up with the material we use today. If you're strongly typed, it has a lot of relevance. If you're not, well, it doesn't. (You'll think things like, well, I'm kinda' like that, but I'm also like this...) I've heard that the material is accurate in more cases than it is not, however. One thing I do know is that many people test differently when they're at work and must behave in one fashion than they do when they're at home and can behave more naturally. My question is, what do you do with the information once you have it? Keirsey has some stuff about management styles, raising children and matchmaking using MBTI, but I don't personally agree with all of it. We've actually talked about it here before. I'm an INTJ. Very strongly typed. If you were to look it up, you'd see how my behavior here reflects this. Of course, most people are more interested in how they test and what they can do with these ideas than with how other people behave. (I'm always curious about other people's types. More to see how what I see them doing reflects what the test says than anything.)

Well, I have serious doubts about the whole past lives theory. I personally suspect people take present day experience and documented information on past experiences and create rich stories. Our minds are magnificent little machines. Have you ever noticed that most people who talk about past lives were famous people? How come no one was ever talks about their life experience as the undocumented third head janitor of the Louvre?