John Ray: Dickens

[pseudonym67]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

Very often it was better to be in the workplace where you would be warm and fed, rather than at home, where conditions where far more cramped and squalid.

Quite possibly true but at the time there was a general fear of the workhouse and what went on there. In the Our Mutual Friend there is an elderly lady who prefers to take her chances and ends up dying in a ditch to escape the workhouse.

pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Beginning KDevelop Programming[^]

[Lost User]

Apparently, life in the workhouse was just above the quality of life experienced in Debtors Prisons. Horrible places no doubt but peoples of that era had little choices available to them.

[Stan Shannon]

Oakman wrote:

none of them thought they had the answer and tried to shove it down anyone's throat the way you do.

But I have not tried to shove anything down anyone's throat. The only people trying to do that are those trying to shove secular humanism and marxism down the troat of western civilization. My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol. However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems. When you can invent the cause, you can invent the solution. I did not assert any thing that denies that there was a great deal of misery during that era. But out of it came new ways of thinking about the political relationships between institutions in our society. And one of those was certainly the notion that government was uniquely qualified and responsible for the resolution of such problems. And that, therefore, any institution within our society which conflicted in any way with the role of government was bad because government was good. All of which led inevitable to the rise of Adolph Hitler. So, yes, Jon, Charles Dickens casued the holocaust!!!!!!

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

[Lost User]

Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it. But if you want to investigate further the time lines during that Victorian era, I do give references above (in my reply to Christian Graus) that should settle your mind to some extent. Read them, you might be surprised of what you might learn. And your suggestion that Charles Dickens caused the holocaust is ludicrous.

[Oakman]

Tim Craig wrote:

Remember the ex-paratrooper turned biology professor who was looking to kick his ass?

I thought that was you. :laugh:

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Oakman]

73Zeppelin wrote:

It's not just Dickens

No, of course not. He tries hard to pass himself off as an intellectual, but it's all show. In this case he thought that reading a review of Dickens's oeuvre by an Aussie whose elevator doesn't go to the top floor all that often would somehow allow him to pass himself off as an expert on the man that some consider the second best writer to work in English. He should have known that someone would call him on it, but like a lot of third-raters he imagines everyone else to be as uneducated as he is.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Oakman]

Stan Shannon wrote:

My most intiment study of Charles Dickens happens to be Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol.

That is not surprising.

Stan Shannon wrote:

However, my assertions about Dickens was that, as with modern liberals, he misidentifies the cause of problems.

And you know this from Mr. Magoo? You are as blind as he is. Stan, you don't know what you are talking about. You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Oakman]

Ilíon wrote:

I'd read this NYT piece a few days before Ray put up his post.

You mean after staying awake all night trying to find something that you could claim supported your OP. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: This opinion piece first claims that Dickens was writing about a 400 calorie oatmeal gruel, but Dickens never said that. He then claims that some workhouses fed a more nuitritious oatmeal gruel and that Oliver would, in reality, be given that. Of course, nothing in Oliver Twist deals with the calorie content of the gruel. He goes on to suggest that Oliver might have had his gruel diet supplemented by meat and vegetables - but admits that such largesse from the orphanage would not have had to have happened, but is only a supposition on his part.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Oakman]

73Zeppelin wrote:

Your analyses of Dickens in the context of this thread are impressive.

Thanks. I appreciate your thoughts. :)

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Lost User]

The problem Jon is that both Ilion and Stan are taking the words of Dickens as a factual account of peoples lives of the time. But the truth is, they are works of fiction. Nothing more, nothing less, although they are great stories. But stories based upon what he saw and witnessed. Yet in terms of historical context, these works of Dickens are thought to indeed reflect some truth and reality. As far as Ilion and Stan are concerned, it is evident that they are placing things outside of historical context.

[Christian Graus]

Yeah, that must be why I succeed in discussing things with most people. Because the problem is me, not you.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

[Christian Graus]

*grin* it's a Boratism that has drifted into every day use.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

[Oakman]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

But the truth is, they are works of fiction

Of course. Dickens, like Shakespeare, Moliere, Updike, et al, first and foremost writes to tell a story. A saleable story. He described degradation and squalor not to have everyone run to the barricades but to arouse sympathy for his protagonist - which in turn would mean they would be happy when that protagonist overcame the odds and prospered. The thing these self-proclaim literary critics show no sign of understanding is that in order to have a happy ending, one needs to have an unhappy beginning. No-one will be glad at heart because Tiny Tim did not die, if we had not already been told that he would die within a year.

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

As far as Ilion and Stan are concerned, it is evident that they are placing things outside of historical context.

They have no idea what that context is. Ignorance, in this case, is not bliss, but asininity

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Stan Shannon]

Oakman wrote:

You are trying to deal yourself into a high-stakes poker game and you don't even have enough for the ante. Your "analysis" is not only all wrong, it is pathetically bad. It classifies you with Ilion as a wannabee educated person trying hard to sound knowledgeable about something when every word you speak reveals your ignorance.

And you, Jon, are not the final arbiter of what represents education. I am actually pretty damn sure that I am far more well educated than you are, both in terms of degrees held, and personal research. So, sorry, but I simply do not need your approval to register an opinion. I do not, and have not for a very long time, accepted the standard interpretation of history provided by the current educational system. It is simply fraught with blatant inaccuracies and leftwing biases. Again, your own ideas on the SOuth are a perfect example of that. YOu have clearly read a small bit of literature on the topic which supports your preconcieved opinions and have done no actual personal research on the topic at all. Hell, Jon, I see precious little evidence that you understand what an education even is. The ultimate goal of being educated is being able to formulate your own opinions and world views, not simply regurgitating and quoting the views of others. And your continued comparison of me to Illion is actually quite humorous. Illion and I have virtually nothing in common aside from a certain agreement concerning politics. What you, and others, demonstrate is that anyone who dare interject any disagreement with the standard left leaning model of history, government and society comprise a dangerous collective 'other' who must not be allowed into you little closely guarded intellectual circle. In other words, Jon, you are a perfect example of how the anti-intellectual left 'Palinizes' its opposition.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

[Oakman]

Christian Graus wrote:

*grin* it's a Boratism that has drifted into every day use.

Actually I heard it used in Buffy the Vampire Slayer circa 1997, but in context, 'tis veddy veddy British, donchaknow.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Stan Shannon]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

Charles Dickens was a teller of stories. These stories happened to reflect life as he saw it.

Well, hells bells, I just refer to Jane Austin than.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

[Lost User]

Jane Austin - another great story teller. But was a story teller of English middle and upper classes, and as with Dickens, there is some degree of truth to what she wrote about.

[Oakman]

Stan Shannon wrote:

I am actually pretty damn sure that I am far more well educated than you are, both in terms of degrees held, and personal research.

Could be. However, I have trouble believing that anyone who claims English as his mother tongue and who has never read Dickens is worthy of the label, "educated." Illiterate seems far more appropriate.

Stan Shannon wrote:

I do not, and have not for a very long time, accepted the standard interpretation of history provided by the current educational system.

Yes. I understand that. I can't imagine that there is anyone else in the world besides you and Ilion who thinks that Dickens is a cause of Hitler.

Stan Shannon wrote:

The ultimate goal of being educated is being able to formulate your own opinions and world views, not simply regurgitating and quoting the views of others.

Really? I thought the idea was to learn about, and ultimately to understand some small part of, the universe. Perhaps if you spent more time receiving and less broadcasting, you might be shoocked to discover how much more there is to learn.

Stan Shannon wrote:

And your continued comparison of me to Illion is actually quite humorous.

No, it sad. You have far more potential than he does, yet you emulate him in the forum more and more.

Stan Shannon wrote:

What you, and others, demonstrate is that anyone who dare interject any disagreement with the standard left leaning model of history, government and society comprise a dangerous collective 'other' who must not be allowed into you little closely guarded intellectual circle.

Yes, I have noticed how Mr. Plankton, or Mike Gaskey have been ostracized for their non-left-leaning views. It is not your views, Stan. It is you that is being isolated, because you prove over and over again unable to learn. Unable to admit you are wrong. Unable to change. Unable to respect anyone's views that do not coincide with your own. Likewise, it is not Ilion's views that make his name synonymous with "asshole" in this forum, it is his behavior. If you want people to stop associating the two of you in their minds, it's up to you to stop acting like him.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Oakman]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

Jane Austin - another great story teller.

Stan's only contact with Dicken is via Mr. Magoo; with Austin's novels it is the Bollywood classic: Bride and Prejudice. Think I am making the name up?[^] However, I am sure we will shortly be blessed with a treatise on why Jane Austin caused Gordon Brown. Or maybe Sarah Palin.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

[Stan Shannon]

Oakman wrote:

Could be. However, I have trouble believing that anyone who claims English as his mother tongue and who has never read Dickens is worthy of the label, "educated." Illiterate seems far more appropriate.

I actually find that to be just about the most boring place and time of human history. I've never been able to generate much intellectual interest in it. But, then, I've also never cared for Melvile, Twain, Hemmingway either, or really any other form or art and expression from the 19th and early 20th century. Though, I really do enjoy Steinbeck and Faulkner. So, maybe it is just personal taste. Heck, I eve detest Shakespeare.

Oakman wrote:

I thought the idea was to learn about, and ultimately to understand some small part of, the universe. Perhaps if you spent more time receiving and less broadcasting, you might be shoocked to discover how much more there is to learn.

No, that itsn't it at all. Understaninding, which I have devoted my life to, is, of course, important. But understanding can never be perfect. At some point, you must form your own unique perspectives on what it all means.

Oakman wrote:

Yes, I have noticed how Mr. Plankton, or Mike Gaskey have been ostracized for their non-left-leaning views.

That is only becuase both, to some extent, endorse a libertarian perspective. I don't. And it is that which you cannot tolerate.

Oakman wrote:

It is you that is being isolated, because you prove over and over again unable to learn. Unable to admit you are wrong. Unable to change. Unable to respect anyone's views that do not coincide with your own.

That statement is an absurdity on its surface. First, my entire argument is evidence of my ability to change and admit to being wrong. There was a time in my life when you and I would have agreed on far more than we do now. I now understand more than I once did and I realize why your views are intellectually flawed and self serving. I have shown far less disrespect for the views of others than they have for mine. Hell, my great crime is that I endorse true Jeffersonian principles and I tend to be a contrarian even on issues tht I largely agree with - such as evolution, for example. That is probably something Illion and I have in common. Illion promotes a farily traditioanlly christ