Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
Friends we were with xmas eve have covid, one of who will need some oxygen at the hospital. She should be OK but its not an incidental admission.
Sorry to hear that. May I enquire the ages?
IMO people are stretching the 'incidental admissions' excuse to breaking point.
So I don’t think this is really the case. Chris Hopson, head of NHS providers was very candid on this this morning on radio 5. Very noticeable trend in the admissions. So the idea that this is wishful thinking from uninformed people is not fair, its being observed and reported at the highest level.
I didn't say that incidental admissions are not an important portion of the picture. I'm saying the attitude on here that rises in cases can be somehow ignored because of 'incidentals' is wrong.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
I'm not proud I didn't understand it.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
Cue obvious jokes. Judging by the bios of the twats tweeting their Hogmanay in England plans, most of them are Rangers fans. Hope you enjoy helping those lads with their mental health, southron neighbours.
Nothing or nobody could cure those knuckle draggers.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
I am from the north of Italy and many of you will remember how our area was deeply hit at the beginning. I did my part joining the frontline (at the time I was assigned to surgery) without any protection, I recall putting trash bags over my uniform, 3 surgical mask on top of each other and accessing those rooms full of pronated people with chin lesions hooked to ventilators I've never even saw during nursing school. People confused and gasping from the lack of O2, people allucinating with burning fever, people without proper ventilation because there where simply no more machines.
At the time I had already seen my share of deaths on duty since I graduated a few years ago, but there was something hunting in watching a person suffocating, eyes rotating and all, without being able to help them. It was excruciating, but those people never had a choice, they were infected in a time when we didn't know much nor we had the instruments we have now, so there was just sadness for their situation in my heart and the best I could do for them was providing the best care I was capable of, every day at 101% and I always went back home exhausted but I knew I made my part in trying to make those people less miserable and maybe contributing in saving a few of them.
As many of us who were deeply affected and risked for months without proper gear, I got some professional help to cope with so much death.
But now things have changed. Now most of ICU patients are Unvaxxed people who will literally try to rip your gear off when you approach them with a syringe (insuline syringe, cortisonic drugs are heavily used to try to keep the inflammation under control but will increase your sugar blood level) because they fear you will inoculate them with the vaccine. I am talking about barely alive people chained to 6 iv pumps with heavy drugs, a ventilator, with a catheter in every hole. But still they will spit on you, calling you a "government sheep" for trying to keep them alive. Keeping on all the gear you guys largely saw on TV for hours and hours to provide care to those people is making me consider to quit my job and never hear of an hospital again, expecially because they are yeeting themself into coffins but they obviously still cause societal harm and this is always in the back of my mind when providing care to them. They had a choice, they had time, they choose to not to be vaccinated, they are using hospitals funds and being generally horrible with the staff, while on the first wave people were grateful at us trying to give them some dignity, and covid caregiving wasn't as developed as now so it's a paradox but Unvaxxed people have also better care than those who were hit and died with the first wave because now hospitals are equipped and staff is far more experienced in the matter.
Do you have any advice to try to cope with those people? Sorry for any typo I've might have written, I am on my phone.
Assuming it is true: Bloody hell
And still we pussy around with the anti-vaxxers. Grrr
Maybe it's time for vaccine refuseniks to contribute towards the cost of their hospital treatment if they can afford to do so (and there were no medical reasons for them to refuse the jab).
Tax them. Tax them all. If they're on benefits, reduce their benefits.
Keep an eye on what's going on in Italy. As I mentioned earlier, there have been rumblings about removing the negative test exemption from the Italian Covid green pass scheme.
Should that happen then no-one who can offer proof of vaccination, recovery from infection or a proper medical exemption will be able to remain in paid employment.
Confronting the heel diggers with financial ruin in this way would be quick, easy to administer, and has the best chance of forcing them to bend. If they go through with it, it might work.
If that nurse story is true (i am exceptionally sceptical) - then surely the patient is refusing treatment, as is their right?
They should therefore be kept comfortable and then allowed to die?
I'm not convinced by the nurse story either, but that wasn't the point of my intervention. I merely thought that the prospect of Draconian action to deal with the refusers was worth mentioning. If it's done and it's seen to work then there could be a domino effect of other countries deploying similar methods - perhaps including, dependent on how things go over the next few weeks, us.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Although there are significant differences between translations. The NIV, for example, uses materials not available to earlier translators, so many passages are significantly different in substance as well as style from say, the KJV.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
Hello.
We had this discussion last week, given the care I have received from the NHS etc after a few accidents.
All I can say is thanks to all the taxpayers on here, and I pledge to keep myself fit so as to reduce my chance of diabetes, cancer and obesity. I reckon in the long term I'll save the NHS cash, compared with a sedentary lifestyle.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
I'm not proud I didn't understand it.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
I think it is to a large extent on the reader. If they can be bothered. And I don't say that to be snarky.
Don Quixote is a magnificent book. But if you don't read Spanish you need help ie a translation. Nothing wrong with that.
You are saying well I didn't understand that (and by implication therefore it's no good - if not then apologies).
But for Ulysses in particular there are about a thousand "guides". Frank Delaney's is the standard.
And while you're on Delaney it's worth reading his Simple Courage. A fantastic tale.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
More and more of these stories now. At some point the vaxxed majority will turn on the amtivaxxers, violently
"Family of Iowa man, 78, with sepsis who died from complications after surgery say he waited TWO WEEKS for hospital bed because unvaxxed COVID patients had overwhelmed the system
Dale Weeks, 78, was a retired school superintendent diagnosed with the infection in November and was being treated at a small, rural hospital
His family wanted him transferred to a larger hospital that could provide him with better treatment options but none of the bigger facilities had open beds
A spokesperson for MercyOne, the hospital system tasked with Weeks' care, admitted that unvaccinated individuals were causing bed shortages "
Germany must be undertesting and/or underreporting severely
24k cases, 274 deaths
Likewise Poland
15k cases, 755 deaths
I'm sure they're both undertesting and underreporting (in that we'll see in fill in positives to come in the coming days). I also suspect they simply don't have the LFT culture we do in the UK.
But I also suspect that the Germans are benefiting from timing: they started their surge a little earlier, which has resulted in people pulling back from social engagements, and which means their case count was on the way down:
It's holidays in Germany so a lot less testing happening (see also vaccination numbers). We'll have to wait until a few days into January to get a better idea. But the incidence rate in Germany has indeed been falling for several weeks now. It's probably rising again by now because of Omicron.
Not sure what you mean by timing. The Delta wave got going here weeks later not earlier than most neighbours (not sure about Poland) and the recent decline is a combination of measures being introduced and enforced weeks ago because of the Delta wave, along with people getting spooked by Omicron (at least at first), and recently people trying to avoid getting it because they wanted to see relatives at Christmas.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
More and more of these stories now. At some point the vaxxed majority will turn on the amtivaxxers, violently
"Family of Iowa man, 78, with sepsis who died from complications after surgery say he waited TWO WEEKS for hospital bed because unvaxxed COVID patients had overwhelmed the system
Dale Weeks, 78, was a retired school superintendent diagnosed with the infection in November and was being treated at a small, rural hospital
His family wanted him transferred to a larger hospital that could provide him with better treatment options but none of the bigger facilities had open beds
A spokesperson for MercyOne, the hospital system tasked with Weeks' care, admitted that unvaccinated individuals were causing bed shortages "
France bans British residents of - for example, Belgium, from using EuroTunnel to drive from UK to Belgium as they have to transit France - and only French residents are allowed to land in France:
France bans British residents of - for example, Belgium, from using EuroTunnel to drive from UK to Belgium as they have to transit France - and only French residents are allowed to land in France:
Saw Don't Look Up yesterday. Excellent. Required viewing for PB especially.
Same here, and same here
BTW I asked this the other day - any Veep fans here? Watched first 2 episodes the other night and it is certainly watchable, but does it improve from here on in?
It does improve, but it suffers from a lot of the same flaws of much of Ianucci's work, in that in attempting to be extremely biting it's hard to have any empathy with any characters as they are merely entertaining caricatures, and only some of them will be interesting enough to watch (it's one reason The Death of Stalin worked so well by contrast,since we know that lot were nutters) as they have no depth.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
No. I believe it would be morally wrong to impose a lockdown on the general population because we had decided it was morally wrong to force medical treatment (i.e. the vaccine) onto people.
If people who refuse to receive the protection afforded by the vaccine are causing pressure on the NHS then we should add some additional capacity to provide them with palliative care.
The comparison to mountaineers from Topping is completely bunk. No-one is suggesting imposing a lockdown because of the risk that a small number of mountaineers might subsequently need medical treatment if we don't keep the whole country locked up. The situation is completely different.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
British DJ Dimension sparks fury in New Zealand for bringing the first Omicron case through its tightly-controlled borders and going out clubbing in Auckland before testing positive
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
I'm not proud I didn't understand it.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
To be art I presume a work has to be about conveying a message of some kind, even if an ambiguous one (otherwise why would some people snobbishly look down on more formulaic or shallow works which may be technically brilliant but lack 'substance' and deeper meaning). If the message or the transmission of that message is too obsure or confused for people to pick up on that message, is it a successful piece of art? Is confusion the point? As that is a slippery slope where any old rubbish could be deemed to be significant. I've never read James Joyce but people seem relatively united on his worth as an artist.
But while a story may be good art even if most people cannot grasp it, it is surely a shit story if people cannot grasp it?
Germany must be undertesting and/or underreporting severely
24k cases, 274 deaths
Likewise Poland
15k cases, 755 deaths
I'm sure they're both undertesting and underreporting (in that we'll see in fill in positives to come in the coming days). I also suspect they simply don't have the LFT culture we do in the UK.
But I also suspect that the Germans are benefiting from timing: they started their surge a little earlier, which has resulted in people pulling back from social engagements, and which means their case count was on the way down:
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
They are, of course, all translations (unless he had Hebrew and Koine Greek), and have different purposes / objectives. I'd argue that the experience would actually help with reflection - though perhaps challenge in addition to comfort. I used to have a book called a parallel New Testament, which had four translations of the same section on each double page spread.
In the end it went to a theological college library. These days you get the same from the internet, though they tend to be older translation, due to copyright restrictions.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
Yes, it is a ridiculous and asinine comparison, and I'm surprised Topping is making it. He is rarely this dim
To invoke mountaineers you'd have to hypothesise a cerebral virus which was forcing people of all ages and sizes to do dangerous sports: causing millions of them to climb mountains, ski glaciers, abseil cliffs, try base jumping, do underwater caving etc, and in the face of this wave if risk taking the government has invented and distributed remarkably effective and FREELY AVAIILABLE new sports equipment - kit that keeps 95% of the users of the equipment out of danger, and out of hospital. Thus saving the health system from collapse
All, that is, except for the mountaineers who continue to insist on going mountaineering without the amazing new equipment because of "civil liberties" "I like the thrill" etc etc thus thousands of mountaineers are now filling the hospitals with their injuries and broken skulls and people with other ordinary illnesses are dying for lack of hospital care. Thanks to the fucking mountaineers
In THAT case it would be judicious to punish the mountaineers, make their lives much harder, maybe even refuse them treatment, until they use the fantastic new dangerous sports kit freely provided to all
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
No. I believe it would be morally wrong to impose a lockdown on the general population because we had decided it was morally wrong to force medical treatment (i.e. the vaccine) onto people.
If people who refuse to receive the protection afforded by the vaccine are causing pressure on the NHS then we should add some additional capacity to provide them with palliative care.
The comparison to mountaineers from Topping is completely bunk. No-one is suggesting imposing a lockdown because of the risk that a small number of mountaineers might subsequently need medical treatment if we don't keep the whole country locked up. The situation is completely different.
Comparing mountaineering with antivaxxers is as utterly bonkers as comparing vaccine mandates to yellow stars.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
I'm not proud I didn't understand it.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
To be art I presume a work has to be about conveying a message of some kind, even if an ambiguous one (otherwise why would some people snobbishly look down on more formulaic or shallow works which may be technically brilliant but lack 'substance' and deeper meaning). If the message or the transmission of that message is too obsure or confused for people to pick up on that message, is it a successful piece of art? Is confusion the point? As that is a slippery slope where any old rubbish could be deemed to be significant. I've never read James Joyce but people seem relatively united on his worth as an artist.
But while a story may be good art even if most people cannot grasp it, it is surely a shit story if people cannot grasp it?
Nah. Rule one: something is art if the artist says it is art. It needs to do nothing.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
It's the principle. If you are charging people for the national resources they use.
That's not a principle. We already charge people for resources all the time: alcohol, tobacco, petrol, diesel etc are taxed through the roof. Get over it.
Saw Don't Look Up yesterday. Excellent. Required viewing for PB especially.
Same here, and same here
BTW I asked this the other day - any Veep fans here? Watched first 2 episodes the other night and it is certainly watchable, but does it improve from here on in?
It does improve, but it suffers from a lot of the same flaws of much of Ianucci's work, in that in attempting to be extremely biting it's hard to have any empathy with any characters as they are merely entertaining caricatures, and only some of them will be interesting enough to watch (it's one reason The Death of Stalin worked so well by contrast,since we know that lot were nutters) as they have no depth.
Thanks. I think my problem with Veep is everyone being American and less relatable than DoS which bizarrely works partly because of everyone having their native accent.
British DJ Dimension sparks fury in New Zealand for bringing the first Omicron case through its tightly-controlled borders and going out clubbing in Auckland before testing positive
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
Mountaineers do not drag unsuspecting members of the public up the mountain to die with them. Anti-vaxxers kill other people. They might as well stick knives in people.
There are enough lawyers in here to confirm that Courts have ruled over the years that intentionally infecting other people with a fatal disease was against the law and deserved custodial sentences depending on the victim's state of health at the time of the trial.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
Normally called the kjv which is a bit of a clue that it's both.
British DJ Dimension sparks fury in New Zealand for bringing the first Omicron case through its tightly-controlled borders and going out clubbing in Auckland before testing positive
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
You are missing out on one of life's wondrous literary experiences.
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
I'm not proud I didn't understand it.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
To be art I presume a work has to be about conveying a message of some kind, even if an ambiguous one (otherwise why would some people snobbishly look down on more formulaic or shallow works which may be technically brilliant but lack 'substance' and deeper meaning). If the message or the transmission of that message is too obsure or confused for people to pick up on that message, is it a successful piece of art? Is confusion the point? As that is a slippery slope where any old rubbish could be deemed to be significant. I've never read James Joyce but people seem relatively united on his worth as an artist.
But while a story may be good art even if most people cannot grasp it, it is surely a shit story if people cannot grasp it?
Nah. Rule one: something is art if the artist says it is art. It needs to do nothing.
I don't think art or literary critics would agree with that rule, or snobs, given the many many many creative endeavours that do not get acclaim as they deserve for not meeting some arbitrary standards of worth, or even accepted as being art at all (people used to debate, and may well still do, about whether video games are art, or be biased against entire genres of fiction for example). Perhaps I am wrong but I doubt R L Stine or self published authors of erotic dinosaur fiction would be regarded as producing art by lots of people.
I'm very happy to regard it all as art, some of more interest or merit to me or others. But I suspect most of those pushing acclaimed work would like the bar set so low.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
If you only read it in English, then yes, it's a distinction without a difference. My point was that the reason why you have so many English "versions", and why there are differences between them big enough to feel jarring, is that it's an English translation of a (Latin translation of a) Greek translation of the originals in either Aramaic or Hebrew. The original untranslated versions are all mostly close enough together that you can read different versions without the jarring feeling.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
If you only read it in English, then yes, it's a distinction without a difference. My point was that the reason why you have so many English "versions", and why there are differences between them big enough to feel jarring, is that it's an English translation of a (Latin translation of a) Greek translation of the originals in either Aramaic or Hebrew. The original untranslated versions are all mostly close enough together that you can read different versions without the jarring feeling.
Thanks. When I was in my early 20s I read all the King James (if that's the correct term...) and half the Quran. I've barely touched either since...
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
Agree with you but slight quibble on weather - should be "unexpected".
MWIS is your friend, and if they think it's going to be gusting above 50 then it ain't worth it whatever your experience.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
The latter sound like anti-vaxxers. I assume they make up a larger fraction of mountaineers in hospital, too.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
Many years ago while I was in Aber, I had gone out early one morning to photograph the scenery after a heavy overnight fall of snow.
Coming back down Constie (the big cliff at the north end with the funicular) in proper mountain boots with thick, grippy rubber soles, very gingerly, I met a couple of younger students walking up. The girl was in high heels. She had no grip at all.
I managed to keep calm and persuaded them to turn around, but my goodness, I was hiding being very angry.
I've been repeatedly asked by my friends if I wrote the latest series of Boris Johnson Worzel Gummidge.
The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
It's the principle. If you are charging people for the national resources they use.
That's not a principle. We already charge people for resources all the time: alcohol, tobacco, petrol, diesel etc are taxed through the roof. Get over it.
So, logically, we should tax mountaineers at the point of use for the expected charge on the health service?
I can't see that's desirable, though - would probably cost more to collect the tax than you'd raise. I am absolutely in favour of taxing anti-vaxxers for the damage they might do to society.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
Agree with you but slight quibble on weather - should be "unexpected".
MWIS is your friend, and if they think it's going to be gusting above 50 then it ain't worth it whatever your experience.
If you're on a long-distance hike, it sometimes isn't that easy. Or if you're using a basecamp.
Shortly before I had my fall (which fortunately was not too bad) I'd been in a beallach in mist/cloud, with the cloud flashing blue and red from distant lightning hits. Spectacular but blooming frightening. My keenness to escape downhill contributed to my mistake and slip.
I don't go into the mountains a lot, living in Cambridgeshire, but I've never encountered anything like that since. The thunder was almost a physical force.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
I vaguely recall a story about an american chap who decided to pack in the modern world and live off the land in the wild or somesuch, but had no skills, training or proper supplies to do so, not even a map, and he died. Apparently it got made into a relatively sympathetic story and some saw it as a noble pursuit, but local rangers essentially took the view that the chap had effectively (though not intentionally) committed suicide through carelessness.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
It's the principle. If you are charging people for the national resources they use.
That's not a principle. We already charge people for resources all the time: alcohol, tobacco, petrol, diesel etc are taxed through the roof. Get over it.
So, logically, we should tax mountaineers at the point of use for the expected charge on the health service?
I can't see that's desirable, though - would probably cost more to collect the tax than you'd raise. I am absolutely in favour of taxing anti-vaxxers for the damage they might do to society.
Hence my preferred solution: An across the board 5% increase in Income Tax, combined with a 5% discount in Income Tax for anyone vaccinated.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
If you only read it in English, then yes, it's a distinction without a difference. My point was that the reason why you have so many English "versions", and why there are differences between them big enough to feel jarring, is that it's an English translation of a (Latin translation of a) Greek translation of the originals in either Aramaic or Hebrew. The original untranslated versions are all mostly close enough together that you can read different versions without the jarring feeling.
Absolute utter and unqualified balls, every book of the New Testament was originally written in koine Greek.
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
If you only read it in English, then yes, it's a distinction without a difference. My point was that the reason why you have so many English "versions", and why there are differences between them big enough to feel jarring, is that it's an English translation of a (Latin translation of a) Greek translation of the originals in either Aramaic or Hebrew. The original untranslated versions are all mostly close enough together that you can read different versions without the jarring feeling.
No they're not. Most modern translations are translated directly from the original source material, be that Hebrew or Greek. If you went back to Tyndale, you might have a point.
The snag is that there are many different sources - far more than most people realise - so there are significant variations between versions.
To take only the most obvious example, there are seven books in the Catholic Bible not usually paralleled in their Protestant counterparts;
I've been repeatedly asked by my friends if I wrote the latest series of Boris Johnson Worzel Gummidge.
The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
Isn't there are series of innocent looking children's books that's full of truly obscene double meanings? Such as 'Who will help Jack off the horse?' and 'Brenda's Beaver Plays A Round?'
I like the uniform smoothness to Sweden's exponential case curve. No nasty lumpiness to it.
They still only doing part time reporting.
Yes, Tuesday-to-Firday reporting only. Fortuantely the Swedisgh health authorities report the ICU figures daily (including numbers in ICU which is not on the main Sweden dashboard.)
Local bookseller on a book which wasn't even in the school library (except as an ebook):
'“It was not easy to find a box full of 33 Snowfish, but we did,” he continues. “We sold all that we bought, and we kept a couple as loaners because we wanted to make sure any students in the community could see what the fuss was about. There will always be some around.”
It’s now easier than ever to read 33 Snowfish in Spotsylvania county [...]'
Oh it's publicity gold to an author when their book is banned - it wouldn't surprise me if agents sought to get their author's books banned just for the publicity it generates.
When The Well of Loneliness was banned, Virginia Wolff and Compton Mackenzie were furious that Orlando and Extraordinary Women were not banned at the same time. They felt cheated out of the extra sales a court case would produce.
Oddly, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned at the same time, and not republished for 30 years. And when it was finally published in 1959 the trial caused sales to rocket. Huge numbers of copies were being passed round schools in the hope that they would find the naughty bits.
The key thing linking them of course is that they were all otherwise notably undistinguished books.
See also the Satanic Verses which I've found unreadable both times I've attempted to start it.
The most comical one I worked on was Ulysses, which escaped a formal ban because the lawyer assessing it at the request of the Home Office admitted he had been totally unable to read it. Instead, they launched proceedings under various post office regulations as far as can be judged simply to annoy James Joyce.
Quite amazingly, there is a record of an American magistrate who had somehow read and understood it.
I didn't realise one was supposed to actually understand it. I thought Ulysses was simply a collection of words in a semi-random order that existed to test the patience of the reader.
I made it about six pages in.
It is the only novel I have read twice
Tho I confess I couldn't get past the third paragraph of Finnegan's Wake
When I'm sitting in an airport lounge, sleep deprived, unsure what time of day or night it is, then I find rereading novels is a perfect way to pass the time.
A very religious uni friend said something about the bible. He had read it many times, and at times of stress, or boredom, he would pick up a bible and read it: it relaxed him, and the familiarity of the text was like talking to a friend and time would fly.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
He presumably means a different English translation, rather than a different version.
Not being religious, I assumed 'version' equated to 'translation'?
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
If you only read it in English, then yes, it's a distinction without a difference. My point was that the reason why you have so many English "versions", and why there are differences between them big enough to feel jarring, is that it's an English translation of a (Latin translation of a) Greek translation of the originals in either Aramaic or Hebrew. The original untranslated versions are all mostly close enough together that you can read different versions without the jarring feeling.
Absolute utter and unqualified balls, every book of the New Testament was originally written in koine Greek.
I do like the gentle tones of a quiet theological discussion in the grassy back lawns of the internet.
I've been repeatedly asked by my friends if I wrote the latest series of Boris Johnson Worzel Gummidge.
The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
Isn't there are series of innocent looking children's books that's full of truly obscene double meanings? Such as 'Who will help Jack off the horse?' and 'Brenda's Beaver Plays A Round?'
I've been repeatedly asked by my friends if I wrote the latest series of Boris Johnson Worzel Gummidge.
The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
Isn't there are series of innocent looking children's books that's full of truly obscene double meanings? Such as 'Who will help Jack off the horse?' and 'Brenda's Beaver Plays A Round?'
I like the uniform smoothness to Sweden's exponential case curve. No nasty lumpiness to it.
They still only doing part time reporting.
Yes, Tuesday-to-Firday reporting only. Fortuantely the Swedisgh health authorities report the ICU figures daily (including numbers in ICU which is not on the main Sweden dashboard.)
Everything about Sweden response has been very poor.
I don't agree with Topping's mountaineering comparison. It's crass.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
I vaguely recall a story about an american chap who decided to pack in the modern world and live off the land in the wild or somesuch, but had no skills, training or proper supplies to do so, not even a map, and he died. Apparently it got made into a relatively sympathetic story and some saw it as a noble pursuit, but local rangers essentially took the view that the chap had effectively (though not intentionally) committed suicide through carelessness.
On my walk, I stopped off for the night at Kearvaig Bothy, in the very northwest of Scotland. Also staying there was a woman whose friend had died there the previous year.
I've been repeatedly asked by my friends if I wrote the latest series of Boris Johnson Worzel Gummidge.
The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
Isn't there are series of innocent looking children's books that's full of truly obscene double meanings? Such as 'Who will help Jack off the horse?' and 'Brenda's Beaver Plays A Round?'
Comments
There is nothing fabulous about parading anti-intellecualism.
Evolution in action.
But I equally note that I will be far from the only person who failed to finish it. At what point does the author bear some responsibility, or is it all on the reader?
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
He also said that reading a different version of the bible was rather jarring, as he noticed the differences.
The lunacy continues...
I thought @TSE would like this line (after the Dauphin is reported dead):
"Anthony walks through Austin Friars ringing his new silver bells and crying 'God be thanked, one Frenchman less'"
NY Times
"#Ireland - 13th Euro country to break its record
And a massive new high too.
16,428 new #Covid19 infections confirmed, up 160% on last week
568 Covid patients in hospital, with 93 in ICU.
Twice this week daily hospital admissions have exceeded 100, levels not seen since January"
https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1476271343083610120?s=20
"15-year-old boy diagnosed with brain tumour after scans cancelled due to Covid
"Noah Herniman, 15, suffers from neurofibromatosis meaning tumours grow on his nerve tissues.
"His routine annual MRI scan was cancelled due to pressures the health board was facing from the pandemic.
"He was later diagnosed with an inoperable benign tumour at his brain's core."
https://twitter.com/i/events/1476218561467015172?s=20
To be pedantic, he was of an age when the genes had already been passed on.
We had this discussion last week, given the care I have received from the NHS etc after a few accidents.
All I can say is thanks to all the taxpayers on here, and I pledge to keep myself fit so as to reduce my chance of diabetes, cancer and obesity. I reckon in the long term I'll save the NHS cash, compared with a sedentary lifestyle.
Specimen date vs reporting date, you say?
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
Don Quixote is a magnificent book. But if you don't read Spanish you need help ie a translation. Nothing wrong with that.
You are saying well I didn't understand that (and by implication therefore it's no good - if not then apologies).
But for Ulysses in particular there are about a thousand "guides". Frank Delaney's is the standard.
And while you're on Delaney it's worth reading his Simple Courage. A fantastic tale.
"Family of Iowa man, 78, with sepsis who died from complications after surgery say he waited TWO WEEKS for hospital bed because unvaxxed COVID patients had overwhelmed the system
Dale Weeks, 78, was a retired school superintendent diagnosed with the infection in November and was being treated at a small, rural hospital
His family wanted him transferred to a larger hospital that could provide him with better treatment options but none of the bigger facilities had open beds
A spokesperson for MercyOne, the hospital system tasked with Weeks' care, admitted that unvaccinated individuals were causing bed shortages "
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10352863/Family-Iowa-man-78-sepsis-died-say-waited-TWO-WEEKS-hospital-beds.html
Just the wrong way...
Not sure what you mean by timing. The Delta wave got going here weeks later not earlier than most neighbours (not sure about Poland) and the recent decline is a combination of measures being introduced and enforced weeks ago because of the Delta wave, along with people getting spooked by Omicron (at least at first), and recently people trying to avoid getting it because they wanted to see relatives at Christmas.
Or you can put it in a company and swap Directors around.
But one or two properties in GM will be a very incidental income unless you do it like Cherie Blair and buy a block of 14 flats.
And if you have gone for expensive properties (perhaps 120k+), yields get clobbered.
Though if you do capital works, you can set them against CGT when you sell it aiui.
Not sure that a lifetime gift avoids CGT, though it may delay it.
I'll wait for an answer.
It's a general problem with the NHS - obesity and nutters taking on an icy black run.
If people who refuse to receive the protection afforded by the vaccine are causing pressure on the NHS then we should add some additional capacity to provide them with palliative care.
The comparison to mountaineers from Topping is completely bunk. No-one is suggesting imposing a lockdown because of the risk that a small number of mountaineers might subsequently need medical treatment if we don't keep the whole country locked up. The situation is completely different.
I.e. the King James bible is a translation, but also a version?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10353305/British-DJ-sparks-fury-NZ-bringing-Omicron-case-tightly-controlled-borders.html
But while a story may be good art even if most people cannot grasp it, it is surely a shit story if people cannot grasp it?
Their deaths have fallen by about 30-40% in the last week.
There may be another hump to follow, as Omicron comes in. They are, of course, all translations (unless he had Hebrew and Koine Greek), and have different purposes / objectives. I'd argue that the experience would actually help with reflection - though perhaps challenge in addition to comfort. I used to have a book called a parallel New Testament, which had four translations of the same section on each double page spread.
In the end it went to a theological college library. These days you get the same from the internet, though they tend to be older translation, due to copyright restrictions.
To invoke mountaineers you'd have to hypothesise a cerebral virus which was forcing people of all ages and sizes to do dangerous sports: causing millions of them to climb mountains, ski glaciers, abseil cliffs, try base jumping, do underwater caving etc, and in the face of this wave if risk taking the government has invented and distributed remarkably effective and FREELY AVAIILABLE new sports equipment - kit that keeps 95% of the users of the equipment out of danger, and out of hospital. Thus saving the health system from collapse
All, that is, except for the mountaineers who continue to insist on going mountaineering without the amazing new equipment because of "civil liberties" "I like the thrill" etc etc thus thousands of mountaineers are now filling the hospitals with their injuries and broken skulls and people with other ordinary illnesses are dying for lack of hospital care. Thanks to the fucking mountaineers
In THAT case it would be judicious to punish the mountaineers, make their lives much harder, maybe even refuse them treatment, until they use the fantastic new dangerous sports kit freely provided to all
It's a full breakfast with no swaps. You're getting that shitty tomato.
There are enough lawyers in here to confirm that Courts have ruled over the years that intentionally infecting other people with a fatal disease was against the law and deserved custodial sentences depending on the victim's state of health at the time of the trial.
https://youtu.be/g5EcdwKUeGY
I'm very happy to regard it all as art, some of more interest or merit to me or others. But I suspect most of those pushing acclaimed work would like the bar set so low.
However, there are aspects to this that might confuse. There are 'good' mountaineers/hikers/walkers/climbers: people who go up with the correct equipment, judging the conditions, and come unstuck due to a simple mistake or bad luck, such as weather.
Then there are 'mountaineers' (really, people who go up mountains) who wear the wrong kit, don't look at the weather, and carry no equipment to help them. I've seen loads like this, like a couple of people in loafers near the top of Scafell Pike, or jeans and no pack in cold mist on Kinder Scout.
I have much more sympathy with the former than the latter.
MWIS is your friend, and if they think it's going to be gusting above 50 then it ain't worth it whatever your experience.
Coming back down Constie (the big cliff at the north end with the funicular) in proper mountain boots with thick, grippy rubber soles, very gingerly, I met a couple of younger students walking up. The girl was in high heels. She had no grip at all.
I managed to keep calm and persuaded them to turn around, but my goodness, I was hiding being very angry.
Boris JohnsonWorzel Gummidge.The latest episode of the BBC’s new Worzel Gummidge sees actors deliver a range of hidden jokes for watching adults, incorporating the naughtiest-sounding bird names they could find.
Red faces as new BBC Worzel Gummidge episode ‘littered’ with sexual innuendos...
....Viewers remarked on the unusual frequency of bird names, including the “red-knobbed coot”, “blue-footed booby” and “penduline tit”.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1476280493150810112
I can't see that's desirable, though - would probably cost more to collect the tax than you'd raise. I am absolutely in favour of taxing anti-vaxxers for the damage they might do to society.
Shortly before I had my fall (which fortunately was not too bad) I'd been in a beallach in mist/cloud, with the cloud flashing blue and red from distant lightning hits. Spectacular but blooming frightening. My keenness to escape downhill contributed to my mistake and slip.
I don't go into the mountains a lot, living in Cambridgeshire, but I've never encountered anything like that since. The thunder was almost a physical force.
And within ten minutes, it was over.
https://twitter.com/CrimeLdn/status/1476281590271684622?s=20
The snag is that there are many different sources - far more than most people realise - so there are significant variations between versions.
To take only the most obvious example, there are seven books in the Catholic Bible not usually paralleled in their Protestant counterparts;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books
Although I wont be with you, as I will be taking the 4th booster.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/captain-pugwash-creator-traumatised-urban-5896636
https://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,862057,00.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/dec/11/scotland
A very odd death.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Brendas-Beaver-Needs-Barber-Books-Season-ebook/dp/B06XWXM52P/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2GR96DIMX1HBD&keywords=Brenda's+Beaver+Needs+a+Barber&qid=1640808525&s=books&sprefix=brenda+s+beaver+needs+a+barber,stripbooks,74&sr=1-1