Even after 38 court flops and two recounts punters are still ready to bet on Trump and Betfair remai
Options
Comments
-
IDS, Corbyn, the DUP, the ERG, Sultana
HOUSE !
https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/916#noes0 -
Quite agree with all of these points. Still really enjoyed the third book though.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).2 -
Now I want the sequel to Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter to feature Chamberlin as a ruthless hunter of the undead......Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.1 -
I don’t think that’s right is it? How many Labour MPs voted with the Government? There appear to have been 58 Tory rebels so if the other 20 non-Tories had not supported him over then his majority would have been only 173. I understand that one of the MPs voting with the Government was Jeremy Corbyn. So, to clarify, Johnson won with the tactic support of Starmer’s abstention and the actual support of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn voting with him.Fysics_Teacher said:
Labour don't have 213 votes to be fair: he would still have won.DougSeal said:
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now0 -
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.0 -
Honestly, the micro budget mockbuster Abraham Lincoln vs Zombies wasn't that bad.Malmesbury said:
Now I want the sequel to Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter to feature Chamberlin as a ruthless hunter of the undead......Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.0 -
Being permanently rogered by a priapic Old English Sheep Dog?Stuartinromford said:
I am as far from a classical scholar as you can get. I'm a physicist who went to a comprehensive in the late 1980s.ydoethur said:
And of course there’s nothing he can do about that until 2024 either...Stuartinromford said:
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
But my understanding is that a lot of classical literature boils down to:
1. Mortal has character flaw.
2. Gods come up with a punishment that exquisitely exploits said character flaw.
3. Punishment lasts forever.
Boris ought to be able to work out what's coming his way, shouldn't he?1 -
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.2 -
Prove he didn't.Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.2 -
What does Boris want? I've read two or three of his biographies and two or three of his books, and rewatched When Boris Met Dave, Brexit (with Benedict Cumberbatch) and his lap of the Top Gear track, but I cannot pretend to understand the Prime Minister.kle4 said:
1) No, they can't, but with vaccine rollout they probably are correct they can push past Covid rebellions for another 6-9 months, as Labour will probably abstain on many measures.Stuartinromford said:
Blimey Part Two.HYUFD said:
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
I don't think Boris cares except for rebellions on Brexit
2) Certainly hope so.
Boris uses people rather than likes them, and brooks no dissent as many purged MPs will testify, or disloyalty, as Dominic Cummings will, but his ruthless power plays do not seem to be in aid of any great cause. Sfaict, Boris's position on Brexit and the pandemic is he hopes someone will make them go away so we can all live happily ever after.0 -
-
But as the majority was 213, if the Labour party had voted against he would still have won, surely? After all Jeremy is not a Labour MP.DougSeal said:
I don’t think that’s right is it? How many Labour MPs voted with the Government? There appear to have been 58 Tory rebels so if the other 20 non-Tories had not supported him over then his majority would have been only 173. I understand that one of the MPs voting with the Government was Jeremy Corbyn. So, to clarify, Johnson won with the tactic support of Starmer’s abstention and the actual support of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn voting with him.Fysics_Teacher said:
Labour don't have 213 votes to be fair: he would still have won.DougSeal said:
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now0 -
Maybe an infinite line of different priapic Old English Sheep Dogs? So as not to develop a relationship with any of them?Luckyguy1983 said:
Being permanently rogered by a priapic Old English Sheep Dog?Stuartinromford said:
I am as far from a classical scholar as you can get. I'm a physicist who went to a comprehensive in the late 1980s.ydoethur said:
And of course there’s nothing he can do about that until 2024 either...Stuartinromford said:
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
But my understanding is that a lot of classical literature boils down to:
1. Mortal has character flaw.
2. Gods come up with a punishment that exquisitely exploits said character flaw.
3. Punishment lasts forever.
Boris ought to be able to work out what's coming his way, shouldn't he?
"You can banish any of them whenever you like... there will always be another..."
This classics stuff is easy, isn't it?
#TeamNatSci0 -
Chamberlain died of bowel cancer just a few months later, in December 1940.Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.0 -
0
-
So it’s a ghost story?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Chamberlain died of bowel cancer just a few months later, in December 1940.Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.2 -
He perpetually seeks psychological redemption from his damaged childhood.DecrepiterJohnL said:
What does Boris want? I've read two or three of his biographies and two or three of his books, and rewatched When Boris Met Dave, Brexit (with Benedict Cumberbatch) and his lap of the Top Gear track, but I cannot pretend to understand the Prime Minister.kle4 said:
1) No, they can't, but with vaccine rollout they probably are correct they can push past Covid rebellions for another 6-9 months, as Labour will probably abstain on many measures.Stuartinromford said:
Blimey Part Two.HYUFD said:
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
I don't think Boris cares except for rebellions on Brexit
2) Certainly hope so.
Boris uses people rather than likes them, and brooks no dissent as many purged MPs will testify, or disloyalty, as Dominic Cummings will, but his ruthless power plays do not seem to be in aid of any great cause. Sfaict, Boris's position on Brexit and the pandemic is he hopes someone will make them go away so we can all live happily ever after.2 -
So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.0 -
Yes, I think the only way of understanding the mans actions are through the lens of his early life.IanB2 said:
He perpetually seeks psychological redemption from his damaged childhood.DecrepiterJohnL said:
What does Boris want? I've read two or three of his biographies and two or three of his books, and rewatched When Boris Met Dave, Brexit (with Benedict Cumberbatch) and his lap of the Top Gear track, but I cannot pretend to understand the Prime Minister.kle4 said:
1) No, they can't, but with vaccine rollout they probably are correct they can push past Covid rebellions for another 6-9 months, as Labour will probably abstain on many measures.Stuartinromford said:
Blimey Part Two.HYUFD said:
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
I don't think Boris cares except for rebellions on Brexit
2) Certainly hope so.
Boris uses people rather than likes them, and brooks no dissent as many purged MPs will testify, or disloyalty, as Dominic Cummings will, but his ruthless power plays do not seem to be in aid of any great cause. Sfaict, Boris's position on Brexit and the pandemic is he hopes someone will make them go away so we can all live happily ever after.0 -
MR James style - Hitler finds out that a covenant signed by a dying man has a long... reach. And the penalties for breaking it... extremeIanB2 said:
So it’s a ghost story?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Chamberlain died of bowel cancer just a few months later, in December 1940.Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.0 -
Foot?Carnyx said:
Manny Shinwell?Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.0 -
He was nominated for Best Actress at the 2008 Oscars.SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.0 -
Famed for playing a pregnant teenager, which as a man just proves what a good actor he was...SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.1 -
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.0 -
Will he still be allowed to play female parts?Scott_xP said:
Famed for playing a pregnant teenager, which as a man just proves what a good actor he was...SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.0 -
A sentence I never thought I'd read.tlg86 said:
He was nominated for Best Actress at the 2008 Oscars.SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.1 -
Corbyn voted against, as did 14 Labour MPs.DougSeal said:
I don’t think that’s right is it? How many Labour MPs voted with the Government? There appear to have been 58 Tory rebels so if the other 20 non-Tories had not supported him over then his majority would have been only 173. I understand that one of the MPs voting with the Government was Jeremy Corbyn. So, to clarify, Johnson won with the tactic support of Starmer’s abstention and the actual support of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn voting with him.Fysics_Teacher said:
Labour don't have 213 votes to be fair: he would still have won.DougSeal said:
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now0 -
Congratulations: that is the best comment of the week.Andy_Cooke said:
That makes it sound like Chamberlain ruthlessly hunted down those who voted against him.Stark_Dawning said:
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?ydoethur said:
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.0 -
In drag, maybe?TrèsDifficile said:Will he still be allowed to play female parts?
0 -
Why was what he said dumb?kle4 said:
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
To disclaim that dramas involving depictions of real people include fictional events is standard in many dramas and legally required in many nations. I fail to see why what he said was dumb?0 -
These lawsuits are serious business and we should pay attention to them. Said the cool, clear headed rational bettor.
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/13338857821012869120 -
imho the 2nd book is far better. I think in theory you can read them as standalone books.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.0 -
0
-
Ooooo.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704970 -
They've scotch-egged the vaccine?rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704970 -
And having a stonking big landslide majority.DougSeal said:
I don’t think that’s right is it? How many Labour MPs voted with the Government? There appear to have been 58 Tory rebels so if the other 20 non-Tories had not supported him over then his majority would have been only 173. I understand that one of the MPs voting with the Government was Jeremy Corbyn. So, to clarify, Johnson won with the tactic support of Starmer’s abstention and the actual support of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn voting with him.Fysics_Teacher said:
Labour don't have 213 votes to be fair: he would still have won.DougSeal said:
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.BluestBlue said:So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
All the talk about having an 80 seat majority forgets that as this is an England only regulation the SNP won't vote.
Plus of course Sinn Fein don't either.
That means the working majority is actually 135. Since there were not 68 rebels that wasn't enough to overcome the majority.0 -
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704972 -
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704971 -
Or they've found another virus we need to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704971 -
-
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.0 -
I think it dumb because it treats the public as though they are dumb.Philip_Thompson said:
Why was what he said dumb?kle4 said:
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
To disclaim that dramas involving depictions of real people include fictional events is standard in many dramas and legally required in many nations. I fail to see why what he said was dumb?
You don't have to agree, it's a matter of opinion, so to turn your question around, I don't understand why you have a problem with people having a problem with the view he expressed. You've already gone from objecting to people criticising him for making the comments to criticising people having an opinion on his comments, I don't know where you will jump to next.0 -
Blimey Johnson looks rough on BBC news. Totally clapped out.0
-
There are people out there who think that Star Wars is a documentary: many if not most people will think that what they see in a programme like the Crown has to be true as "they wouldn't be allowed to say something that wasn't true".kle4 said:
I think it dumb because it treats the public as though they are dumb.Philip_Thompson said:
Why was what he said dumb?kle4 said:
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
To disclaim that dramas involving depictions of real people include fictional events is standard in many dramas and legally required in many nations. I fail to see why what he said was dumb?
You don't have to agree, it's a matter of opinion, so to turn your question around, I don't understand why you have a problem with people having a problem with the view he expressed.2 -
Dustin Hoffman came close with Tootsie.SandyRentool said:
A sentence I never thought I'd read.tlg86 said:
He was nominated for Best Actress at the 2008 Oscars.SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.0 -
I never expressed an opinion on people having a problem though. I literally only asked why it was dumb. That is a question not criticism. What in my posts was criticism?kle4 said:
I think it dumb because it treats the public as though they are dumb.Philip_Thompson said:
Why was what he said dumb?kle4 said:
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
To disclaim that dramas involving depictions of real people include fictional events is standard in many dramas and legally required in many nations. I fail to see why what he said was dumb?
You don't have to agree, it's a matter of opinion, so to turn your question around, I don't understand why you have a problem with people having a problem with the view he expressed. You've already gone from objecting to people criticising him for making the comments to criticising people having an opinion on his comments, I don't know where you will jump to next.
Saying that there should be disclaimers when involving real people is not a new idea, in fact studios have done a "all persons are fictitious" disclaimer since the 1930s. Doing so with people who aren't fictitious is surely eminently reasonable. And given that people have expressed concerns I don't see why the Culture Secretary weighing in is dumb?0 -
Wasn't there a problem with The Crying Game in that nominating Jaye Davidson for Best Supporting Actor was actually a major spoiler?Alphabet_Soup said:
Dustin Hoffman came close with Tootsie.SandyRentool said:
A sentence I never thought I'd read.tlg86 said:
He was nominated for Best Actress at the 2008 Oscars.SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.0 -
https://twitter.com/SJohnsonWPR/status/1333890843757907970?s=19
Surely this is fraud by Sidney Powell?
Surely she is setting herself up to be disbarred?0 -
That's not on. The Ministry of Silly Walks is British - Say No To Cultural Appropriation!rottenborough said:3 -
They are.kle4 said:
I think it dumb because it treats the public as though they are dumb.Philip_Thompson said:
Why was what he said dumb?kle4 said:
That he spoke about it wasn't the issue, it's that I think what he said was dumb. You surely don't think that ministers should not be criticised for their comments relating to their departments.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't understand why the minister concerned has been criticised?kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
To disclaim that dramas involving depictions of real people include fictional events is standard in many dramas and legally required in many nations. I fail to see why what he said was dumb?
You don't have to agree, it's a matter of opinion, so to turn your question around, I don't understand why you have a problem with people having a problem with the view he expressed. You've already gone from objecting to people criticising him for making the comments to criticising people having an opinion on his comments, I don't know where you will jump to next.0 -
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704971 -
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...0 -
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)0 -
That's not exactly unexpected; one would think Pfizer/BioNTech will be approved this week, with Moderna in the next week or two, and AZN by Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704970 -
That makes sense.Philip_Thompson said:
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)1 -
Brilliant performance. But, sadly, Davidson never did much else.Fysics_Teacher said:
Wasn't there a problem with The Crying Game in that nominating Jaye Davidson for Best Supporting Actor was actually a major spoiler?Alphabet_Soup said:
Dustin Hoffman came close with Tootsie.SandyRentool said:
A sentence I never thought I'd read.tlg86 said:
He was nominated for Best Actress at the 2008 Oscars.SandyRentool said:So after Rita Ora leaving me in a state of bafflement yesterday, today it is the turn of Ellen/Elliot Page.
A film star, apparently.1 -
Why is there never a ‘don’t care’ option in these polls ?HYUFD said:2 -
If she's disbarred, all that demonstrates is the extent of the Deep State conspiracy against blatant lies President Trump.Philip_Thompson said:https://twitter.com/SJohnsonWPR/status/1333890843757907970?s=19
Surely this is fraud by Sidney Powell?
Surely she is setting herself up to be disbarred?2 -
I don't think it is dreadful to have a disclaimer on the series apart from the fact that commercially I bet Netflix love the controversy of did it didn't it happen.
(For clarity, it didn't.)1 -
Yes the third book was still very good. I bought it in hardback though and it was so bloody heavy. The second book is the best. Every word in it is a joy to read, even when you're crying.MaxPB said:
Quite agree with all of these points. Still really enjoyed the third book though.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).0 -
Per CNN Biden just gained almost 700k votes in New York (and Trump gained lots too - not sure how many).
Biden 80,914k, Trump 74,070k
Biden 51.3%, Trump 46.9%0 -
Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).0 -
May be out of date:Fysics_Teacher said:
That makes sense.Philip_Thompson said:
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/27/hospitals-england-told-prepare-early-december-covid-vaccine-rollout-nhs
The Pfizer vaccine not only likes it cold but also can only be safely moved 4 times so you can get it to a UK hospital but no further. So NHS staff will be first because Pfizer is first out of the blocks.0 -
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thought provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.1 -
Must be MHRA approval for the Pfizer vaccine, it's said to be coming any day now. That means the first people could be getting vaccinated by Thursday!rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/13338733427057704970 -
It's not for everyone.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thoguht provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.1 -
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.0 -
.
A gateway appetizer.Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.2 -
Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
We have been notified to expect vaccination within a week or so. The logistics of the Pfizer vaccine means that NHS are first, then primary care and social care.Philip_Thompson said:
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)1 -
They were better than the cheese footballs.Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.0 -
Literature is like all art - it's personal whether you like it. Or not.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thoguht provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.
Nothing grates as much as some fool saying "You *must* like paintings by X".....0 -
Managed to get hold of some of them last year. Nostalgia truly has much to answer for.IshmaelZ said:
They were better than the cheese footballs.Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.0 -
I'm glad you mentioned the personal pronoun thing, that was weird. Not as bad as the lack of speech marks in Normal People, and I don't think it impacted my opinion of the book, but it was noticable. But she must be doing something right, people love it.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thoguht provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.
0 -
https://twitter.com/AngryScotland/status/1333901556392013826?s=19rottenborough said:Blimey Johnson looks rough on BBC news. Totally clapped out.
0 -
Piece on the radio talking about all the old high street shops. Some classic names Richard Shops, etc.kle4 said:
Managed to get hold of some of them last year. Nostalgia truly has much to answer for.IshmaelZ said:
They were better than the cheese footballs.Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.0 -
Makes sense if there are logistics issues.Foxy said:Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
We have been notified to expect vaccination within a week or so. The logistics of the Pfizer vaccine means that NHS are first, then primary care and social care.Philip_Thompson said:
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)0 -
-
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).1 -
It also makes sense from a public health point of view, reducing the spread in hospitals by inoculating the people who interact with patients will help keep staff capacity up through the winter. Glad to hear you'll get vaccinated soon Foxy!Foxy said:Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
We have been notified to expect vaccination within a week or so. The logistics of the Pfizer vaccine means that NHS are first, then primary care and social care.Philip_Thompson said:
NHS are second.Fysics_Teacher said:
NHS workers first I hope (and I say that a someone classed as "extremely vulnerable").DavidL said:
And then a massive roll out for the most vulnerable before Christmas so that they have had at least their first dose and get the second very early in the new year.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
And then teachers...
(Care workers are first)0 -
Mmm, and a nicely chilled Beaujolais? Or a Pale Ale?Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.1 -
Very long books aren't my cup of tea. About 300 pages is okay.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thought provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.0 -
Two have caused quite enough problems without a third.kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).0 -
FPT
Hyufd said:
'Given Glasgow has not had a Tory MP since 1979 and we have had 28 years of Tory government since and it voted Yes to independence even in 2014 when Scotland overall voted No, politically I am little bothered what Glasgow thinks and would of course never canvass there '
I have to correct you there. Glasgow Hillhead was Tory -held until it fell to Roy Jenkins at the March 1982 by-election.
2 -
Cheesy balls?kle4 said:
Managed to get hold of some of them last year. Nostalgia truly has much to answer for.IshmaelZ said:
They were better than the cheese footballs.Stocky said:
Do you like those cheese cubes and pineapple bits on cocktail sticks that were ubiquitous at parties of old?TheScreamingEagles said:
Eating pineapple pizzas is the leading cause of Covid-19.RobD said:
Damn, I thought it was a major new study about the health benefits of pineapple pizzas.TheScreamingEagles said:
Approval for one of the vaccines.rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
Eating food that goes against all laws of man, God, and nature is how we got into this mess.
Just asking.
Well people are showering less during lockdown.1 -
Well its about time. I mean we have waited longer for that than the last volume of GoT and that's just ridiculous.kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).1 -
Seems like quite a few lawyers would be treading the line between downright unethical behaviour with some of these lawsuits.Philip_Thompson said:https://twitter.com/SJohnsonWPR/status/1333890843757907970?s=19
Surely this is fraud by Sidney Powell?
Surely she is setting herself up to be disbarred?0 -
Isn’t that what the Book of Mormon is supposed to be?kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).2 -
Actually, I think I'm just describing the Book of Mormon?kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).0 -
Former cybersecurity chief hints at legal action against Trump attorney who said he should be ‘shot’Scott_xP said:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/01/chris-krebs-trump-campaign-4417241 -
I was the same. It was just annoying.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thought provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.0 -
Fysics_Teacher said:
Isn’t that what the Book of Mormon is supposed to be?kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).
Snap!kle4 said:
Actually, I think I'm just describing the Book of Mormon?kle4 said:
I thought that meant you weren't satisfied with the old and new testaments and we were expecting another soon, which would be quite the shake up for a lot of churches.TOPPING said:Oh and on Mantel, No 3 is waiting there as a Christmas treat. The first two were fantastic.
Same with The Testaments (waiting for Christmas).0 -
It's also a great story - worth retelling if only as a warning to each rising generation of special advisers. There's even an apocryphal Shakespearean version (The history of Thomas Lord Cromwel) in the much-maligned Fourth Folio.kle4 said:
I'm glad you mentioned the personal pronoun thing, that was weird. Not as bad as the lack of speech marks in Normal People, and I don't think it impacted my opinion of the book, but it was noticable. But she must be doing something right, people love it.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thoguht provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pgp33-EVqXkkle4 said:
Seems like quite a few lawyers would be treading the line between downright unethical behaviour with some of these lawsuits.Philip_Thompson said:https://twitter.com/SJohnsonWPR/status/1333890843757907970?s=19
Surely this is fraud by Sidney Powell?
Surely she is setting herself up to be disbarred?1 -
Are you saying that she, Mantel, wrote something you didn't like?DavidL said:
I was the same. It was just annoying.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thought provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.2 -
For anyone interested in the actual papers and rulings in the various legal cases: https://electioncases.osu.edu/0
-
Nope, anyone who doesn't like Velasquez* can be consigned to the circle of hell reserved for Farage's tailor and every atom of Trump.Malmesbury said:
Literature is like all art - it's personal whether you like it. Or not.Peter_the_Punter said:
I gave up on Wolf Hall after 150 pages. It's rare for me not to finish a book once I've started but I couldn't cope any more with the 'present in the past' and the peculiar use of personal pronouns. It was frustrating because I like historical novels, the period fascinates me and she is perfectly capable of writing decent prose. For some reason though she adopts these strange artificial mannerisms which distract from the story. I think her readership mistake the mannerism for 'Art'. Good luck to them.rcs1000 said:
I tried to read Wolf Hall, and failed.kle4 said:
I just couldn't get into it. I got no real insight into the people, or feel for the period, it just felt like 'stuff happening'.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.ThomasNashe said:
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.kle4 said:
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?ydoethur said:
Anything by Philippa GregorySunil_Prasannan said:
Pearl HarborMalmesbury said:
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.kle4 said:
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.HYUFD said:
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
U-571
Braveheart
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
What I did like about the latest (and possibly last) Shardlake book was that C J Samson had a 70 page essay at the end going indepth on the historiography of the events that formed the basis of the plot, well beyond your typical 'This is how it really went down' author's note at the end. Certainly not something wanted or needed in most cases, but interesting.
Though I still think Cornwell put it best in one of his such notes, about how he made it up because 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
I may go back it, given how well regarded it is by *most* people whose opinions I hold in high regard.
I guess they also take her 'contrarian' view of history as original and thoguht provoking. I just find it as superficial and contrived as the stylistic mannerisms.
It's not for me.
Nothing grates as much as some fool saying "You *must* like paintings by X".....
*There are others but I'm trying not to be tedious.0 -
Go go go go go...MaxPB said:
Must be MHRA approval for the Pfizer vaccine, it's said to be coming any day now. That means the first people could be getting vaccinated by Thursday!rottenborough said:Health editor of Economist:
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333873342705770497
https://twitter.com/natashaloder/status/1333901257300389893?s=201
This discussion has been closed.