BoatBanter.com - Hypothetical question

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - Hypothetical question (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/110670-hypothetical-question.html)

Hypothetical question

On Oct 9, 7:12*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 04:10:15 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 9, 5:21*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:56:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 8, 10:28*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 20:31:54 -0600, Vic Smith

wrote:
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:26:03 -0400, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:20:49 -0400, Tosk
wrote:

Funny, as soon as I started to read the above paragraph I knew it was
our WAFA spinning his tales again...

Add speaks Russian - probably in French - to the list of
accomplishments.

He is truly the most interesting man in the world.

Heh heh. Timely. *Daughters boyfriend, an international gadabout, left
a couple Coronas in the fridge while I was on vacation.
I passed, and grabbed a bottle of Harnas, "Of Polish Highlanders."..
Don't know how interesting I am, but drinking Polish hillbilly beer
should help that, along with my BAC.

True story. *We had a get together here a couple of years ago - Mrs.
Wave collegues, some of mine and a few oher friends and neighbors. So
I went out to buy beer.

Now you have to understand that when I quit, over 30 years ago, there
wasn't much choice for beer - in fact, the height of American beer
snobbery was Coors - which you couldn't get on the East Coast at the
time.

Anyway, I went out and bought a case of Sam Adams lager, case of Bud
and a case of Pabst Red, White and Blue.

I had half a case of Sam, 3/4 case of Bud and the Pabst was gone.

Go figure. *:)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nest time go straight Old Milwaukee. or Strohs.

There won't be any beer left!

Oh beers - just got me to thinking.

Ballantine XXX (rat pee), Narragansett, Carling's (Mabel - Black
Label), Schaefer (the one beer to have when you're having more than
one - always thought that was a bit odd for a slogan), JAX, Falstaff
and of course the worst beer in the world that's actually good after a
while - Dixie. *:)

Oh - thought of another one - Hamm's - The beer - refreshing.

I need to do some research on that - there's got to be a website with
old regional beers I don't remember.

....Around here, it was Blatz, Schlitz, Drewery's, Hamms, Bud, PBR,
Busch, Miller, Stagg, Little Kings, Heilmann's Old Style, Heineken,
Old Millwaukeee, Strohs, *colt 45 Malt

There's more but that's about all I can think about in a minute..

Blatz - now there's a name for beer. *:)

Yes, and the *end result* was pronounced the same...

Schlitz? speaks for itself/

Hypothetical question

On 10/9/09 9:38 AM, Gene wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:39:29 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 8, 9:15 am, wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Well maybe not. But seeing the creation, religion,evolution thread is
getting so long, I thought I'd ask a hypothetical question. Well maybe
it's not as hypothetical , but here goes.

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

etc, etc.

That is a rather complex question.

Would we be describing the reading assignment as a selection of one
out of seven fictional books? Or, can you choose the non fiction book
versus one of the six novels.....

On the face of it, given that there are choices, it would seem to be
acceptable. However, I would cry fowl on the basis that the class is
*English Literature* which, by definition, are those texts written in
English. If we are going to offer everything translated into English
as fair game, we might as well just change the course title and
syllabus to World Literature.

Given the course title, if the teacher is compelled to offer some sort
of link to a religious text, I think the Book of Common Prayer would
be more appropriate.

Notice included is the Gospel account of Matthew. Would this be
considered as promoting religion?

Probably, due to the limitations of choice.

Christianity is a religion developed from Judaism, all of which
developed in the Middle East, a region that spans southwestern Asia,
southeastern Europe, and northeastern Africa.... and as far as I can
tell really has little to do with "English Literature" either
geographically, culturally, linguistically, philosophically, etc.
Thus, why offering a Christian text as an acceptable "English Text"
without also including the (surely translated) Jewish, Buddhist,
Mormon, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Islam, Confucianism, Shinto, etc.,
etc. texts.... without even an honorable mention to Classical Paganism
which WAS the original English Religious Literature.... is a bit
cloudy.

AND! Even if it was required reading. could it be used for literary
purposes only?

I doubt that it could be, in this context.

Authorship/Style? Nobody knows who wrote the Book of Matthew and one
can't really discuss Matthew without inclusion of the other three
gospels, most notably Mark (and the non-extant Quelle source), from
which the Book of Matthew was plagiarized.

So, what are you going to ask the students to *do* with that text in
an English Literature course?
--

Forté Agent 5.00 Build 1171

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by
the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do.
So, throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.
Catch the trade winds in your sails.
Explore. Dream. Discover." - Unknown

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

First off, it wasn't a "bible study", Gene. and it wasn't to be such.
It was like any other book report. to give an over all critique of
what the author was trying to convey. And honestly, I really don't
rememebr what I wrte about. that was in 1972 and I dont' have the
paper.

No one *had* to chose the Matthew account.

I didn't suggest in ANY way that it WAS Bible study and I noted that
there WAS a choice.

Now, address the point..... what has The Bible got to do with ENGLISH
Literature....

The study of Literature should or could encompass the following
points:

1. The body of written works of a language, period, or culture.
2. Imaginative or creative writing, especially of recognized
artistic value.
3. The art or occupation of a literary writer.
4. The body of written work produced by scholars or researchers in
a given field: medical literature.
5. Printed material: collected all the available literature on the
subject.
6. Music. All the compositions of a certain kind or for a specific
instrument or ensemble: the symphonic literature.

I attempted to address some of these items to show why the Bible was
not an English text.

How would you address the matter, today.... in the context of English
Literature. The fact of the matter is YOU CAN'T, because the Bible is
NOT English Literature. It had no more right or reason to be included
in that book list than Les Miserables, Der Steppenwolf, or Amori di
Venere or any of the translations of same.

If you discount the religious aspect, the fact remains: the book JUST
DOESN'T BELONG in that group of required reading.

Robert Lowell, who held a precursor Poet Laureate post at the LC in the
1940s, taught a class called "The King James Bible as English Literature."

I took a similarly titled course while pursuing my master's in English.

The KJ bible is a magnificent work in the English language, and many
serious students of English lit consider it English lit.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Hypothetical question

On Oct 9, 8:38*am, Gene wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:39:29 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 8, 9:15*am, Gene wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

Well maybe not. But seeing the creation, religion,evolution thread is
getting so long, I thought I'd ask a hypothetical question. Well maybe
it's not as hypothetical , but here goes.

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. *Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

etc, etc.

That is a rather complex question.

Would we be describing the reading assignment as a selection of one
out of seven fictional books? Or, can you choose the non fiction book
versus one of the six novels.....

On the face of it, given that there are choices, it would seem to be
acceptable. However, I would cry fowl on the basis that the class is
*English Literature* which, by definition, are those texts written in
English. If we are going to offer everything translated into English
as fair game, we might as well just change the course title and
syllabus to World Literature.

Given the course title, if the teacher is compelled to offer some sort
of link to a religious text, I think the Book of Common Prayer would
be more appropriate.

Notice included is the Gospel account of Matthew. *Would this be
considered as promoting religion?

Probably, due to the limitations of choice.

Christianity is a religion developed from Judaism, all of which
developed in the Middle East, a region that spans southwestern Asia,
southeastern Europe, and northeastern Africa.... and as far as I can
tell really has little to do with "English Literature" either
geographically, culturally, linguistically, philosophically, etc.
Thus, why offering a Christian text as an acceptable "English Text"
without also including the (surely translated) Jewish, Buddhist,
Mormon, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Islam, Confucianism, Shinto, etc.,
etc. texts.... without even an honorable mention to Classical Paganism
which WAS the original English Religious Literature.... is a bit
cloudy.

AND! Even if it was required reading. could it be used for literary
purposes only?

I doubt that it could be, in this context.

Authorship/Style? Nobody knows who wrote the Book of Matthew and one
can't really discuss Matthew without inclusion of the other three
gospels, most notably Mark (and the non-extant Quelle source), from
which the Book of Matthew was plagiarized.

So, what are you going to ask the students to *do* with that text in
an English Literature course?
--

Forté Agent 5.00 Build 1171

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by
the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do.
So, throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.
Catch the trade winds in your sails.
Explore. Dream. Discover." * - Unknown

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
*http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

First off, it wasn't a "bible study", Gene. and it wasn't to be such.
It was like any other book report. to give an over all critique of
what the author was trying to *convey. And honestly, I really don't
rememebr what I wrte about. that was in 1972 and I dont' have the
paper.

No one *had* to chose the Matthew account.

I didn't suggest in ANY way that it WAS Bible study and I noted that
there WAS a choice.

Now, address the point..... what has The Bible got to do with ENGLISH
Literature....

The study of Literature should or could encompass the following
points:

* *1. *The body of written works of a language, period, or culture.
* *2. Imaginative or creative writing, especially of recognized
artistic value.
* *3. The art or occupation of a literary writer.
* *4. The body of written work produced by scholars or researchers in
a given field: medical literature.
* *5. Printed material: collected all the available literature on the
subject.
* *6. Music. All the compositions of a certain kind or for a specific
instrument or ensemble: the symphonic literature.

I attempted to address some of these items to show why the Bible was
not an English text.

How would you address the matter, today.... in the context of English
Literature. The fact of the matter is YOU CAN'T, because the Bible is
NOT English Literature. It had no more right or reason to be included
in that book list than Les Miserables, Der Steppenwolf, or Amori di
Venere or any of the translations of same.

If you discount the religious aspect, the fact remains: the book JUST
DOESN'T BELONG in that group of required reading.

--

Forté Agent 5.00 Build 1171

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by
the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do.
So, throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.
Catch the trade winds in your sails.
Explore. Dream. Discover." * - Unknown

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
*http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's jsut it, Gene, it wasn't required. it was an option like the
others.

And we discussed many other things in English Lit than just English Lit

Hypothetical question

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:29:05 -0400, Gene
wrote:

Serious students of cuisine can consider a chilidog as part of the
American Kennel Club,

Nice. I like it!

Hypothetical question

On 10/9/09 10:29 AM, Gene wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:49:29 -0400, H the K
wrote:

Robert Lowell, who held a precursor Poet Laureate post at the LC in the
1940s, taught a class called "The King James Bible as English Literature."

I took a similarly titled course while pursuing my master's in English.

The KJ bible is a magnificent work in the English language, and many
serious students of English lit consider it English lit.

You can "consider" anything you want, but English Literature is
defined as:

Literature written in English since c.1450 by the inhabitants of the
British Isles.

or

English literature refers to literature written in the English
language, including literature composed in English by writers not
necessarily from England.....

Serious students of cuisine can consider a chilidog as part of the
American Kennel Club, but that doesn't make it so..... that's one big
reason we don't let *students* make those decisions.....

Most scholars of English lit would include the KJ bible. Even wiki does,
under the header, English Literatu

"The King James Bible, one of the most massive translation projects in
the history of English up to this time, was started in 1604 and
completed in 1611. It represents the culmination of a tradition of Bible
translation into English that began with the work of William Tyndale. It
became the standard Bible of the Church of England, and some consider it
one of the greatest literary works of all time. This project was headed
by James I himself, who supervised the work of forty-seven scholars.
Although many other translations into English have been made, some of
which are widely considered more accurate, many aesthetically prefer the
King James Bible, whose meter is made to mimic the original Hebrew verse."

"...one of the greatest literary works of all time."

And it is in English. Therefore, it is English literature.

I studied Rouse's of Homer's Odyssey and Iliad. For many, Rouse's work
is considered a landmark of *English* literature, even though his prose
is based upon translations from the Greek.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Hypothetical question