Eric Hansen on tue 9 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Sorry I missed this one from the beginning??? Interesting...
h a n s e n
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:50 AM, phil wrote:
> Hi Randall,
>
>
>
> > Original Message -----
> > From: Randall Moody
>
>
> > Isn't he the guy that fell in love with a prostitute and murdered one o=
f
> her john's that beat her then later while in prison
> > assaulted an orderly, stabbed a fellow inmate and "shanked" a guard? Yo=
u
> know you may be >on to something about public school and prison.... :)
>
> > Randall in Atlanta
>
>
>
>
> Lol...
>
>
> I dunno...
>
>
> I spoke a little carelessly, having meant only that I admired very much t=
he
> Work Robert Stroud did, and, that I wish I could have met him, and to hav=
e
> been able to form first hand, an opinion of his character.
>
>
> I have been a week and a half with a 'flu...I think it's the H5N1, but, w=
ho
> knows...
>
>
>
> My mind and emotions ( not my Stomach ) feel very like a little Boat
> hitting major Ground Swells at Sea...orientation good, but being moved a =
lot
> from the great Below where, leaning on the Rudder...I am managing my head=
ing
> alright...if between amusement, tears, and wellings of profundities which
> tear my Heart.
>
>
>
> I have been working with Bird Rescue/Rehab occupation for quite a while
> now...I dunno, decades if in a light way usually...a heavy way, off and o=
n
> for a decade, when that is how it is.
>
>
> I knew nothing about Robert Stroud till just a few years ago, where, I
> tried sifting through the conflicting mess of not much and worse, to try =
and
> see if I could find out anything...then, I did not give it any further
> thought...but, for now and then to be reminded he had lived.
>
> I gather he was of a Spirited sort, and, I have seen it often enough myse=
lf
> even in mundane Life, that if one seems proud or spirited, or does not be=
nd
> to other's commands, this is enough to make enemies, have lies told to
> degrade you, and, to draw people who wish to break you.
>
>
> Canaries, connoted his rememberence, and, I felt a wave of sadness to thi=
nk
> of how his life went...and a wave of admiration for the Work that he did.
>
>
> We will never know the truth or the real settings of the unpleasant event=
s
> attributed to him, in order to be able to judge anything about it.
>
>
> Few people can work with the very small Birds, such as Canaries...they ar=
e
> so delicate, so small, and, by the time you even have any reason to suspe=
ct
> something is wrong, you may well only have hours left to hope you may rem=
edy
> it.
>
>
> I work with larger ones, if only a little larger...Morning Doves, Pigeons=
,
> others now and then, also, with many quite tiny Neonates or older Babys,
> sick or injured or not, whom I have raised, socialized to their kind when
> possible, and, released..
>
>
> Few of these Birds have any chance here otherwise...especially if they
> require time and care and attention...espeicllay the medium to 'far gone'
> ones who would be perfunctorily euthenized without question by Vets or ot=
her
> Wildlife facilities or government licenced contract Vets for protected
> species and the like.
>
> Anyway...
>
> I edged on faith and maybe some intuition, and maybe wishful thinking, to
> find in his favor...against the hear-says which variously do not.
>
>
> It is very complicated to undo the tangles of History...to see what lay
> where, of the knot...where usually, everyone is satisfied with credulity =
and
> superficiality.
>
>
> I dunno, I feel exhausted now.
>
>
>
> Below...amid...s'more...the original reply...
>
>
>
> > Original Message -----
> > From: Randall Moody
>
>
> > Isn't he the guy that fell in love with a prostitute and murdered one o=
f
> her john's that beat her then later while in prison
> > assaulted an orderly, stabbed a fellow inmate and "shanked" a guard? Yo=
u
> know you may be >on to something about public school and prison.... :)
>
> > Randall in Atlanta
>
>
>
> No...not like that...or, at least, far as I understand, or accept...not a=
s
> you inflect, either.
>
>
>
> If I recall...
>
>
> 1909...Alaska, Rob't Stroud, 19 years old, from Washington State, left
> Home, on his own, no criminal history nor even any hint any was possible
> for his character.
>
> Green, inexperienced, not worldly, frank and forthright by
> nature...emotionally open, guileless, gets Pnuemonia, it gets worse, and,=
he
> is seriously ill...
>
>
> A Dance Hall Girl who he knew, with whom an acquaintance was on-going (
> who maybe yes, maybe no, was a sometimes 'prostitute' ) whether or not th=
e
> acquaintance was romantic or otherwise, takes him in to her little home
> where she lives alone...mops his brown, changes sweat soaked sheets, make=
s
> Soups, Teas, keeps the Wood Stove running day and night, Spoon feeds him
> while he is too sick to sit or eat...she rents a small Popcorn Machine, a=
nd
> sells Popcorn, to make additional money for careing for him...she takes c=
are
> of him, where, otherwise, he would have died.
>
>
> Over however many weeks, he recovers, and, survived.
>
>
> Robert is grateful for her kindness.
>
>
> The girl gets beaten and raped and possibly robbed by a well known around
> town older man, a mature, street wise, criminal type, known for his
> viscousness, violence and violent temper...it is possible he was punishin=
g
> her for refusing to let him be her Pimp, for her reusing to be a prostitu=
te
> other than as an occasional matter and by her own leave and lights.
>
>
> She almost dies and is badly injured...now the income from her selling
> Popcorn and Dancing in the Chorus Line and so on, and paying for her own
> existance, is compromised as well.
>
>
> Robert is now poised to spend time taking care of her...and, finding mean=
s
> of income.
>
>
> 19 year old Mr. Stroud, confronts the man, ( in what way, we do not
> know...it may have been as simple as just asking "What happened??" ) , an=
d,
> about all we seem to know, is a physical scuffle or fight ensued, and, th=
e
> man was shot.
>
>
> Probably, the man was shot by his own gun, in the course of a struggle, i=
n
> which he was trying to draw on, and shoot Stroud.
>
>
> The Gun was never attributed to Shroud, anyway, far as I could find out.
>
>
>
> Stroud prompltly goes to the Police, presents himself and the Gun, and,
> relays his story of what happenned...presenting to the Police, the Man's
> wallet also, containing the Money ( which according to some sources, ) he
> had stolen from the Girl.
>
>
> We will never know what his story was, nor how inflected in the telling,
> nor, in the transcription to tell what actually happenned...only, what wa=
s
> either made of it, or, made from it to suit others.
>
>
> Shot-man may well have been in good criminal stead with local crooked
> Police, and or a procurer of Girls and Drugs for them, and or their being
> used to a cut of his own profits for them and his symbiosis, and or other
> services he would render, or he may have been related to the Judge or DA =
or
> Police Cheif as well, or or who knows...but, something hypes up the
> charges...and, probably, if an honest Legal conditions, no charges need h=
ave
> been filed against young Mr. stroud in the first place.
>
phil on tue 9 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi Eric,
It began as "What do we think of..."
A fellow named Ken Robinson, a retired professor or something, talking in a
seminar or other gathering, about 'education' and 'creativity', and, the
question of whether 'education' ( in what I would suggest is necessarily th=
e
pejoritive tense of the term, ) as we know it, detracts from it's victim's
possessing and hence manifesting, 'creativity' ( whatever that is).
One sincere and deepening response, by Carol Casey, happened to have a
sig-line mentioning 'Canaries', where, in passing, I referenced Robert
Stroud...
Randall asked, if with paraphrasing what I felt was the usual interpolating
spin to which History is only too liable ( not his fault, ), if this was
"the" Robert Stroud of whom such things are said...
Where, I offered a fast off-the-cuff digression into what I recall having
accepted or extracted, from the otherwise tangled mess and slumping
poo-piles of 'History'.
The question salient, is, or remains, "Does Education as it has come to be,
adversely effect 'Creativity'.."?
For which, in my opinion, some preliminary descriptions/definitions of both
terms, would be nice, in order for permutations of the basal 'Algebra' of
the sought-for equation to be able to make sense, and or, be demonstrated -
Education, meaning what?
Creativity, meaning what?
And, maybe more importantly, to whom?
And, with that, to whom would that 'to-whom' matter? And why?
Like that...
Love,
Phil
Who may be now on the ragged ass end of his happy-go-lucky H5N1 or
whateveritis fever-and-chills and whatnotelse Voyage...and thank God, Coffe=
e
and Pall Malls taste good as ever, or it would have been 'misery'...
Lv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Hansen"
> Sorry I missed this one from the beginning??? Interesting...
> h a n s e n
Carol Casey on wed 10 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi, Eric,
Phil has summed it up nicely, except for some parts, which might indicate
that he's not quite over his fever.
Carol
Canary Court
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:18 PM, phil wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
> It began as "What do we think of..."
>
>
> A fellow named Ken Robinson, a retired professor or something, talking in=
a
> seminar or other gathering, about 'education' and 'creativity', and, the
> question of whether 'education' ( in what I would suggest is necessarily
> the
> pejoritive tense of the term, ) as we know it, detracts from it's victim'=
s
> possessing and hence manifesting, 'creativity' ( whatever that is).
>
>
> One sincere and deepening response, by Carol Casey, happened to have a
> sig-line mentioning 'Canaries', where, in passing, I referenced Robert
> Stroud...
>
>
> Randall asked, if with paraphrasing what I felt was the usual interpolati=
ng
> spin to which History is only too liable ( not his fault, ), if this was
> "the" Robert Stroud of whom such things are said...
>
>
> Where, I offered a fast off-the-cuff digression into what I recall having
> accepted or extracted, from the otherwise tangled mess and slumping
> poo-piles of 'History'.
>
>
> The question salient, is, or remains, "Does Education as it has come to b=
e,
> adversely effect 'Creativity'.."?
>
>
>
> For which, in my opinion, some preliminary descriptions/definitions of bo=
th
> terms, would be nice, in order for permutations of the basal 'Algebra' of
> the sought-for equation to be able to make sense, and or, be demonstrated=
-
>
>
> Education, meaning what?
>
> Creativity, meaning what?
>
> And, maybe more importantly, to whom?
>
> And, with that, to whom would that 'to-whom' matter? And why?
>
>
>
> Like that...
>
>
>
> Love,
>
>
> Phil
> Who may be now on the ragged ass end of his happy-go-lucky H5N1 or
> whateveritis fever-and-chills and whatnotelse Voyage...and thank God,
> Coffee
> and Pall Malls taste good as ever, or it would have been 'misery'...
>
> Lv
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Hansen"
>
>
> Sorry I missed this one from the beginning??? Interesting...
>> h a n s e n
>>
>
Eric Hansen on wed 10 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
I didn't know they still made Pall Malls ---??
Well, we have a stereotype about creativity, don't we?? It is the Amadeus
Factor, that God made creative people just like that, ultra-creative,
possessed of some divine gift, in spite of their being mere mortals and
prone to excess (artistic license)
Actually it is a lot of hard work and serious thought - nothing can ever
replace that - is that what "genius" is?
which gets us back to education, Our Educational System is a class/caste
system which permits "better" degrees to go to those who can afford it
(Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) not necessarily to those with the ability
to learn. You don't even need a degree for that -
The Robert Stroud story is great; and now that anti-biotics are going the
way of fossil fuel, his researches may again be quite relevant -
h a n s e n
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Carol Casey wrote:
> Hi, Eric,
>
> Phil has summed it up nicely, except for some parts, which might indicate
> that he's not quite over his fever.
>
> Carol
> Canary Court
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:18 PM, phil wrote:
>
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> >
> >
> > It began as "What do we think of..."
> >
> >
> > A fellow named Ken Robinson, a retired professor or something, talking =
in
> a
> > seminar or other gathering, about 'education' and 'creativity', and, th=
e
> > question of whether 'education' ( in what I would suggest is necessaril=
y
> > the
> > pejoritive tense of the term, ) as we know it, detracts from it's
> victim's
> > possessing and hence manifesting, 'creativity' ( whatever that is).
> >
> >
> > One sincere and deepening response, by Carol Casey, happened to have a
> > sig-line mentioning 'Canaries', where, in passing, I referenced Robert
> > Stroud...
> >
> >
> > Randall asked, if with paraphrasing what I felt was the usual
> interpolating
> > spin to which History is only too liable ( not his fault, ), if this wa=
s
> > "the" Robert Stroud of whom such things are said...
> >
> >
> > Where, I offered a fast off-the-cuff digression into what I recall havi=
ng
> > accepted or extracted, from the otherwise tangled mess and slumping
> > poo-piles of 'History'.
> >
> >
> > The question salient, is, or remains, "Does Education as it has come to
> be,
> > adversely effect 'Creativity'.."?
> >
> >
> >
> > For which, in my opinion, some preliminary descriptions/definitions of
> both
> > terms, would be nice, in order for permutations of the basal 'Algebra' =
of
> > the sought-for equation to be able to make sense, and or, be demonstrat=
ed
> -
> >
> >
> > Education, meaning what?
> >
> > Creativity, meaning what?
> >
> > And, maybe more importantly, to whom?
> >
> > And, with that, to whom would that 'to-whom' matter? And why?
> >
> >
> >
> > Like that...
> >
> >
> >
> > Love,
> >
> >
> > Phil
> > Who may be now on the ragged ass end of his happy-go-lucky H5N1 or
> > whateveritis fever-and-chills and whatnotelse Voyage...and thank God,
> > Coffee
> > and Pall Malls taste good as ever, or it would have been 'misery'...
> >
> > Lv
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Eric Hansen"
> >
> >
> > Sorry I missed this one from the beginning??? Interesting...
> >> h a n s e n
> >>
> >
>
phil on fri 12 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi Carol,
Would you elaborate the 'some parts' I had neglected?
It occurs to me, that what is so wonderful about Fevers, is the =3D
experience overall is about on par with other naive incidental autogenic =
=3D
adrenochrome metabolizations.
I always loved being sick when I was a kid, or since, as long as it had =3D
a decent Fever phase...otherwise, you just feel crappy and it is no =3D
fun...
Love,=3D20
Phil
Lv
----- Original Message -----=3D20
From: Carol Casey=3D20
Hi, Eric,
Phil has summed it up nicely, except for some parts, which might =3D
indicate that he's not quite over his fever.=3D20
Carol
Canary Court
Carol Casey on sat 13 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi, Phil and anyone else tuning in,
I was referring to the "sincere and deepening" parts . . . a nice complimen=
t
and I thank you. Surely sincere, but deepening . . . so subjective.
Carol
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:33 PM, phil wrote:
> Hi Carol,
>
>
>
>
> Would you elaborate the 'some parts' I had neglected?
>
>
>
> It occurs to me, that what is so wonderful about Fevers, is the experienc=
e
> overall is about on par with other naive incidental autogenic adrenochrom=
e
> metabolizations.
>
>
> I always loved being sick when I was a kid, or since, as long as it had a
> decent Fever phase...otherwise, you just feel crappy and it is no fun...
>
>
>
> Love,
>
>
> Phil
> Lv
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Carol Casey
>
>
> Hi, Eric,
>
> Phil has summed it up nicely, except for some parts, which might indicat=
e
> that he's not quite over his fever.
>
> Carol
> Canary Court
>
phil on sun 14 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi Eric,
What fun...
Below...amid...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Hansen"
>I didn't know they still made Pall Malls ---??
Yes...or, the un-filtered ones were what I meant of course...
They now make
quite
a few filter versions of Pall Malls also, which seems absurd, but, so it
goes.
Non-Filter wise, as far as what remains in the Market - "Pall Mall" are
'King
Size', compared to the other, and older 'short'
standard size un-filtered Cigarettes.
Pall Mall motto - "IN HOC SIGNO VINCES" - 'Wherever Particular People
Congregate'
They also still make the 'short' Standard Size
tan-paper-fake-"Cork"-likeness end, "Kool"
non-filters ( but they are hard to find)...''Players Navy
Cut''( An old American Brand )..."Camel"...and "Philip Morris
Commandos"...far as I know.
Maybe
"Chesterfields" ( which were 'King Size' also ) still exist, but,
personally, I never cared for them
much.
I doubt many people to-day recall when very thin Cork was used on some
brands of un-filtered Cigarette ends, to prevent those not used to smoking
from having the paper stick inconveniently to their Lip.
We used to be a society so much more polite than hardly anyone living now,
can imagine.
Anyway...
> Well, we have a stereotype about creativity, don't we??
I don't know...
I don't...
Some may, sure...
> It is the Amadeus
> Factor, that God made creative people just like that, ultra-creative,
> possessed of some divine gift, in spite of their being mere mortals and
> prone to excess (artistic license)
I never associated that as a stereotype, nor that possible stereotype with
'creativity'...though I suppose I could have.
I just accepted Mozart was himself...if that is who you mean.
Possibly, a 'creative' person in seeing another's meritorious innovation or
invention or elaboration, simply says "Cool...", or smiles a nod...and gets
it.
People who have no 'creativity', say "How creative!"...or, admonish others
to 'Be creative!" - or wish to lassoo the victim into somehow being their
beee-hatch.
I doubt anyone in Centuries past, thought creativity was so novel or
unexpected or odd, as to have bothered having a term for it.
Too, the meanings of words change...as do the reasons for having had the
meanings.
It seems to me, that what we call 'Creativity' is a base line
occupation of Life itself...even when or if partially resting on it's
Laurels...or,
enjoying the fruits of it's Creativity.
One builds a House...then, to some degree, rests in it...finds other
occupation, then...within and without it...
Thus the myriad of Foms gathered/made, occupied, so to speak, by, or as,
Creatures,
Organisms...
The Engineering Genius of 'Nature'...and, the how by which such Living form=
s
are
assembled Molecule-by-Molecule...to be enjoyed, and, abandonded...in turn..=
.
They do not do this for having been exogenically 'educated' by indifferent
over-managing
glowering salaried job-clinging strangers, far as I can tell...
> Actually it is a lot of hard work and serious thought
I don't think so...
Vision, clearity, directness, genius so called...or to see, and hence act,
with
directness
effeciency and
economy...the antipodes of what people usually mean by struggle or 'work' o=
r
'strain' or
'education'
and so on...
'education' as we know it, is like how 'Pate' is made...
Yes, the 'Goose' is valued, guarded jealously...yes, he is force fed
with-a-Funnel...yes, his
Feet are nailed-to-a-board...and, yes, his Liver is cut out and eaten.
Thus is he 'valued'...
But then too, according to those who so minister, it was never his Liver
anyway...it belonged to them, and, he was just taking care of it till they
needed it.
> - nothing can ever
> replace that - is that what "genius" is?
I would say, Genius is inordinate ecomony of directness in
perception/understanding/comprehension/anticipation...sometimes followed by
action or
expression or exteriorization of some sort.
For which, in the present people-worlds, it will usually make enemies, and
fast.
If others feel they can make money or get attention on enslaving or
exploiting the source, or find solace in
destroying it from envy, then, it may
appear to make 'friends', or, will do so, about as well as the 'Golden
Goose' did, in the Story about how that went.
So...we have the Goose as involentary donor of his Liver...or, donor of
'Golden Eggs', either way, usually not so good for the Goose.
Job descriptions always are best read very c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y...if one is
being ( even tacitly) hired...
> which gets us back to education, Our Educational System is a class/caste
> system which permits "better" degrees to go to those who can afford it
> (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) not necessarily to those with the abilit=
y
> to learn. You don't even need a degree for that -
It would seem so...yes.
What relation these kinds of 'education' and 'degrees' have to the
ostensible 'subjects' otherwise, is far less clear...or, far less happy.
Or, the subjects themselves, have been no less, and, typically, far far mor=
e
compromised and corrupted, than have the means of acquiring degrees in them=
.
I think of them as corpses being gang humped untill they resemble bags of
slush.
Institutions of education demonstrate some of the means of arranging the
corpses, and, positions for humping them,
and, provide practice corpses for the novitiates/initiates, and, everyone
gets to try
humping the
corpses from those or other positions, to get the knack, develop adequate
thrusting or grinding prowess, and for them to acquire marketable
proficiency certificates for being welcomed into the labor pool or
professions.
> The Robert Stroud story is great;
If it is true...or, if my accpetance is roughly the truth...and, it might
be...or it might not be...but, we have no way to know, other than by feel..=
.
intuition...sense maybe...
I suppose my summary poetic comprehension...is as - a young man, cut
from the same Cloth as Ayn Rand's
"Howard Rourke", having been cast in a differing drama/gauntlet than Mr.
Rourke was, where, instead
of
Architecture in 1948 or whenever it was, as an already mature, middle
aged man...it
was the Alaskan Frontier, 19 years old, pnuemonia, one friend, no
profession, and, the
damp chilly Autumn of 1909...
> and now that anti-biotics are going the
> way of fossil fuel, his researches may again be quite relevant -
Yes...
> h a n s e n
Love,
Phil
Lv
phil on mon 15 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi Steve,
Sad that only one or two people had any interest in the Original Topic of
Ken Robinson's talk.
So it goes...
In order to guide the matter away from a possibly fatal Thread Drift, let m=
e
suggest, that the centralmost Theme, 'Creativity', is at play here, and to
be recognised as emblematic, not only in the initial association on my part=
,
of, 'Canaries', and, 'Robert Stroud, but, with whatever quality, in anyone'=
s
construances or acceptances personally, of Mr. Stroud as himself, and, of
those conditions, dramas, hear-says, and inexorably political contexts in
which we understand him to have found his way.
Not all problems occur in conditions which admit to a happy or satisfying
solution...and, I am sure also, we will all agree, that yesterday's
"solutions" often undelie or emerge, as to-days apparent "problems".
Creativity...can be imagined to aid the naive Pilgrim away from
complaisency, and, possibly, into useful insight, in considering any seemin=
g
'problem', how it is defined, who defines it for whom, and, how it may be
the result of or a disguise for, yesterday's solution(s)...or, Creativity
can aid the naive Pilgrim in finding elaborations which retain
complaiscency, and make it a richer more detailed experience.
Creativity itself, in the usual sense of it, seems no guarantee of anything=
,
other than, what it is put to, and, how-so.
Below...amid...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Slatin"
> Phil --
>
> Stroud is long dead, and accurate information
> about him gets thinner as time goes on. His
> current image is governed largely by Hollywood
> which created an extremely sympathetic portrait
> of him in "The Birdman of Alcatraz."
If possibly not as sympathetic as the real character, rightly understood,
would have been...
I had no preconceived notions...no Horse-in-the-Race...and, while I had see=
n
the Burt Lancaster Movie long ago, it had zero effect on my then or since
apprehensions/anticipations.
I had not found out anything about Robert Stroud untill quite recently,
where, in some stolen hours from other duties, I did what digging I could.
What began this, was an incidental glimpse of a Photograph, taken of him, i=
n
1912.
I arrived at my acceptance in sifting through and evaluating what
information or hear-say as I could find.
My sharing of my acceptance, was not a rough-draft Doctoral Thesis nor a
heavy submission of any sort...it is simply my accepance, as it is, which i=
s
open to further or new information, and, possibly further or new revisions.
> Prisons are rough places no matter what, and all
> we really know about him pre-prison is that he was
> convicted of knocking some guy out and then murdering
> him, execution style, bullet in the back of the head.
I never found any such reference, or interpreation, anywhere, as that.
The only Gunshot references I ever found, repeated many times in different
sources, without any variation,
was an approximately contact wound to the Chest...consistant with what may
happen when two people are stuggling over a loaded and or cocked and loaded
Revolver.
No reference anywhere, ever, suggested the Revolver was Stroud's nor brough=
t
to the altercation by Stroud.
No reference anywhere ever said the victim/deceased, had been shot in the
Head.
Leaving the patient Reader to pretty well have to suppose, the Revolver was
one which was owned by, and, being brandished by the deceased...
No?
> We don't know much about his motives, but it's hard
> to think that the bullet was justified.
This is too far afield now...
> Subsequent to his conviction, he was involved in
> several violent acts, including murdering a guard.
Which tells us nothing of context, nor, continuity.
> What we do know about him is that it wasn't until
> he was placed in perpetual solitary that he did
> anything useful with his life, and while in solitary
> he made great contributions to our knowledge of
> birds.
I imagine he was bored...too...and, probably, depressed.
In fact, this was borne out in my light research...he was bored, and,
depressed a great deal.
> Perhaps he's one of those people who are just
> unfit for human contact.
Well...you may of course read into it, or interpolate as you like.
That is not my appreciation.
> He can be praised for
> his contributions without presuming that he was
> a victim in other areas of his life.
Take yer pick...
> And the motto "in hoc signo vinces?" That's Latin
> for "in this sign victory" or words to that effect.
Oh...I stand corrected then...
I had assumed at the age of 11, that the in-english "quote" appearing
beneath the Latin, was a translation, rather than a second seperate
saying...anbd, I had not thought to review the complaiscency.
Ooooops!
Lol...
Thanks...
> Steve Slatin --
Phil
Lv
Steve Slatin on mon 15 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Phil --
Stroud is long dead, and accurate information
about him gets thinner as time goes on. His
current image is governed largely by Hollywood
which created an extremely sympathetic portrait
of him in "The Birdman of Alcatraz."
Prisons are rough places no matter what, and all
we really know about him pre-prison is that he was
convicted of knocking some guy out and then murdering
him, execution style, bullet in the back of the head.
We don't know much about his motives, but it's hard
to think that the bullet was justified.
Subsequent to his conviction, he was involved in
several violent acts, including murdering a guard.
What we do know about him is that it wasn't until
he was placed in perpetual solitary that he did
anything useful with his life, and while in solitary
he made great contributions to our knowledge of
birds.
Perhaps he's one of those people who are just
unfit for human contact. He can be praised for
his contributions without presuming that he was
a victim in other areas of his life.
And the motto "in hoc signo vinces?" That's Latin
for "in this sign victory" or words to that effect.
Steve Slatin --
--- On Sun, 3/14/10, phil wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
>
> What fun...
>
>
> Below...amid...
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Hansen"
>
>
> >I didn't know they still made Pall Malls ---??
>
>
> Yes...or, the un-filtered ones were what I meant of
> course...
>
> They now make
> quite
> a few filter versions of Pall Malls also, which seems
> absurd, but, so it
> goes.
>
>
> Non-Filter wise, as far as what remains in the Market -
> "Pall Mall" are
> 'King
> Size', compared to the other, and older 'short'
> standard size un-filtered Cigarettes.
>
> Pall Mall motto - "IN HOC SIGNO VINCES" - 'Wherever
> Particular People
> Congregate'
>
phil on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Hi Randall,
Below...amid...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Randall Moody"
> Sorry but this is nothing more than an attempt to demonize institutions
> for
> the individual choices of their human members. The institution does not
> have
> a brain to make choices neither is it self aware.
My own sense of it, is that we do well to look very carefully at
Institutions and Corporations and Bureaucracies or mechanized Authorities o=
f
whatever
sort, what they do, how they do it, how the people
which comprise them adapt or have adapted to that environment and
milieu...how those whom the organizations serve, adapt to the kind or
quality of product or service.
This is very important stuff...
> It is nothing more than a
> group of individuals making choices to do good things or bad things. No
> amount of anthropomorphizing corporations or institutions will change the
> fact that the decisions to do certain things or pursue certain lines of
> behavior are made by humans. The decisions made at Ford were made by
> humans
> at Ford not by Ford as if it is a sentient being.
> --Randall in Atlanta--
And, a human being is 'nothing more than' about $1.35 worth of basic raw
materials. Hence, the value of any given human being, is...$1.35.
A Car is nothing more than a way to get from A...to B.
A Job is nothing more than a way to make money.
A home, nay, 'house', is nothing more than some 2x4s and gypboard and gloss=
,
and a
mortguage and maybe, now, a bankreposession.
A Ceramic Pot is nothing more than some Clay, surrounding an interior empty
space.
Maybe this is what they convinced all them Jim Jones people of, you know,
for that Kool-Aid to be so welcome? ( well, okay, they had help, I
know...lotsa help...but...)
Anyway...
Oye...
This does not work for me.
Decisions people make, are always made in ( what for them, is a definite )
context...the context is both
their internal landscape, and, the so to speak external and immediate
landscape in which they are operating...and or, their decisions represent a
relationship between these, or, rather, between their construence or
acceptances or description of
these, however so.
Coerce, define and restrict these conditions, and, you coerce, define and
restrict the
range, quality, or kinds of decisions people will reliably make or be able
to
make, or be permitted to make...and or also, you limit the kind of people
who will even
be there, to make them...thus limiting things and results, even more.
Trying to suppose that everyone will transfer the values of one context to
another, may or may not tell us anything of why the values of one context
may still differ from those of another context.
Institutions/corporations/bereaucracies/authorities-as-mechanized
management, tend to evolve to where people are
subservient and expendible to the operations/procedures, growth or internal
politics
and ambitions and budget-politics of the
institution/corporation/bereaucracy/management, even when the Mission
Statement of the
Organization or of those giving it it's charter, had originally been about
an intention to impersonally, selflessly, serve or benifit other
people outside the Organization.
Because a formation of say Fighter Planes, manages to fly in unison, to fly
in Formation, does not
mean they are on course.
An errant member, flying away from the formation, may be on course, but, ou=
t
of formation....he/she may also be off course, and out of formation.
Unless one knows the flight plan or course-plan intended, it is hard to
judge who
is on course, or not, whatever the formation or it's integrity appear to be
doing.
Generally, people will elect to remain in formation, oblivious or in denial
or confused or Doe-in-Headlights about what the course was or could be, or
should be, or
why...or they do not feel qualified to evaluate the course, or they are
prohibited in various ways from doing so, or they had been punished for
trying in prior occasions to do so, where they lost their nerve or
confidence...or they never thought about it...
This assumes endless forms...
Seems to me...
Love,
Phil
Lv
Randall Moody on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
My last word on the subject of Stroud. Once the person is convicted of
murder, assault and stabbing of the guard it is no longer hearsay. "*Hearsa=
y
* is information gathered by one person from another concerning some event,
condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience."
Yes, he wrote a few really good books on Canaries but he also killed a man,
assaulted others and stabbed a guard while in prison. Calling all of that
hearsay is akin to saying that he didn't really write the books attributed
to him.
My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if the
school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without humans.
--Randall in Atlanta
Lee Love on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Randall Moody wr=
=3D
ote:
> My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
> responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if t=
=3D
he
> school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without human=
=3D
s.
Social organizations behave exactly like "living, breathing
beings." That is how corporations come to thinking of individuals as
simply being expendable cells, sometimes deciding how home human lives
balance in cost compared to the changes that would save those lives.
That is how Ford dealt with exploding gas tanks in the past.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Beth Donovan on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
On the creativity discussion - I watched the video and thought, my goodness=
.
Don't parents and family have something to do with helping develop
creativity in children? My own personal thoughts are that many children
today are hopelessly overscheduled. They have no time to sit under a tree
reading or thinking or figuring out a way to build something - all their
time must be supervised by an adult. Children must always want to play wit=
h
others - those who perhaps like to draw or paint or sculpt are seen as
possible outcasts because they don't want to spend all their time with
others.
How sad.
Doesn't creativity come from having the time to think, experiment and just
be occasionally lazy? I know my best ideas come when I'm not being forced
to think about something in particular.
I'm no fan of public schools today. They don't have recess anymore. They
don't have time for kids to be kids, and as soon as school is out, the youn=
g
ones get dumped in a daycare where their time is scheduled so they can't be
kids. And then Mommy or Daddy picks them up from daycare and drops them of=
f
at soccer practice or baseball or dance practice or even violin lessons -
whether or not the child has any interest in those things.
It's crazy.
Cheers,
Beth Donovan
Castle Argghhh! Farm
Easton, Kansas
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Lee Love
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 8:19 AM
To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Wonder what you all think of this - Randall, Stroud, Creativit=
y
- one of two to keep things short
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Randall Moody
wrote:
> My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
> responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if
the
> school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without
humans.
Social organizations behave exactly like "living, breathing
beings." That is how corporations come to thinking of individuals as
simply being expendable cells, sometimes deciding how home human lives
balance in cost compared to the changes that would save those lives.
That is how Ford dealt with exploding gas tanks in the past.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
"Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent." --Rumi
Carol Casey on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Thanks for this. My daughter sent me that video; she is concerned about my
grandson's first experience with school and what will happen to his highly
imaginative and free-form life. Your analysis seems right on.
Carol
Canary Court
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Beth Donovan wrote:
> On the creativity discussion - I watched the video and thought, my
> goodness.
> Don't parents and family have something to do with helping develop
> creativity in children? My own personal thoughts are that many children
> today are hopelessly overscheduled. They have no time to sit under a tre=
e
> reading or thinking or figuring out a way to build something - all their
> time must be supervised by an adult. Children must always want to play
> with
> others - those who perhaps like to draw or paint or sculpt are seen as
> possible outcasts because they don't want to spend all their time with
> others.
>
> How sad.
>
> Doesn't creativity come from having the time to think, experiment and jus=
t
> be occasionally lazy? I know my best ideas come when I'm not being force=
d
> to think about something in particular.
>
> I'm no fan of public schools today. They don't have recess anymore. The=
y
> don't have time for kids to be kids, and as soon as school is out, the
> young
> ones get dumped in a daycare where their time is scheduled so they can't =
be
> kids. And then Mommy or Daddy picks them up from daycare and drops them
> off
> at soccer practice or baseball or dance practice or even violin lessons -
> whether or not the child has any interest in those things.
>
> It's crazy.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Beth Donovan
> Castle Argghhh! Farm
> Easton, Kansas
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayart [mailto:Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Lee Love
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 8:19 AM
> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: Wonder what you all think of this - Randall, Stroud,
> Creativity
> - one of two to keep things short
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Randall Moody
> wrote:
>
> > My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
> > responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if
> the
> > school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without
> humans.
>
> Social organizations behave exactly like "living, breathing
> beings." That is how corporations come to thinking of individuals as
> simply being expendable cells, sometimes deciding how home human lives
> balance in cost compared to the changes that would save those lives.
> That is how Ford dealt with exploding gas tanks in the past.
>
>
> --
> Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
> http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
>
> "Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
> the artistry moving through and be silent." --Rumi
>
Randall Moody on tue 16 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
Sorry but this is nothing more than an attempt to demonize institutions for
the individual choices of their human members. The institution does not hav=
=3D
e
a brain to make choices neither is it self aware. It is nothing more than a
group of individuals making choices to do good things or bad things. No
amount of anthropomorphizing corporations or institutions will change the
fact that the decisions to do certain things or pursue certain lines of
behavior are made by humans. The decisions made at Ford were made by humans
at Ford not by Ford as if it is a sentient being.
--Randall in Atlanta--
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Lee Love wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Randall Moody
> wrote:
>
> > My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
> > responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if
> the
> > school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without
> humans.
>
> Social organizations behave exactly like "living, breathing
> beings." That is how corporations come to thinking of individuals as
> simply being expendable cells, sometimes deciding how home human lives
> balance in cost compared to the changes that would save those lives.
> That is how Ford dealt with exploding gas tanks in the past.
>
>
> --
> Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
> http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
>
> =3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
> the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
>
phil on wed 17 mar 10
y - Contin'd
Hi Randall, all...
Below...amid...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randall Moody"
> My last word on the subject of Stroud. Once the person is convicted of
> murder, assault and stabbing of the guard it is no longer hearsay.
> "*Hearsay
> * is information gathered by one person from another concerning some
> event,
> condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience."
Well...no one said that the stabbing of a guard attributed to Mr. Stroud in
prison
was 'Hear Say' (
even though really, at this point, it is...and even if at this point I
accept it as probable fact, that he did ).
Nor do we even know if he did stab-a-guard.
All we know, if we even can say we know it, is that it is said he was
convicted of
doing so...or, that he was convicted of doing so.
> Yes, he wrote a few really good books on Canaries but he also killed a
> man,
> assaulted others and stabbed a guard while in prison. Calling all of that
> hearsay is akin to saying that he didn't really write the books attribute=
d
> to him.
You seem really hung up on the killed-a-guard part...
Well...and, probably he did...and...
So?
We know nothing of what the guard had been doing, nor what the situation
was, in order to form a moral
or other contextual
judgement about it.
None of us have seen the original documents of Mr. Stroud's Trial, and, as
for me, even if I
could, I know very well how things are not always as they are made to
appear, and, or, one needs to read between-the-lines, so to speak, and then
some, to get a
feel for what may have happened...if one even can at all.
Personally, I feel there is enough reason to be found preserved in such
information as I could find, for Mr. Stroud to be given a benifit of the
doubt, as regard global indictments upon his character, or, upon himself
wholely.
> My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
> responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if
> the
> school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without
> humans.
People do reliably forsake areas of personal responsibility, ethics,
accountability, aesthetics, conscience, health,
parts-of-self, options for value-fulfillment unavailable in the situation,
or
interest and follow-through however so, in various dimensions of their own
and other's well being, when
they are employed by
bureaucracies,
institutions, corporations, governments, or other large organizations.
They are required to.
Or, they are required to make 'adjustments' anyway.
Compulsory 'education' prepares and entrains them for this.
As do many birth families, mass media and entertainment industry, or other
continuous elements of their
unhappy normatising surrounds.
Now, if I understand your mention, according to your view, people in prison=
,
or,
people in school, or people in confinement imposed by others, or people in
confinements more or less accepted by them for some gain or trade-off,
whether as penitants or employees or both, make
identical decisions from an identical 'menu' of options, to what they would
have made, if they were not in an
institution/bureaucracy/organization/corporation????
Fish in a Barrel swim no farther or deeper than they would have in the Sea
or Lake or River?
No diference in the Water, either?
That does not seem right to me...it does not seem plausable...it does not
seem correct...it is not possible.
"No"...
It is not that way.
> --Randall in Atlanta
Well...we can not say this is uninteresting..!
Best wishes,
Phil
Lv
Randall Moody on wed 17 mar 10
y - one of two to keep things short
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:10 AM, phil wrote:
> Hi Randall,
>
> Decisions people make, are always made in ( what for them, is a definite =
)
context...the context is both
their internal landscape, and, the so to speak external and immediate
landscape in which they are operating...and or, their decisions represent a
relationship between these, or, rather, between their construence or
acceptances or description of
these, however so.
It is true that people make decisions based on their environment or the
context in which the decision is to be made. I am not arguing that this
isn't the case. You still come back to the fact that it is the person or
people making the decision and not the institution. The decisions being mad=
e
in a given company are made by people within that company.
--Randall in Atlanta--
Carol Casey on wed 17 mar 10
y - Contin'd
Well, we can thank Sir Ken at the very least for stimulating thoughtful
answers about creativity, individual agency, institutional control,
ambiguity or clarity in moral actions, ambiguity, grace from unlikely
sources . . .
Carol
Canary Court
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:24 AM, phil wrote:
> Hi Randall, all...
>
>
>
> Below...amid...
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Randall Moody"
>
>
> My last word on the subject of Stroud. Once the person is convicted of
>> murder, assault and stabbing of the guard it is no longer hearsay.
>> "*Hearsay
>> * is information gathered by one person from another concerning some
>> event,
>> condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience."
>>
>
>
> Well...no one said that the stabbing of a guard attributed to Mr. Stroud =
in
> prison
> was 'Hear Say' (
> even though really, at this point, it is...and even if at this point I
> accept it as probable fact, that he did ).
>
> Nor do we even know if he did stab-a-guard.
>
> All we know, if we even can say we know it, is that it is said he was
> convicted of
> doing so...or, that he was convicted of doing so.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes, he wrote a few really good books on Canaries but he also killed a
>> man,
>> assaulted others and stabbed a guard while in prison. Calling all of tha=
t
>> hearsay is akin to saying that he didn't really write the books attribut=
ed
>> to him.
>>
>
>
> You seem really hung up on the killed-a-guard part...
>
> Well...and, probably he did...and...
>
> So?
>
> We know nothing of what the guard had been doing, nor what the situation
> was, in order to form a moral
> or other contextual
> judgement about it.
>
>
>
> None of us have seen the original documents of Mr. Stroud's Trial, and, a=
s
> for me, even if I
> could, I know very well how things are not always as they are made to
> appear, and, or, one needs to read between-the-lines, so to speak, and th=
en
> some, to get a
> feel for what may have happened...if one even can at all.
>
>
> Personally, I feel there is enough reason to be found preserved in such
> information as I could find, for Mr. Stroud to be given a benifit of the
> doubt, as regard global indictments upon his character, or, upon himself
> wholely.
>
>
>
>
> My issue with the original talk by Robinson was that it removed the
>> responsibility from the people and put it on some faceless entity as if
>> the
>> school is a living, breathing being that can make decisions without
>> humans.
>>
>
>
>
> People do reliably forsake areas of personal responsibility, ethics,
> accountability, aesthetics, conscience, health,
> parts-of-self, options for value-fulfillment unavailable in the situation=
,
> or
> interest and follow-through however so, in various dimensions of their ow=
n
> and other's well being, when
> they are employed by
> bureaucracies,
> institutions, corporations, governments, or other large organizations.
>
>
> They are required to.
>
>
> Or, they are required to make 'adjustments' anyway.
>
>
> Compulsory 'education' prepares and entrains them for this.
>
>
> As do many birth families, mass media and entertainment industry, or othe=
r
> continuous elements of their
> unhappy normatising surrounds.
>
>
>
> Now, if I understand your mention, according to your view, people in
> prison,
> or,
> people in school, or people in confinement imposed by others, or people i=
n
> confinements more or less accepted by them for some gain or trade-off,
> whether as penitants or employees or both, make
> identical decisions from an identical 'menu' of options, to what they wou=
ld
> have made, if they were not in an
> institution/bureaucracy/organization/corporation????
>
>
> Fish in a Barrel swim no farther or deeper than they would have in the Se=
a
> or Lake or River?
>
> No diference in the Water, either?
>
>
>
> That does not seem right to me...it does not seem plausable...it does not
> seem correct...it is not possible.
>
>
> "No"...
>
> It is not that way.
>
>
>
> --Randall in Atlanta
>>
>
>
> Well...we can not say this is uninteresting..!
>
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
> Phil
> Lv
>
| |
|
