From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Oct 3 08:15:01 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:15:01 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? Message-ID: For those who don't know, Rupert Grint has a sizable amount of real estate; ?9.2 million (US$14.6 mil) worth to be exact. Info and Photos here - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1217782/Weasley-does-Harry-Potter-star-Rupert-Grint-21-9-2m-property-empire.html My brother and I have frequently talked about this, people win the lottery, as an example, and buy a multi-million dollar mansion. But they forget that owning a house, is only a small part of the cost. I think Rupert will find that the upkeep and maintenance on these houses is going to be astronomically expensive. Just the heating, and other utilities along are going to cost a king's ransom. Then there is routine maintenance like the pool, the roads, the roof, the paint, and tuck-pointing the brick. Then the cost of grounds upkeep, he has a 22 acre lawn that needs to be mowed. Then there are the yearly taxes. Likely most of use could live comfortably off the yearly taxes he is going to pay on all this property. I truly wish him well, but I think, likely this is going to be his downfall. Just to maintain these places is going to require massive income on his part. I think he is too early in his career to be counting on massive income. Again, I wish him well, but it doesn't look good. That's been the downfall of many a rock star. They think the gravy train will never end, and when they are suddenly not so popular, they don't have the income to maintain their extravagant lifestyle. What usually happens is you run into a short fall of cash and then start borrowing against the value of the house. Pretty soon all the money is gone, there is nothing to show for it, and the house is lost to the bank. Then you've got nothing. I don't know who his financial advisers are, but they are doing a poor job of it. Now, of course, there could be circumstances that I'm not aware of. It could be that he bought the houses in a down market and intends to turn them over relatively soon. That wouldn't be a bad choice, but it hinges on the market and people's fortunes recovering quickly so there is demand for housing like this again. Again, I wish him the very best, but it doesn't look good. Steve/bboyminn From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Sun Oct 4 17:47:18 2009 From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com) Date: 4 Oct 2009 17:47:18 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 10/4/2009, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1254678438.559.17962.m7@yahoogroups.com> Reminder from: HPFGU-OTChatter Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/cal Weekly Chat Sunday October 4, 2009 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2009 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From siskiou at gmail.com Sun Oct 4 21:13:53 2009 From: siskiou at gmail.com (Susanne) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 14:13:53 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <333993888.20091004141353@gmail.com> Hi, Saturday, October 3, 2009, 1:15:01 AM, bboyminn at yahoo.com wrote: > Again, I wish him the very best, but it doesn't look good. I haven't read the article or know anything about the UK housing market, but do these places stand empty, or are they rental property, potentially. Is he planning on moving into one of them? -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at gmail.com From catlady at wicca.net Sun Oct 4 23:21:33 2009 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince) Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:21:33 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > > For those who don't know, Rupert Grint has a sizable amount of > real estate; ?9.2 million (US$14.6 mil) worth to be exact. > Info and Photos here - > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1217782/Weasley-does-Harry-Potter-star-Rupert-Grint-21-9-2m-property-empire.html > > My brother and I have frequently talked about this, people win > the lottery, as an example, and buy a multi-million dollar > mansion. But they forget that owning a house, is only a small > part of the cost. I think Rupert will find that the upkeep and > maintenance on these houses is going to be astronomically > expensive. Just the heating, and other utilities along are going > to cost a king's ransom. Then there is routine maintenance like > the pool, the roads, the roof, the paint, and tuck-pointing the > brick. Then the cost of grounds upkeep, he has a 22 acre lawn > that needs to be mowed. What is tuck-pointing? Maybe he can have a flock of sheep mow his 22 acre lawn. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 07:06:29 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 07:06:29 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Catlady (Rita Prince" wrote: > > --- "bboyminn" wrote: > > > > For those who don't know, Rupert Grint has a sizable amount > > ofreal estate; ?9.2 million (US$14.6 mil) worth to be exact. > > ... Then there is routine maintenance like the pool, the > > roads, the roof, the paint, and tuck-pointing the brick. > > Then the cost of grounds upkeep, he has a 22 acre lawn > > that needs to be mowed. > > What is tuck-pointing? > Maybe he can have a flock of sheep mow his 22 acre lawn. > bboyminn: Tuck-pointing - The houses are brick, brick is very durable, but the cement in between the bricks deteriorates over time and need to be replaced. The process of removing and replacing the cement is called Tuck-Pointing. It is a very delicate and skill process, that cost tons of money. Most think ...cool brick house, I never have to paint is...but the brick and the cement need a lot of work over time, and this work is highly skilled and labor intensive. The problem with having sheep mow the lawn, is that the lawn then become unusable to to massive amounts of sheel dung spread all over the place. Now, perhaps Rupert's personal fortune is much higher than I estimate. Maybe he really does know what he is doing. Perhaps he has a clear and well defined plan. But one of the houses, the latest one, is an 18th Century house with 5 bathroom and SIX bedroom SUITES, not bedrooms, but bedroom SUITES. Plus, two additional cottages on the grounds. Just the funishings alone are going to cost thousands. The grounds upkeep is probably going to cost ?30,000 to ?60,000 per years. I'm guessing he is going to have to earn ?300,000 a year just to break even. Again, I like Rupert, and I really hope his future career goes well and he experiences great success, but you can't really bank on that until...well...the money is actually in the bank. As I was mentioning before, most lottery winner are bankrupt within 5 years, and they way they go bankrupt is by looking at the base price of something, but not the long term upkeep. It is going to cost thousands a year to heat these places, even if they aren't lived in. He is going to have to hire a full time grounds keeper. He is going to have to hire a cleaning service or have live-in maids. That represent tens of thousands of dollars right there. Then we have the taxes, what do you suppose the taxes are on US$14.6 million worth of property. I mean he could have had this nice little 7 bedroom, 3 reception are cottage for only ?2,000,000 - http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?location_ids=1006-34&property_id=680522&search_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search Not too shabby if you ask me. Still, despite being shocked, I hope he knows what he is doing, I really really hope he does. Steve/bboyminn From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 07:47:40 2009 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 07:47:40 -0000 Subject: The Cremation of Sam McGee In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > > I meant to tack this onto my last post, but I forgot. > > It is hard to say why some poems grab me, and other don't, but > I certainly found this one enjoyable. > > "The Cremation of Sam McGee" > Robert Service (1874-1958) > > Tonks: Ah, yes. When I was about 10 years old, in school, we had to pick a poem to memorize and recite in class and this was the one I picked, for some reason. I think I just thought it was funny. "It was the first time he was warm..." Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 07:58:02 2009 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 07:58:02 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > bboyminn: > > Tuck-pointing - > > The houses are brick, brick is very durable, but the cement > in between the bricks deteriorates over time and need to > be replaced. The process of removing and replacing the > cement is called Tuck-Pointing. > > It is a very delicate and skill process, that cost tons of > money. Most think ...cool brick house, I never have to > paint is...but the brick and the cement need a lot of work > over time, and this work is highly skilled and labor intensive. > Tonks: Oh, dear. One more thing to worry about that the landlord will never fix. If I have lived here 30 years and the brick buildings are about 40 years old, does this mean that I am going to find myself sleeping in what use to be the lawn before long, when the buiding comes crashing down? I have never heard of tuck-pointing. I don't think we do it in the U.S. Maybe we just let them fall in? And I didn't have enought to worry about. The new landlords here don't do anything. We have leaves from a year ago still under the trees. I can just imagine what they would say if I asked if we have been tuck-pointed recently. Say,what?? lol. Tonks_op From crookshanks4 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 17:13:39 2009 From: crookshanks4 at yahoo.com (Maria Gromova) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What a snob! Message-ID: <772620.60587.qm@web62202.mail.re1.yahoo.com> I just saw this rot at MSN. Let's write comments saying what we think of this woman. I did so already. http://www.good.is/post/the-dan-brown-diversion/?gt1=48001 ? Crookshanks ? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Tue Oct 6 11:21:30 2009 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:21:30 -0000 Subject: The Quizmaster's N.E.W.T.s Exam Message-ID: Greetings from the elves! We are forwarding the following "N.E.W.T.s Exam" which came to the elvses from the Quizmaster; it looks like fun, though we may be a bit late for the prizes. *** Please send your responses directly to the Quizmaster at: Quizmaster1951 @ yahoo.com *** Thanks, and have fun! From the HPFGU Elves ************* Forwarded message: If you are a true Harry Potter fan then you must take this "N.E.W.T.s exam". And show the world that "YOU" are the EXTREME "Harry Potter" fan. Questions will be from all books and movies 1 thru 6. And yes it will be an open book exam. Questions will range from extremely easy to ... well let's just say you will be needing to open your books to get the answers. The questions about the movies will be to see how good your power of observation is. Hopefully you all have the DVDs. Clues to the answers will well be put out three days after I put the exam. And the answers themselves will be put out 3 days after that. The exam itself I will put out on the night of Friday Sept 25th. Send your answers directly to me at Quizmaster1951 @ yahoo.com. "Do not" use the yahoo group to answer thru or everyone in the groups will see (and be able to copy) your answers. I will only publish the names of the top 2 in each of the 4 age groups. The first to answer all questions correctly and return them to me will be listed as the top N.E.W.T.S. OH Yes did I mention... for the first 4 (top one in each age group) I will send a Prize. Via Mail (too big to e-mail) I am sure that most of you have seen one or maybe both "War of the Worlds" movies. But have you heard the 1938 radio broadcast by Orson Welles that started the whole thing off? To these 4 I will mail a CD with that radio broadcast on it. (See attachment) To be eligible for this your answers to the test must be received prior to the answers being put out. Age groups will be 6-12, 13-20, 21-39 and 40-up. good luck. Instructions for taking the exam are as follows. 1, Respond with the answer to the question only. (example: How did the students travel to Hogwarts each year? you answer should look like this "1, Train.) 2, Do not skip questions. 3, Include which age group you are in. 4, And most important ... HAVE FUN * * * Remember to put your age group in the subject line of your answer sheet if you are competing for the "War of the Worlds" CD. Also to send your answer sheets directly to me not through the group (this is so the others will not be able to copy your answers). GOOD LUCK STUDENTS 1, What house was Rose Zeller in? 2, What house was Lisa Turpin in? 3, What house was Eleanore Branstone in? 4, What did the boggart turn into when it confronted Seamus? 5, What school was Justin Finch-Fletchley going to attend before he got his invite to attend Hogwarts? 6, What month was Neville Longbottom born in? 7, Who did Ron take to the Yule Ball? 8, Who replaced Harry as seeker when he got banned from playing Quiddich? 9, What kind of animal did Professor Moody transfigure Draco Malfoy into? 10, What is Ron Weasley's middle name? 11, What is Fleur Dalacour's little sister's name? 12, What did Draco Malfoy name his son? 13, What chess piece did Hermione take the place of while trying to save the Sorcerer's Stone? (and remember the color) 14, What shape is Harry's scar? 15, For which of Harry's birthdays did Hermione give him a broomstick servicing kit? WANDs 16, What was Harry's wand made of and how long was it? 17, How long was Hagrid's wand prior to being snapped in half? 18, What year did Ollivander's shop start making wands? 19, Harry's wand had a brother. How long was it and who owns it? CREATUREs 20, What did Harry use to put Fluffy to sleep? 21, What was the name of the pub where Hagrid got Norbert's egg? 22, What was the name of the First Centaur that Harry met? 23, What kind of dragon was Norbert? 24, What kind of bird is Fawkes? 25, What is the name of Aunt Marge's bulldog? 26, Who was the Care of Magical Creatures Professor prior to Hagrid? 27, What was Filch's cat's name? 28, How long did Scabbers the rat live with the Weasleys? 29, What breed of dragon did Viktor Krum have to get past during the Tri-Wizard competition? 30, What's the visable difference between a Crup and a Jack Russell terrier? 31, Buckbeak was renamed what? 32, What does a Wrackspurt do? 33, Hepzibah Smith's house-elf's name was what? 34, What did Harry write on Dobby's grave stone? 35, What's the name of the Goblin that took Harry, Ron, Hermione & Griphook to the Lestranges' vault? SPELLS, POTIONS & CHARMS 36, Wormtail cut off which of his hands to add to the cauldron to revive the Dark Lord? 37, What did Harry have to eat to be able to breathe under water? 38, What are the 3 "D"s in apparating? 39, What is the counter jinx for "Levicorpus"? 40, Hermione's Patronus takes the form of what? 41, Felix Felicis is also known as what? 42, How many WITCHes took the polyjuice to look like Harry when leaving the Dursleys? 43, What form does Professor Umbridge's patronus take? 44, If you wanted to look up what "Dittany" was what book would you look in? 45, What kind of potion would you take if you wanted to look like someone else? 46, What is the leg-locker curse? 47, The plant "Aconite" is also known by 2 other names. What are they? 48, What is the full "body-Bind" jinx? 49, What was the spell Professor Lockhart tried to use to erase Harry and Ron's memories? 50, What charm would you use to make a feather fly? 51, What spell was used to make a wad of chewing gum shoot out of a key hole and into Peeves left nostril? 52, What was the spell used to cast the Dark Mark into the sky at the Quidditch World Cup? 53, What was it that caused Neville to turn into a large Canary? 54, Whose hair did Hermione think she had when she drank the polyjuice potion containing the cat hair? 55, Name the 3 unforgiveable curses? Misc. 56, What are the 4 houses of Hogwarts? 57, What platform does the Hogwarts train leave from at King's Cross? 58, What color of ink was used to address the first letter sent to Harry inviting him to attend Hogwarts School? (2 words) 59, What is the full name of the resident ghost of Gryffindor? 60, Who was Prof. Lockhart's assistant when he started the dueling club? 61, Who haunts the toilets of the girl's bathroom? 62, When did Headless Nick die? 63, When not being used to sort students where is the Sorting hat kept? 64, What kind of broom did Madam Hooch learn to fly on? 65, What floor is Prof. Flintwick's office on in the west tower? 66, All student organizations, teams & clubs were disbanded by what educational decree? 67, What is Prof. Dumbledore's full name? 68, What's Hagrid's little Brother's name? 69, Dilys Derwent was Headmistress of Hogwarts during what years? 70, What was the name of the vampire that attended Slughorn's party with Eldred Worple? 71, Who is the "Gray Lady"? 72, Where did Tom Riddle buy his diary? 73, What is Nurmengard? 74, Who forged the first Golden Snitch? 75, "Erised stra ehru oyt ube cafru oyt on wohsi" is inscribed on the top of what? 76, What shape is the scar above Prof. Dumbledore's left knee? 77, How much money did Harry take form Hagrid's coat to pay the owl for delivering the paper? 78, According to Hagrid whats the difference between a stalagmite and a stalactite? 79, Prof. Dumbledore asked Hagrid to get an item from Gringotts for him. What vault was it in? 80, What is the name of the Pub that you have to go through to get into Diagon Ally from Muggle London? 81, What are the 3 types of balls used in playing Quidditch? 82, How many ways are there to commit a Quidditch foul? 83, What flavor of jelly bean did Prof. Dumbledore put in his mouth visiting Harry in the hospital wing after saving the Sorcerer's Stone? 84, What color was Mr. Weasley's Ford Anglia? 85, What mode of transportation is the "Blue Bottle"? 86, What does the firm Grunnings make? 87, A person that can talk to snakes is called what? 88, What kind of broom does Tonks ride? 89, What was Hagrid's mother's name? 90, What is the phone number for the visitor's entrance to "MOM"? 91, Rufus Scrimgeour was head of what office prior to becoming Minister of Magic? THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT MOVIES 1 THRU 6 TO SEE HOW GOOD YOUR OBSERVATION SKILLS ARE (hope you have your DVD's) 92, What is the engine number on the Hogwarts Express? 93, In what year did James Potter (Harry's dad) play Seeker at Hogwarts? 94, What day of the year did Riddle's diary take Harry back to? 95, What is the licence plate number on the Weasleys' Car? 96, When Sirius Black attacked the portrait of the fat lady, she hid in a portrait of Hippos. What kind of animal walked behind her while she was talking to Prof. Dumbledore? 97, How many flying horses were pulling the Beauxbatons carrage? 98, What Educational Decree number was used for recruiting the Inquistorial Squad? 99, In the book Ginny kisses Harry for the first time in the Gryffindor common room. Where are they when she kisses him in the movie? 100, What Hogwarts character was in all the books but not seen or heard of in movies 1 thru 6? (clue: he give all the students a bad time) END OF N.E.W.T. TEST Survey question In your opinion if Harry's cousin Dudley had ever shown any sign of magical ability and had received an invite to Hogwarts, what house do you think he would have been sorted into? From d2dmiles at yahoo.de Thu Oct 8 20:24:24 2009 From: d2dmiles at yahoo.de (Miles) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 22:24:24 +0200 Subject: Thoughts and questions on Nobel Prize for Literature Message-ID: <9C1F38AF12C84820AFD19D66FCBEBF30@miles> No, RK Rowling did not win ;). The German author Herta M?ller seems to be more or less unknown outside the German speaking countries. But I think her personal biography make her interesting for many people, especially those who live and love their mother tongues. M?ller was born in Romania as a member of the German minority. The German speaking community, which began to settle in Transsylvania (sic) starting in th 12th century, is still existing, but seems to die out in this century. After the second World War, they were suppressed by the communist government in Romania and had problems to cultivate and preserve language and traditions. Many people left Romania, most of them came to Germany - among them Herta M?ller, who couldn't publish her books uncensored in her home country. Soon after she came to Germany, she became a prominent and successful author, both praised by critics and read by many people. She never ceased to accuse the - now former - Romanian government and the still unpunished members of the Romanian secret police, Securitate. But I think there is something about her that is interesting beyond politics and civil rights. M?ller is a person whose home is not really a country, state, or nation. Her home is her language - the one thing that ties the Romanian Germans together, the personal shell she took from Romania to Germany. I know there are several listies who left their home country and now live in a country with another language. How do you feel about your "old" and "new" language? Still homesick when listening to the old one, totally homelike in the new one? Several other listies do participate here in English, but only know it as a second or third language, still living in their home countries. How do you feel about reading and writing in English? Do you feel comfortable, are you translating what you write here? Could you imagine to live in Britain, Australia, or the US? How about members who are native speakers of English, but live abroad? Do you feel at home in your language? Did or do you learn the language of the people you now live with? Miles, who waits for other answers before answering to his own question [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From d2dmiles at yahoo.de Thu Oct 8 20:49:16 2009 From: d2dmiles at yahoo.de (Miles) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 22:49:16 +0200 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? References: Message-ID: <0809231B7B6B4533B663BEDB9E15E632@miles> Tonks wrote: > Oh, dear. One more thing to worry about that the landlord will never > fix. If I have lived here 30 years and the brick buildings are about > 40 years old, does this mean that I am going to find myself sleeping > in what use to be the lawn before long, when the buiding comes > crashing down? I have never heard of tuck-pointing. I don't think we > do it in the U.S. Maybe we just let them fall in? And I didn't have > enought to worry about. The new landlords here don't do anything. We > have leaves from a year ago still under the trees. I can just imagine > what they would say if I asked if we have been tuck-pointed recently. > Say,what?? lol. Miles: I do not think you have to worry. There are many brick buildings in my home town which are much older than 40 years, and I never heard that the cement had to be replaced.. This one http://www.schoenes-deutschland-in-bildern.de/gelsenkirchen_ehem_postgebaude.jpg is about 100 years old, and believe me, it does not fall apart ;). Miles, who really does not think that millennia of human brick experience lead to crumbling buildings all over the world From md at exit-reality.com Thu Oct 8 21:57:51 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:57:51 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <0809231B7B6B4533B663BEDB9E15E632@miles> References: <0809231B7B6B4533B663BEDB9E15E632@miles> Message-ID: <000001ca4862$62302e00$26908a00$@com> You don't replace the cement, it's simply a refacing. It's more like grouting tile, you just scrape or sand-blast the mortar then apply a surface layer of cement and strike the joints. All brick structures need it eventually, it's inevitable that some of the cement will crack and come apart, all buildings settle, all cement and concrete wears down under the elements. Stone faced buildings need it as well. md -----Original Message----- Miles: I do not think you have to worry. There are many brick buildings in my home town which are much older than 40 years, and I never heard that the cement had to be replaced.. This one http://www.schoenes-deutschland-in-bildern.de/gelsenkirchen_ehem_postgebaude .jpg is about 100 years old, and believe me, it does not fall apart ;). Miles, who really does not think that millennia of human brick experience lead to crumbling buildings all over the world From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Oct 9 06:18:52 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:18:52 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000001ca4862$62302e00$26908a00$@com> Message-ID: --- "Child Of Midian" wrote: > > You don't replace the cement, it's simply a refacing. It's more like > grouting tile, you just scrape or sand-blast the mortar then apply a surface > layer of cement and strike the joints. All brick structures need it > eventually, it's inevitable that some of the cement will crack and come > apart, all buildings settle, all cement and concrete wears down under the > elements. Stone faced buildings need it as well. > > md > > -----Original Message----- > > > Miles: > I do not think you have to worry. There are many brick buildings in my home > town which are much older than 40 years, and I never heard that the cement > had to be replaced.. > ... bboyminn: Right, it is something that is done on old house of brick or stone. At some point the cement between the bricks or stone needs to be touched up. It may have come loose, or cracked, or separated from the brick. The problem is that to do a good job, it is very labor intensive and takes a very skill worker. You have to use a very tiny trowel so the cement only goes into the crack and not on the brick. This is very slow work. Fortunately, no, it doesn't have to be done often, but one of Rupert's houses is an 18th century house. Trust me, if it hasn't already been tuck-pointed, it will have to be soon. Plus, he has three properties, all large estates with multiple buildings. I did a little reverse calculation to determine how much money Rupert would have to have in the bank to generate my predicted 300,000 per year expenses. At 4% interest, he needs a cash reserve of 7.5 million, that can be Pounds ? or Dollars $ as you wish. That would imply that his total worth would have to be 9.3 mil plus 7.5 mil for a total of 16.8 million, and it would have to remain stable at that level for as long as he owns the property. If he spends it down, then he earns less interest. So, he probably need closer to 20 million to cover his considerable expenses and have money to live on. Now, he will certainly make some money in the future. He may even get a successful TV, Film, or comedy career. So, all is not completely lost, but he has massive assets tied up in these properties, which in turn represent many on-going expenses, that I hope and pray he has taken into consideration. Steve/bboyminn From md at exit-reality.com Fri Oct 9 07:07:50 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 03:07:50 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <000001ca4862$62302e00$26908a00$@com> Message-ID: <000301ca48af$36df4900$a49ddb00$@com> My father worked in masonry for 13 years and it's not that big a deal. He did a corner of my grandmother's house in a few hours one day. md -----Original Message----- > > Miles: > I do not think you have to worry. There are many brick buildings in my home > town which are much older than 40 years, and I never heard that the cement > had to be replaced.. > ... bboyminn: Right, it is something that is done on old house of brick or stone. At some point the cement between the bricks or stone needs to be touched up. It may have come loose, or cracked, or separated from the brick. / From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Oct 9 08:42:39 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:42:39 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000301ca48af$36df4900$a49ddb00$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: >> bboyminn: >> >> Right, it is something that is done on old house of brick or >> stone. At some point the cement between the bricks or stone >> needs to be touched up. It may have come loose, or cracked, >> or separated from the brick. > / > >MD: > > My father worked in masonry for 13 years and it's not that > big a deal. He did a corner of my grandmother's house in a > few hours one day. > > md bboyminn: Yes but what is your father's standard hourly rate for masonry work? I suspect it is not cheap. And the corner took a few hours, what would it cost for the whole house? Though you are right, if the original masonry and brick work are well done, tuck-pointing would only have to be done once a century or so; depending on how generally well card for the house is. Steve/bboyminn From md at exit-reality.com Fri Oct 9 15:05:33 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:05:33 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <000301ca48af$36df4900$a49ddb00$@com> Message-ID: <005001ca48f1$f36ac760$da405620$@com> Re-pointing an entire house would not likely cost much more than painting it. What a man gets done on a Sunday afternoon on a step ladder and what a masonry crew does in a day on scaffold are two different things. Most brick will show wear in about twenty years, after that slight cracks will appear and some minor erosion. The issues isn't the quality of work or upkeep, it's settling and environment. Rain and cold are big enemies to masonry, water soaks into the mortar, freezes and breaks it down. A good masonry sealer will slow it down, but it's expensive to do that to an entire house every year too. On average a building may have 30-50 years before re-pointing is recommended, or needed. It's generally more cosmetic than anything, however long, vertical cracks could be a sign of structural damage from settling. md -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bboyminn Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 4:43 AM To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: bboyminn: Yes but what is your father's standard hourly rate for masonry work? I suspect it is not cheap. And the corner took a few hours, what would it cost for the whole house? Though you are right, if the original masonry and brick work are well done, tuck-pointing would only have to be done once a century or so; depending on how generally well card for the house is. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Oct 9 20:22:24 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:22:24 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000001ca4862$62302e00$26908a00$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: Miles: > I do not think you have to worry. There are many brick buildings in my home > town which are much older than 40 years, and I never heard that the cement > had to be replaced.. > This one > http://www.schoenes-deutschland-in-bildern.de/gelsenkirchen_ehem_postgebaude > .jpg > is about 100 years old, and believe me, it does not fall apart ;). > > Miles, who really does not think that millennia of human brick experience > lead to crumbling buildings all over the world md: > You don't replace the cement, it's simply a refacing. It's more like > grouting tile, you just scrape or sand-blast the mortar then apply a surface > layer of cement and strike the joints. All brick structures need it > eventually, it's inevitable that some of the cement will crack and come > apart, all buildings settle, all cement and concrete wears down under the > elements. Stone faced buildings need it as well. Geoff: My father was a bricklayer after he came out of the army at the end of WWII. He often got involved with pointing and told me about it. It depends a lot on the quality of the original work. The usual reason for re-pointing is to restore the facing of the mortar so that it has an angled slope away from the brick, the idea being that when it rains, the water thus runs away from the brickwork and falls off instead of remaining where it can permeate the brickwork and cause deterioration. As Child of Midian has said, it is usually only the surface of the mortar which needs replacing or even only smoothing off. We live in a house which is 74 years old and the state of the pointing is excellent - without any work having been done on it in that time. From md at exit-reality.com Fri Oct 9 22:05:28 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:05:28 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <000001ca4862$62302e00$26908a00$@com> Message-ID: <000f01ca492c$9cc89460$d659bd20$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geoff We live in a house which is 74 years old and the state of the pointing is excellent - without any work having been done on it in that time. ------------------------------------ They can also use a silicone mixed mortar now that expands and contracts without breaking. Where I live, SE Pennsylvania, masonry takes beating because our winters have a lot of freezing and thawing, this really bust up the roads and concrete. If, though, you live in Phoenix your brick will likely look brand new 100 years after you lay it. md From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 10 02:52:45 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:52:45 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000f01ca492c$9cc89460$d659bd20$@com> Message-ID: md wrote: > Where I live, SE Pennsylvania, masonry takes beating because our winters have a lot of freezing and thawing, this really bust up the roads and concrete. If, though, you live in Phoenix your brick will likely look brand new 100 years after you lay it. > > md > Carol responds: Actually, Phoenix (and southern Arizona in general, including Tucson) is notorious for rapid temperature changes, especially in winter, and for extreme temperature differences between winter (below freezing) and summer (temperatures in the 100s and sometimes 110s Fahrenheit). I don't know what that does to brick--most houses around here are stucco though some older houses from the 1950s and 1960s are brick--but it wreaks havoc on pavement. Carol, just tossing in my two cents because you mentioned Phoenix From md at exit-reality.com Sat Oct 10 03:20:27 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 23:20:27 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <000f01ca492c$9cc89460$d659bd20$@com> Message-ID: <000d01ca4958$a1cee140$e56ca3c0$@com> It's not the temperature, it's the moisture. Where I live it's constantly wet, so if it's 40 and raining during the day, then drops to 28 over night the water freezes in the concrete, stucco, etc and cracks it. You have to have the combination of rain followed by below freezing temps. -----Original Message----- > Carol responds: Actually, Phoenix (and southern Arizona in general, including Tucson) is notorious for rapid temperature changes, especially in winter, and for extreme temperature differences between winter (below freezing) and summer (temperatures in the 100s and sometimes 110s Fahrenheit). I don't know what that does to brick--most houses around here are stucco though some older houses from the 1950s and 1960s are brick--but it wreaks havoc on pavement. /terms/ From md at exit-reality.com Sat Oct 10 05:39:16 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:39:16 -0400 Subject: new DVD / Blu-Ray are extended editions In-Reply-To: References: <000f01ca492c$9cc89460$d659bd20$@com> Message-ID: <000c01ca496c$04e9d790$0ebd86b0$@com> It's official, the new deluxe releases include the deleted scenes. SS has 7 minutes, COS has 13. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Oct 10 07:42:27 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 07:42:27 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Geoff" wrote: > > ... > > Geoff: > ... > > We live in a house which is 74 years old and the state of the > pointing is excellent - without any work having been done on > it in that time. > bboyminn: Yes, but keep in mind that Rupert has a brick house that is over 200 years old, and it is not really a common house; it is a very large mansion. When I travel to London via Google-Maps Street View, I see building all over that are being refaced. So, this is maintenance that does have to be done. Interesting as this side discussion is, of course, my basic point was that even Brick buildings do need on-going maintenance. I shutter to think what it is going to cost Rupert to heat these places. Then taxes, then insurance, then the cost of furnishing a house that large; money, money, money. As I said, I think he has made a big mistake, but hopefully he knows what he is doing, and he just hasn't bothered to consult with me over the details. Back to brick buildings, I'm wondering if new brick buildings in the UK are really made out of brick? In the USA, most buildings are only cosmetically brick, structurally they are wood; thinking of houses rather than large office building. Most office building are structuarally steel, and consmetically brick, so the same principle holds. However, I know older building in the UK are really structurally brick. Does that construction technique still hold; is it common? Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Oct 10 09:12:28 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:12:28 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > > --- "Geoff" wrote: > > > > ... > > > > Geoff: > > ... > > > > We live in a house which is 74 years old and the state of the > > pointing is excellent - without any work having been done on > > it in that time. > > > > bboyminn: > > Yes, but keep in mind that Rupert has a brick house that is over > 200 years old, and it is not really a common house; it is a very > large mansion. > > When I travel to London via Google-Maps Street View, I see > building all over that are being refaced. So, this is > maintenance that does have to be done. Geoff: I lived in London for 45 years and go up every couple of months to see my son and his family in Croydon. Thus I have a pretty good idea about weather and conditions of houses. What you possibly see on Google Maps - if you concentrate on the centre - is the fact that a lot of companies and owners re-point the brickwork for cosmetic reasons, not necessarily for structural reasons. Again, in your viewing remember that London is a city of radius 20 miles and more so the total area is approaching 1300 square miles so you can only be viewing a small percentage of that. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 10 18:41:46 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:41:46 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Back to brick buildings, I'm wondering if new brick buildings > in the UK are really made out of brick? In the USA, most > buildings are only cosmetically brick, structurally they are > wood zanooda: Some time ago, intrigued by all this wood construction in the US, I asked Geoff the same question and he said the answer was yes: their houses are brick or stone. Wooden houses are only here, I guess :-). From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Oct 10 20:42:55 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:42:55 -0000 Subject: Rupert! - What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Geoff" wrote: > > > > --- "bboyminn" wrote: > > > > --- "Geoff" wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > Geoff: > > > ... > > > > > > We live in a house which is 74 years old and the state of the > > > pointing is excellent - without any work having been done on > > > it in that time. > > > > > > > bboyminn: > > > > Yes, but keep in mind that Rupert has a brick house that is > > over 200 years old, and it is not really a common house; it > > is a very large mansion. > > > > ... > > Geoff: > I lived in London for 45 years ...I have a pretty good idea > about weather and conditions of houses. > > What you possibly see on Google Maps - ... - is the fact that > a lot of companies and owners re-point the brickwork for > cosmetic reasons, not necessarily for structural reasons. > > ... bboyminn: Yes, but you don't repaint a wooden house to create structural integrity, you do it for cosmetic reasons. However, in both re-pointing and re-pointing a house, there is an implied preservation of the structural integrity. If the cement between the brick become too neglected, it means damage to the house and potentially to its structural integrity. Just as if a house is left unpainted, the wood start to deteriorate and the great the likelihood of internal water damage from leaks. So, yes, in the short term, painting and pointing are cosmetic, but in the long term the are necessary maintenance to preserve the building itself. But my central point is that a brick house is not maintenance free. It does require maintenance, and that maintenance requires money. Again, many many people who are newly rich, lottery winners for example, are bankrupt in 5 years, because they look at the initial cost, but fail to look at the on-going cost of owning large mansions and driving expensive cars. I think I can actually buy a car for the cost of an oil change on a Rolls Royce. A big barn like Rupert's new house, is going to cost a king's random to heat and cool. He is going to have to pay someone a living salary plus benefits to maintain the grounds. Then, what do you suppose the cost of furnishing all those rooms is going to be? Not cheap you can be sure of that. What I'm saying is that buying a house, is a lot easier and cheaper than owning a house. Owning a house is an endless drain on finances. For example, what do you suppose it is going to cost to have a new roof put on a huge mansion like that. In their lifetime, it is not uncommon for a house to need three or four new roofs. 25 to 30 years is about the most you can expect out of a normal shingle roof. At one of this houses, he is already adding a new addition. New construction cost are through the roof. My sister added a new room to her house and the new room cost as much as the rest of the house, and this is a relatively new modern house. Now Rupert may have a brilliant and lucrative career ahead of him, but I don't think it is wise to count on that until it happens. Spending presumed future revenue is a sure way to doom. I think Dan has moved much more wisely. He has three properties, but they are part of building complexes, or as we would call them condo complexes. You pay a yearly maintenance fee to the condo association, and they are responsible for all on-going maintenance. When you are not there in a flat or condo, you don't need to heat or cool as it is extremely unlikely that not doing so would cause any damage. That not equally true of a house. A house must be heated to a limited degree in the winter to prevent the pipes from freezing and busting, which in turn can cause tremendous damage to the property. Again, I certainly wish Rupert the very best, I just hope he has a workable plan. I just hope he has taken all the enormous miscellaneous expenses into account that come with owning properties like this. Because I don't doubt that the on-going cost is going to run into a very substantial 6 figures per year. Several of us could easily live comfortable off his basic housing expenses. And, maybe he does have a plan. Maybe he plans to fix up and turn one of the properties for a profit. There are a lot of things that I don't know. But on the surface, it looks to me like he has bitten off a lot more than he can chew in the long run. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Oct 10 20:53:03 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:53:03 -0000 Subject: Rupert! - What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: All that ranting and rambling said, Rupert doe a have a real advantage, these homes are all paid for free and clear. If you've ever bought a house, and I'm sure many of you have, you know that the price of the house is only a fraction of the cost of a house. I bought a house at US$89,000 quite a few years back, but they full pay off cost of the 30 year mortgage was something like US$300,000. The money Rupert saves on interest will go a long way to paying for maintenance. But that is something of a phantom too. That only works if you still buy a $89,000 house. If you instead buy a $300,000 house, you save nothing and are riddled with even higher expenses. Again, I'm probably fretting and worrying over nothing. But it seems to me that Rupert has way over extended himself. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat Oct 10 21:16:22 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:16:22 -0000 Subject: Rupert! - What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: bboyminn: > Yes, but you don't repaint a wooden house to create structural > integrity, you do it for cosmetic reasons. However, in both > re-pointing and re-pointing a house, there is an implied > preservation of the structural integrity. If the cement between > the brick become too neglected, it means damage to the house > and potentially to its structural integrity. Just as if a house > is left unpainted, the wood start to deteriorate and the great > the likelihood of internal water damage from leaks. > > So, yes, in the short term, painting and pointing are cosmetic, > but in the long term the are necessary maintenance to preserve > the building itself. > > But my central point is that a brick house is not maintenance > free. It does require maintenance, and that maintenance requires > money. Geoff: Yes, but the point I am making is that London is not massively covered with firms re-pointing as Google information seems to suggest and that UK houses generally only require very long-term maintenance in that area. bboyminn: > Again, many many people who are newly rich, lottery winners for > example, are bankrupt in 5 years, because they look at the > initial cost, but fail to look at the on-going cost of owning > large mansions and driving expensive cars. I think I can > actually buy a car for the cost of an oil change on a Rolls > Royce. Geoff: But I seems to recall that Rupert has been very clever and trendy and bought an old ice-cream van. From md at exit-reality.com Sat Oct 10 21:20:59 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:20:59 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! - What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001b01ca49ef$8ff0ba10$afd22e30$@com> -----Original Message----- bboyminn: But my central point is that a brick house is not maintenance free. It does require maintenance, and that maintenance requires money. ////////////////// Brick is one of the lowest maintenance exteriors there is. md From md at exit-reality.com Sat Oct 10 21:24:56 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:24:56 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001c01ca49f0$1d7a6660$586f3320$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of zanooda2 zanooda: Some time ago, intrigued by all this wood construction in the US, I asked Geoff the same question and he said the answer was yes: their houses are brick or stone. Wooden houses are only here, I guess :-). ------------------------------------ Brick houses in the US are brick, but some houses have brick-face, which is basically the same as stucco. Sometimes it's literally a red stucco over a white stucco and the red is scrapped away to make a brick look, sometimes the bricks are bricks but only about 1 inch thick, but mostly that was used int he 70's and 80's and greatly fell out of style because it doesn't last and looks terrible when it goes. Most new houses in the US are wood-framed, aluminum sided with stucco, stone or brick fronts. But the stone and brick face are greatly out of style and most are real again now. md From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 11 01:13:53 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:13:53 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <001c01ca49f0$1d7a6660$586f3320$@com> Message-ID: > Brick houses in the US are brick, but some houses have > brick-face, which is basically the same as stucco. Well, it's nice to know that real brick houses exist in the US, although I must admit that I never saw one. There is a lot of construction around here, but it's always wood-wood-wood, unless it's a high-rise or an office building :-). They put on this brick-face, as you call it, and it looks really nice too, but the house is still wooden inside. I thought no one even knows here how to build a house out of brick alone, LOL! zanooda, who had to look up "stucco"... :-). From md at exit-reality.com Sun Oct 11 01:49:07 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:49:07 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <001c01ca49f0$1d7a6660$586f3320$@com> Message-ID: <000001ca4a15$055a67e0$100f37a0$@com> -----Original Message----- Well, it's nice to know that real brick houses exist in the US, although I must admit that I never saw one. There is a lot of construction around here, but it's always wood-wood-wood, unless it's a high-rise or an office building :-). They put on this brick-face, as you call it, and it looks really nice too, but the house is still wooden inside. I thought no one even knows here how to build a house out of brick alone, LOL! zanooda, who had to look up "stucco"... :-). ------------------------------------ Well, brick is always over another structure, you can't build a house out of brick. My grandparents house, which is over 100 years old, is brick, but there's 12" cinderblock actually forming the structure. Red brick is really, always cosmetic, whether it be 1" brick face or full brick. All brick houses are either cinderblock or wood frame. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 11 05:33:22 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 05:33:22 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000001ca4a15$055a67e0$100f37a0$@com> Message-ID: > All brick houses are either cinderblock or wood frame. Not where I come from :-). zanooda From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun Oct 11 06:47:07 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 06:47:07 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: > > > All brick houses are either cinderblock or wood frame. zanooda: > Not where I come from :-). Geoff: Ditto in the UK. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Oct 11 07:24:32 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 07:24:32 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Geoff" wrote: > > > > --- "zanooda2" wrote: > > > > > All brick houses are either cinderblock or wood frame. > > zanooda: > > Not where I come from :-). > > Geoff: > Ditto in the UK. > bboyminn: Yes, in the USA, the brick is rarely more than a cosmetic facade. We build a house of wood or cinderblock/cement block, and cover that house with brick. But is seem in the rest of the world, houses are really structurally made from brick or stone. In a discussion in an audio forum in the UK, a person didn't want to run wires in the house, so he was going through the brick, running the wire outside the house, then coming back in through the brick again. As he describe his house, it was two layers of brick, one layer on the outside, with a completely separate layer on the inside separated by a gap. In short, he has a double walled structurally brick house. I've seen a lot of brick houses in my life, and yes they are low maintenance, but when they do need maintenance it is usually far more expensive than repainting a wood house. Brick need work less often, but is more expensive, and it presumably averages out. Though a brick house is more expensive to build. But, in all honesty, I seriously doubt that a single one of those common family houses was really structurally brick. Perhaps with the exception of a few old historical mansions in the big city. Also, keep in mind that the average American see little beyond his lifetime. We typically build houses to last 100 years, and many lower suburban house are going to be luck to reach anything near that. Typically in Europe, according to rumors I heard, they build houses on the assumption that they will last 500 years. That's quite a different attitude toward construction. Steve/bboyminn From md at exit-reality.com Sun Oct 11 08:25:32 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:25:32 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000001ca4a4c$67562830$36027890$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bboyminn > > zanooda: > > Not where I come from :-). > > Geoff: > Ditto in the UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bricks are too small to build a large structure from, the walls would be too thin for a second floor, insulation would be terrible and the inside walls would be terribly cold and damp in the winter. Yes, some houses are double layer brick, because it would have to be for height and structural integrity. Yes, in older countries there's a lot of brick and stone houses, usually on the small side but the UK certainly has its share of wood framed, aluminum sided development homes. Even if you build a house from brick, if you put a roof on it, lath the walls and insulate and put interior walls up, you have essentially framed the house from wood after the fact. Mostly I was speaking to modern houses, but even a lot of older houses, for my example of houses here in the US --- the oldest often in my area, east coast near philly, appear to be brick houses, but are really masonry block, even 150 years ago, brick on the outside, plaster inside, block in the middle. Just a sturdy and lasting as anything in an older country. md From d2dmiles at yahoo.de Sun Oct 11 11:40:51 2009 From: d2dmiles at yahoo.de (Miles) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:40:51 +0200 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? References: <000001ca4a4c$67562830$36027890$@com> Message-ID: <7DB42776F05545B6ACAF3D40B699AD18@miles> Child Of Midian wrote: > Bricks are too small to build a large structure from, the walls would > be too thin for a second floor, insulation would be terrible and the > inside walls would be terribly cold and damp in the winter. Yes, some > houses are double layer brick, because it would have to be for height > and structural integrity. Yes, in older countries there's a lot of > brick and stone houses, usually on the small side but the UK > certainly has its share of wood framed, aluminum sided development > homes. Miles: This house in Hamburg: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Chilehaus_Point.jpg is one of the most famous examples of expressionistic architecture of the 1920ies in Germany. It is constructed of bricks. The Hagia Sophia in Istanbul is built entirely of bricks. Modern bricks are bigger and poriferous to improve both isolation and costs of building. You are right, that most modern brick buildings have a underlying steel construction (or maybe wood in the US), but the reason for it is not that it's impossible to build bigger buildings out of bricks alone, but because it is expensive to do so. With a steel framework you need less bricks and less worktime to build a house. Miles From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Sun Oct 11 17:42:01 2009 From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com) Date: 11 Oct 2009 17:42:01 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 10/11/2009, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1255282921.1227.4300.m8@yahoogroups.com> Reminder from: HPFGU-OTChatter Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/cal Weekly Chat Sunday October 11, 2009 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2009 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From juli17 at aol.com Sun Oct 11 22:45:48 2009 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:45:48 -0000 Subject: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steve wrote: > > > Brick houses in the US are brick, but some houses have > > brick-face, which is basically the same as stucco. > Zanooda: > Well, it's nice to know that real brick houses exist in the US, although I must admit that I never saw one. There is a lot of construction around here, but it's always wood-wood-wood, unless it's a high-rise or an office building :-). They put on this brick-face, as you call it, and it looks really nice too, but the house is still wooden inside. I thought no one even knows here how to build a house out of brick alone, LOL! > > > zanooda, who had to look up "stucco"... :-). Julie: In California virtually all houses are made of stucco. Brick houses would crumble during an earthquake. I never saw a brick house until I went to Texas to visit relatives. I think they are much prettier than most stucco houses, but they aren't an option in earthquake-prone areas. Nor do wood or stone fare well. So stucco it is :-) Julie From catlady at wicca.net Mon Oct 12 03:09:00 2009 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:09:00 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > Steve wrote: > > > > > Brick houses in the US are brick, but some houses have > > > brick-face, which is basically the same as stucco. > > > Zanooda: > > Well, it's nice to know that real brick houses exist in the US, although I must admit that I never saw one. There is a lot of construction around here, but it's always wood-wood-wood, unless it's a high-rise or an office building :-). They put on this brick-face, as you call it, and it looks really nice too, but the house is still wooden inside. I thought no one even knows here how to build a house out of brick alone, LOL! > > > > zanooda, who had to look up "stucco"... :-). > > Julie: > In California virtually all houses are made of stucco. Brick > houses would crumble during an earthquake. Now: Rita. Especially the older cities like Santa Monica and Pasadena still have some masonry buildings from before the 1933 earthquake. They have fewer after each new quake... Anyway, I was going to reminisce about a brick building in Pasadena that *exploded* during the 1994 quake. Bricks all over the parking lot and the street, crushing some unlucky cars. > I never saw a brick > house until I went to Texas to visit relatives. I think they > are much prettier than most stucco houses, but they aren't an > option in earthquake-prone areas. Nor do wood or stone fare > well. So stucco it is :-) Now: Rita. The stucco houses in California are wood-framed. I've pretty much always lived in lath-and-plaster houses covered in stucco, but nowdays people use drywall instead of lath-and-plaster. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 12 17:54:30 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:54:30 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > The stucco houses in California are wood-framed. zanooda: That's what puzzled me a little in Julie's post :-). After stucco was mentioned, I looked it up and I was under an impression that stucco is only used as a wall-covering material, not as a structural material (for construction itself). I was just going to ask about it when your post came along, LOL. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Oct 12 20:21:02 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:21:02 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: Catlady: > > The stucco houses in California are wood-framed. zanooda: > That's what puzzled me a little in Julie's post :-). After stucco was mentioned, I looked it up and I was under an impression that stucco is only used as a wall-covering material, not as a structural material (for construction itself). I was just going to ask about it when your post came along, LOL. Geoff: You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary defines stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall surfaces or moulding into architectural decorations." Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if houses are wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between the frames can be made of a coating plaster. Referring back to UK houses, most houses up to about the 1960s were brick, including internal walls. External walls were - and still are - double rows of bricks which were cavity walls, i.e. with a gap between the two rows. Nowadays, owners of such houses often have the gap filled with foam to improve the heat retention. Most modern houses have external brick walls but internal walls are sometimes wooden framed with materials such as chipboard as filler - which makes it darned awkward to hang pictures and such things. We are just putting our 1935 house on the market and hope to buy something in the same age range because they are usually considered better than modern houses. From md at exit-reality.com Mon Oct 12 21:24:02 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:24:02 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000801ca4b82$52444d00$f6cce700$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Geoff: You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary defines stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall surfaces or moulding into architectural decorations." Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if houses are wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between the frames can be made of a coating plaster. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Stucco is basically cement and usually spread over a wired or other rough, porous surface. Usually two layers are applied for complete coverage and it can be applied over a minimal wood framing, when it hardens it's very strong and basically makes a cement structure when cured. md From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Oct 12 22:18:51 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:18:51 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000801ca4b82$52444d00$f6cce700$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: Geoff: > You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary defines > stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall surfaces or moulding > into architectural decorations." > Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if houses are > wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between the frames > can be made of a coating plaster. md: > Stucco is basically cement and usually spread over a wired or other rough, > porous surface. Usually two layers are applied for complete coverage and it > can be applied over a minimal wood framing, when it hardens it's very strong > and basically makes a cement structure when cured. Geoff: Hence, as I suggested, the US perception appears to differ to the UK one. From donnawonna at woh.rr.com Mon Oct 12 22:57:03 2009 From: donnawonna at woh.rr.com (Donna) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:57:03 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? References: Message-ID: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> Donna: Being the proud owner of a stucco house in Dayton, Ohio, I can say that the stucco house I own has a cinder block exterior coated with stucco. The inside walls are 2x4s and plaster board (sheet rock?). If I've used an incorrect term, please excuse me. I barely know a Phillips screwdriver from a flathead screwdriver --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: Catlady: > > The stucco houses in California are wood-framed. zanooda: > That's what puzzled me a little in Julie's post :-). After stucco was mentioned, I looked it up and I was under an impression that stucco is only used as a wall-covering material, not as a structural material (for construction itself). I was just going to ask about it when your post came along, LOL. Geoff: You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary defines stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall surfaces or moulding into architectural decorations." Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if houses are wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between the frames can be made of a coating plaster. Referring back to UK houses, most houses up to about the 1960s were brick, including internal walls. External walls were - and still are - double rows of bricks which were cavity walls, i.e. with a gap between the two rows. Nowadays, owners of such houses often have the gap filled with foam to improve the heat retention. Most modern houses have external brick walls but internal walls are sometimes wooden framed with materials such as chipboard as filler - which makes it darned awkward to hang pictures and such things. We are just putting our 1935 house on the market and hope to buy something in the same age range because they are usually considered better than modern houses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From md at exit-reality.com Mon Oct 12 23:37:07 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:37:07 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> References: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> Message-ID: <001201ca4b94$e9901f60$bcb05e20$@com> Sounds standard issue to me. Your terms are correct. -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Donna Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:57 PM To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? Donna: Being the proud owner of a stucco house in Dayton, Ohio, I can say that the stucco house I own has a cinder block exterior coated with stucco. The inside walls are 2x4s and plaster board (sheet rock?). If I've used an incorrect term, please excuse me. I barely know a Phillips screwdriver from a flathead screwdriver From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 13 00:35:52 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:35:52 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > Being the proud owner of a stucco house in Dayton, Ohio, I > can say that the stucco house I own has a cinder block exterior > coated with stucco. Cinder block is concrete, right? Does anyone know something about steel-frame construction? Sounds kind of exotic :-). zanooda From md at exit-reality.com Tue Oct 13 01:02:09 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:02:09 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> Message-ID: <000001ca4ba0$ca7e8420$5f7b8c60$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of zanooda2 Cinder block is concrete, right? Does anyone know something about steel-frame construction? Sounds kind of exotic :-). zanooda ------------------------------------ Not really, it's a type of concrete but not nearly as dense or heavy as concrete, the "cinder" refers to the stone used. md From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue Oct 13 13:59:17 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:59:17 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <000001ca4ba0$ca7e8420$5f7b8c60$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: zanooda: > Cinder block is concrete, right? Does anyone know something about > steel-frame construction? Sounds kind of exotic :-). md: > Not really, it's a type of concrete but not nearly as dense or heavy as > concrete, the "cinder" refers to the stone used. Geoff: We use "breeze blocks" in some construction work -They're defined as "a lightweight building brick made from cinders mixed with sand and cement". Sounds as if they are our equivalent. From md at exit-reality.com Tue Oct 13 14:48:46 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:48:46 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: References: <000001ca4ba0$ca7e8420$5f7b8c60$@com> Message-ID: <000301ca4c14$44b30400$ce190c00$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Geoff: We use "breeze blocks" in some construction work -They're defined as "a lightweight building brick made from cinders mixed with sand and cement". Sounds as if they are our equivalent. ------------------------------------ I think the "light weight" may be a perceptual thing based on the relative strength and age of the one lifting it. :-D From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Oct 13 20:32:29 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:32:29 -0000 Subject: Stucco Houses (was: Rupert! ...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Geoff" wrote: > > > > --- "Child Of Midian" wrote: > > Geoff: > > You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary defines > > stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall surfaces or moulding > > into architectural decorations." > > > Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if houses are > > wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between the frames > > can be made of a coating plaster. > > md: > > Stucco is basically cement and usually spread over a wired or other rough, > > porous surface. Usually two layers are applied for complete coverage and it > > can be applied over a minimal wood framing, when it hardens it's very strong > > and basically makes a cement structure when cured. > > Geoff: > Hence, as I suggested, the US perception appears to differ to the UK one. > bboyminn: I suspect there are a lot of stucco in Europe. I know you find a lot in Minneapolis and they claim that it is because of a larger German influence. Here are some photos of common stucco house - http://206.173.89.52/IDXv4/PropDetail.asp?pd=IDX&mls=ARMLS&mlstbl=ARMLSRES&mlsnum=4161055&ucode=nicholasmcconnell_com&office=&agent=&c=4&t=5822&suplogo= http://206.173.89.52/IDXv4/PropDetail.asp?pd=IDX&mls=ARMLS&mlstbl=ARMLSRES&mlsnum=4097992&ucode=nicholasmcconnell_com&office=&agent=&c=16&t=5822&suplogo= http://206.173.89.52/IDXv4/PropDetail.asp?pd=IDX&mls=ARMLS&mlstbl=ARMLSRES&mlsnum=4197320&ucode=nicholasmcconnell_com&office=&agent=&c=25&t=5822&suplogo= http://www.scottsdaleparadise.com/luxury-homes.php These are in the Phoenix area, and in this case are intended to convey a Spanish or Adobe influence. As pointed out by others, Stucco is placed over the frame of the house. Usually the outside of a house is covered with wire to hold the cement in place. Then a layer of course cement is thrown into the wire frame. Once the house is coated with this, then the finish coat is put on. It can be as smooth or as course as the owner wants, and the finish coat can be tinted to suit the owners taste. The outer finish is then texture in a number of different patterns from a fine sand finish, to knobbly bumps, a finish where the bumps are created then smoothed, and a variety of other finishes. The design and use of Stucco is actually carried over to the USA from European influences. So, I suspect Stucco is common in Europe, but it is called something else. Steve/bboyminn From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Oct 13 22:11:33 2009 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:11:33 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: <4AD3B43F.00009C.03628@D8DXG9G1> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > > Donna: > Being the proud owner of a stucco house in Dayton, Ohio, I can say that the > stucco house I own has a cinder block exterior coated with stucco. The > inside > walls are 2x4s and plaster board (sheet rock?). If I've used an incorrect > term, please > excuse me. I barely know a Phillips screwdriver from a flathead screwdriver > Annemehr: We usually call the plaster board "drywall." I think Sheetrock is one brand of drywall. Our old house is mostly lath and plaster inside, but the newer addition is done in drywall and it's too dang easy to knock a little hole into it. From predigirl1 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 14 05:18:53 2009 From: predigirl1 at yahoo.com (Alex Hogan) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:18:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! In-Reply-To: <772620.60587.qm@web62202.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <156120.17671.qm@web63706.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Snot! Snot!? I'm sure she walks around with her hair clenched JUST SO, and has never had a good time in her life! ? Alex Hogan --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Maria Gromova wrote: From: Maria Gromova Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 12:13 PM ? I just saw this rot at MSN. Let's write comments saying what we think of this woman. I did so already. http://www.good. is/post/the- dan-brown- diversion/ ?gt1=48001 ? Crookshanks ? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From md at exit-reality.com Wed Oct 14 13:38:43 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:38:43 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! In-Reply-To: <156120.17671.qm@web63706.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <772620.60587.qm@web62202.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <156120.17671.qm@web63706.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000901ca4cd3$a61a1ca0$f24e55e0$@com> can someone post a link that works? This one won't for me. thanks md -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alex Hogan Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 1:19 AM To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! Snot! Snot!? I'm sure she walks around with her hair clenched JUST SO, and has never had a good time in her life! ? Alex Hogan --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Maria Gromova wrote: From: Maria Gromova Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 12:13 PM ? I just saw this rot at MSN. Let's write comments saying what we think of this woman. I did so already. http://www.good. is/post/the- dan-brown- diversion/ ?gt1=48001 ? Crookshanks ? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ The main list rules also apply here, so make sure you read them! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/hbfile.html#2 Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:15 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:46:15 -0000 Subject: James Potter and the Hall of the Elders' Crossing Message-ID: bboyminn: For fans of fan-fiction, this extension of the Harry Potter world seems to be very popular. If is not about Harry's father, but about Harry's first born son. Using MSN, I was able to find a three part article about the author and the series. It seems that JKR and the UK and US publishers have no problem with fan-fiction, as long as certain reasonable conditions are met, like not trying to profit from it. Here are the links to the series of three articles. The website where the stories are hosted isn't give, but it shouldn't be that hard to track down - http://www.inquisitr.com/41257/of-harry-potter-james-potter-and-warner-bros-studios-the-story/ http://www.inquisitr.com/41261/of-harry-potter-james-potter-and-warner-bros-studios-the-interview-part-i/ http://www.inquisitr.com/41263/of-harry-potter-james-potter-and-warner-bros-studios-the-interview-part-ii/ Only the movie studios (Warner Brothers) objected, and their objection was not total, they were willing to let the story stand with some minor changes. To me this is one of the most amazing things about the Harry Potter phenominon; the massive creativity it has spawned. On a popular fan-fiction site, last time I check, Harry Potter has 5 or 6 times as many stories as the next closest genre. I believe #2 might have been Lord of the Rings with 50,000, But Harry Potter, at the time, has close to 250,000 stories on file. And that is just the beginning; there are countless stunning fan art images out there. Virtually every scene in the Harry Potter books as been skillfully illustrated, and many scene from fan-fiction have been equally skillfully illustrated. Then we have 'Wizard's Rock', few other genres have generated their own for of music. I do know of one 'Dr Who' band; Time Lord Rock. So, it is not unheard of, but the Wizard's Rock seems to have really caught on. Then finally, on college campuses across the world, though certainly in the USA, kids are play Quidditch. Even having competitions between colleges and universities. I suspect the Quidditch World Cup can't be far off. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Oct 14 20:22:55 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:22:55 -0000 Subject: James Potter and the Hall of the Elders' Crossing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: bboyminn: > To me this is one of the most amazing things about the Harry > Potter phenominon; the massive creativity it has spawned. On > a popular fan-fiction site, last time I check, Harry Potter > has 5 or 6 times as many stories as the next closest genre. > I believe #2 might have been Lord of the Rings with 50,000, > But Harry Potter, at the time, has close to 250,000 stories > on file. Geoff: I've just taken the time to check out www.fanfiction.net, which is one of my favourites. The figures are even more impressive now. As of 21:00 today, the top seven on the leaderboard (assuming I didn't go cross-eyed while I was looking) are: Harry Potter 426040 Twilight 111085 Lord of the Rings 42553 Phantom of the Opera 9145 Song of the Lioness 8235 Maximum Ride 7528 Chronicles of Narnia 5793 Being thick, I don't recognise the fifth and sixth groups. Anybody fill me on on them? In passing, James Potter and the Hall of the Elders' Crossing is on www.fanfiction.net, author glippert. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Oct 14 20:39:19 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:39:19 -0000 Subject: James Potter and the Hall of the Elders' Crossing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "Geoff" wrote: > > --- "bboyminn" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > To me this is one of the most amazing things about the Harry > > Potter phenominon; the massive creativity it has spawned. > >..., > > I believe #2 might have been Lord of the Rings with 50,000, > > But Harry Potter, at the time, has close to 250,000 stories > > on file. > > Geoff: > I've just taken the time to check out www.fanfiction.net, ... > > ... the top seven on the leaderboard ...: > > Harry Potter 426040 > Twilight 111085 > Lord of the Rings 42553 > Phantom of the Opera 9145 > Song of the Lioness 8235 > Maximum Ride 7528 > Chronicles of Narnia 5793 > > Being thick, I don't recognise the fifth and sixth groups. Anybody > fill me on on them? > > ... > bboyminn: Both #5 and #6 have Wikipedia Entries - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Song_of_the_Lioness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Ride Both are fantasy books and involve young people. I believe Maximum Ride has been or is being made into a movie. Again, I'm stunned by the level of creativity that the HP books have created. People who were only marginally interested in art, suddenly found a world so vivid that they couldn't restrain themselves. People who rarely to never read or wrote anything were so enthralled by this world, again, they couldn't restrain themselves; they were compelled to write. It is really very impressive, that JKR could wring so much life and creativity out of people who never experienced it before. It's almost like magic. Steve/bluewizard From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed Oct 14 22:22:02 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:22:02 -0000 Subject: James Potter and the Hall of the Elders' Crossing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: bboyminn: > Again, I'm stunned by the level of creativity that the HP books > have created. People who were only marginally interested in > art, suddenly found a world so vivid that they couldn't restrain > themselves. People who rarely to never read or wrote anything > were so enthralled by this world, again, they couldn't restrain > themselves; they were compelled to write. > > It is really very impressive, that JKR could wring so much life > and creativity out of people who never experienced it before. > > It's almost like magic. Geoff: You're in good company to think that.... 'Harry could hear Lockhart dangling below him saying "Amazing! Amazing! This is just like magic!"' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.239 UK edition) :-) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Oct 16 19:14:36 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:14:36 -0000 Subject: Dan Radcliffe - More Real Estate - US$5.65 Million Townhouse Message-ID: I'm starting to feel like something of a tabloid gossip monger. However ,Dan Radcliffe has now bought a $5.65 million town home in New York on top of the other two properties he own there. In the past he bought a just under $4 million condo, a short time later he bought another just over $4 million condo with a view of the Hudson River. Now, a $5.65 million townhome with a nice bit of backyard - http://curbed.com/archives/2009/10/15/harry_potters_new_565_million_west_village_house.php Though I think it is slightly irresponsible of the many news articles to publish the exact address of the place. I can see no news value in that, but I do see tremendous opportunity for Dan's privacy to be violated. If you read my post on Rupert's seeming excessive lot of real estate, then you understand my concerns. However, if is very possible that they have both bought these as investment properties. Since they are all owned free and clear, they can afford to let them sit unused until the real estate market rebounds. It might well be a good investment. Though I will say the upkeep on Dan's NY condos is going to be massively less than Rupert grand estates. Still, they may both have a plan that will work out very well for them. I really hope so. Prior to this they all seems to have been very conservative with their money, and from what I read, they sat down with an advise that counseled them on the wise and safe management of their money. So, again, perhaps they have a wise plan. In any event, I wish them all the best, and think that all of Dan and Rupert's places are spectacular. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Oct 16 19:39:48 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:39:48 -0000 Subject: Dan Radcliffe - More Real Estate - US$5.65 Million Townhouse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Just for reference, here are the other two properties Dan owns in New York- This is the first property he bought, though the detailed photo are no longer available - http://curbed.com/archives/2007/12/17/celebrity_real_estate_wrap_the_wizard_of_soho.php I don't think he ever intended to live here. The property was place for rental as soon as he bought it. This is the second property he bought - http://curbed.com/archives/2008/02/25/celebrity_real_estate_wrap_when_harry_met_michelle.php Very nice place. I has assumed this is were he lived during the 'Equus' theater run. Steve/bboyminn - who is not as obsessed with real estate as it might seem. From wildirishrose at fiber.net Sun Oct 18 06:27:57 2009 From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:27:57 -0000 Subject: Dan Radcliffe - More Real Estate - US$5.65 Million Townhouse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I love the view that place has. I hate the kitchen area. To me it needs far more room. I love the bedroom. Wish I had a bed like that. What a view. Marianne > > This is the second property he bought - > > http://curbed.com/archives/2008/02/25/celebrity_real_estate_wrap_when_harry_met_michelle.php > > Very nice place. I has assumed this is were he lived during the > 'Equus' theater run. > > Steve/bboyminn - who is not as obsessed with real estate as it > might seem. > From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Sun Oct 18 17:41:52 2009 From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com) Date: 18 Oct 2009 17:41:52 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 10/18/2009, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1255887712.17.66929.m3@yahoogroups.com> Reminder from: HPFGU-OTChatter Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/cal Weekly Chat Sunday October 18, 2009 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2009 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 06:12:49 2009 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:12:49 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What a snob! In-Reply-To: <000901ca4cd3$a61a1ca0$f24e55e0$@com> References: <772620.60587.qm@web62202.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <156120.17671.qm@web63706.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <000901ca4cd3$a61a1ca0$f24e55e0$@com> Message-ID: md: > can someone post a link that works? This one won't for me. Ali: Try this: http://www.good.is/post/the-dan-brown-diversion/ I don't know if it'll work better, but it's worth the shot. Frankly, I think the author has a valid point beneath that thick layer of snobbery. Coverage of the Dan Brown, Stephanie Meyer, JRK, etc. books of the world do overshadow the fact that there are tons of great books being put out (the author citing Pynchon and Doctorow, both more more accessible than the author's ivory tower/liberal arts veneer might indicate). It's not that the Brown/Meyer/etc books aren't infinitely readable and accessible pop fiction (I own some of these very books; heck, I have an entire over-flowing bookshelf dedicated to romance novels) nor that the particular authors seems to have managed to capture a giant reading audience in a time when everyone seems to be bemoaning the fact that no one reads anymore, but it's hard to deny that the coverage of them is at the cost of coverage of other books, with names like Doctorow being relatively known without having the big fame of a Dan Brown (though Doctorow is certainly a better writer than Brown, that hack - and I read and liked Da Vinci Code). Now, it's not necessarily anyone's fault, but it doesn't make Anne Trubek (the original article's author) any less valid, pretty much like we don't go dismissing all the medical knowledge that came out of the Nazi doctors' human experimentation just because said doctors were terrible, wretched, horrible human beings (too many adjectives?). And just to really cover myself, I do not mean pop fiction in any denigrating way. Both Shakespeare and Dumas, pere, were pop phenomenons in their days, and I very much enjoy both their bodies of work. :) ~Ali From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 20 01:39:55 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:39:55 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "P. Alexis Nguyen" wrote: > > md: > > can someone post a link that works? This one won't for me. > > Ali: > Try this: http://www.good.is/post/the-dan-brown-diversion/ > > I don't know if it'll work better, but it's worth the shot. > > Frankly, I think the author has a valid point beneath that thick layer > of snobbery. Coverage of the Dan Brown, Stephanie Meyer, JRK, etc. > books of the world do overshadow the fact that there are tons of great > books being put out (the author citing Pynchon and Doctorow, both more > more accessible than the author's ivory tower/liberal arts veneer > might indicate). It's not that the Brown/Meyer/etc books aren't > infinitely readable and accessible pop fiction (I own some of these > very books; heck, I have an entire over-flowing bookshelf dedicated to > romance novels) nor that the particular authors seems to have managed > to capture a giant reading audience in a time when everyone seems to > be bemoaning the fact that no one reads anymore, but it's hard to deny > that the coverage of them is at the cost of coverage of other books, > with names like Doctorow being relatively known without having the big > fame of a Dan Brown (though Doctorow is certainly a better writer than > Brown, that hack - and I read and liked Da Vinci Code). Now, it's not > necessarily anyone's fault, but it doesn't make Anne Trubek (the > original article's author) any less valid, pretty much like we don't > go dismissing all the medical knowledge that came out of the Nazi > doctors' human experimentation just because said doctors were > terrible, wretched, horrible human beings (too many adjectives?). > > And just to really cover myself, I do not mean pop fiction in any > denigrating way. Both Shakespeare and Dumas, pere, were pop > phenomenons in their days, and I very much enjoy both their bodies of > work. :) Alla: Well, what do you think her point actually is? Because if it is just to inform the public that certain books get massive news coverage, I would say sure, she has a point, I would even tell her DOH. However it reads to me as if her point is that it is a very **bad** thing simply because **better** more serious books get overlooked and to that I have several things to respond to. First of all, I think readers will decide which books will stay for ages and which books will not and whatever is called pop culture these days, people leaving several centuries later may call classics. I mean, okay, she is dismissive of Brown, Rowling, Meyers, how about exploring in more depth WHY people like these books better than many "serious" ones? And believe me, just as you are, I read all kinds of genres and books, including serious ones lol, as I mentioned more than once I have a very serious obsession with my beloved russian classics and no, they are not easy books to read, good books, but mass culture is not very fond of them, me thinks. So I believe I had earned the right to say it - I think critics looking down upon mass culture is well, how to put it? I roll my eyes when they do it. If you explain to me why you do not like specific book of mass culture, sure I will listen and will probably respect your opinion, may or may not agree with you. I do not care much for Dan Brown, you know? Liked Da Vinci and all that, but I am not going back to reread it ever, and did not buy Lost symbol (this is the name, right?) I think Stephenie Meyer tells a good romance story, but I think she is a pretty bad writer. JKR? Well, I love the books, but again I know her limitations as well, even though I certainly think she is the strongest one of the three. But you see my point? People who like these books will not necessarily like all of them and may like one or two for different reasons. I think they get coverage, because media finds them newsworthy and media finds them newsworthy because readers enjoy them. Rowling books are commercial empire now, nobody can deny that, but I will never forget that what initially sparked their popularity was the word of the mouth. If any of the books on the list is that good, I think the word of the mouth should know. As you said, Shakespeare and Dumas were pop culture in their times and I love them both and I would LOVE to see the critic who would dare to insult Shakespeare now as something not worthy the time of academia. And Duma to me is one of the most beloved classics ever. I am rambling and I am now not sure what my important point here is, but I think it is probably this - I did not like this author's article much, or to be more precise I did not like it at all. However, Homer and Langley sounds super cool and I am going to go and order it now :) Alla From joym999 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 20 16:42:49 2009 From: joym999 at yahoo.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:42:49 -0000 Subject: Help Wanted Message-ID: Long-time HP fan and HPFGU member seeks an assistant for a Harry Potter web project. I've had an idea for an HP website for about 5 years, but never gotten around to actually setting it up. I've got lots of text, but I've realized that if I have to do anything other than write that it will never happen. So, I'm looking for someone to do: -Administration: Get a domain name, find a web host, figure out a basic framework for the site, figure out if any software is needed, moderate comments (when we get to that point), etc. -Graphic design: Take my text and design a format for it. Set up all the needed pages and link them together. Find some artists to decorate it (I've looked at a lot of the artwork on the Leaky Cauldron and I think there are a lot of good artists out there; one of them must want more exposure for their work) or some other way to make it look nice. I'm looking for a student with a good graphic arts sense or a budding web designer who loves Harry Potter -- no other qualifications necessary. I will provide the funds needed for the web hosting and give you full credit on the site for your work. If you are interested but have limited time, that's ok. I've been thinking about this for five years so I don't care if it doesn't happen for awhile longer. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Wed Oct 21 03:59:42 2009 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kemper mentor) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A Very Potter Musical Message-ID: <580934.39555.qm@web112520.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >From Alla over at HPfGU main list: Alla: I want to say that Harry apparated on Mars for the fun of it. Are you really saying that it could have happened? Kemper now: Hi Alla! It's next time!!! Your sentence reminded me of one of the best fanfictions evah! It came out a couple of months ago on YouTube. I'm sure you can find it under the search: A Very Potter Musical. It is full of the funny. It is also a true musical and probably 2 hours long. The sucky thing about watching it on YouTube is all the clips. Siriusly, watch the first five parts of Act 1 and you'll be moved to finish the musical even if it takes you 2 or 3 days like it did me. S P O I L E R S P A C E Specificallyj: you sentence is reminds of Draco telling Potter that he's going to transfeer to Pigsfart, wizarding school on Mars, whose Headmaster is has a lion's head and whose name is Rumbleroar. Kemper From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Oct 22 18:54:36 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:54:36 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff" wrote: > > > > --- "Child Of Midian" wrote: > > Geoff: > > You've raised a similar thought to mine. My dictionary > > defines stucco as "fine plaster used for coating wall > > surfaces or moulding into architectural decorations." > > > Is the US definition different to mine? Because even if > > houses are wooden-framed, I cannot see how the wall between > > the frames can be made of a coating plaster. > > md: > > Stucco is basically cement and usually spread over a wired > > or other rough, porous surface. Usually two layers ... > > Geoff: > Hence, as I suggested, the US perception appears to differ > to the UK one. > bboyminn: Sorry, I know this is something of a dead topic, but I think the difference we are seeing is the difference between interior and exterior finish. Interior Stucco is basically plater over lath, but the principle is the same. A rough coat is applied, when it dries a finish coat is applied. On a wood frame house, the frame is first covered with wood of some type, particle board, chip board, or perhaps a concrete 'backer board'. For house exteriors, this is then in turn cover with a loose wire frame that acts both to re-enforce the concrete and to hold it in place. As above, a rough coat first for structural integrity, followed by a finish coat, that can be textured and colored to suit the desires of the customer. Here is my America Heritage Dictionary definition of 'Stucco' - stuc?co - n., 1. A durable finish for exterior walls, usually composed of cement, sand, and lime, and applied while wet. 2. A fine plaster for interior wall ornamentation, such as moldings. 3. A plaster or cement finish for interior walls. As you can see it can be interior (plaster) or exterior (cement). Sorry to interrupt. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 23 00:53:49 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:53:49 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > zanooda: > > Cinder block is concrete, right? Does anyone know something about > steel-frame construction? Sounds kind of exotic :-). > > md: > > Not really, it's a type of concrete but not nearly as dense or heavy as concrete, the "cinder" refers to the stone used. > > Geoff: > We use "breeze blocks" in some construction work -They're defined as "a lightweight building brick made from cinders mixed with sand and cement". Sounds as if they are our equivalent. > Carol responds: Here's what cinder blocks, which are *very* common in Arizona, look like: http://tinyurl.com/yj62teh Obviously, the hollow part is hidden when they're laid like bricks to build a wall, and the solid part faces out. I don't know what they're made of, but they're rough textured and fairly light weight. I could probably carry one in each hand for a short distance if I wore work gloves. I managed to damage a leather coat when I stupidly tried to carry one in both arms. (I was trying to help some kids build a playhouse.) Students used to build bookshelves of boards and cinder blocks when I was in college. Extremely cheap furniture! Since Flagstaff, where I grew up, has cinder pits in its formerly volcanic mountains (they "salt" the icy roads with cinders in wintertime), it's possible that Arizona's cinder blocks are actually made from cinders. Just guessing, of course. Carol, who used to explore half-built cinder block houses as a child and collect the orange and yellow electrical wires for "jewelry" From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Oct 23 06:35:12 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:35:12 -0000 Subject: Brick Houses (was: Rupert! What were you thinking? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Geoff: > > We use "breeze blocks" in some construction work -They're defined as "a lightweight building brick made from cinders mixed with sand and cement". Sounds as if they are our equivalent. Carol responds: > Here's what cinder blocks, which are *very* common in Arizona, look like: > http://tinyurl.com/yj62teh > Obviously, the hollow part is hidden when they're laid like bricks to build a wall, and the solid part faces out. Geoff: Yes, they're the same as our breeze blocks. We use them mainly for light construction - sheds, garages etc. From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com Sun Oct 25 17:41:39 2009 From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com) Date: 25 Oct 2009 17:41:39 -0000 Subject: Weekly Chat, 10/25/2009, 1:00 pm Message-ID: <1256492499.553.60463.m7@yahoogroups.com> Reminder from: HPFGU-OTChatter Yahoo! Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/cal Weekly Chat Sunday October 25, 2009 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm (This event repeats every week.) Location: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Notes: Just a reminder, Sunday chat starts in about one hour. To get to the HPfGU room follow this link: http://www.chatzy.com/792755223574 Create a user name for yourself, whatever you want to be called. Enter the password: hpfguchat Click "Join Chat" on the lower right. Chat start times: 11 am Pacific US 12 noon Mountain US 1 pm Central US 2 pm Eastern US 7 pm UK All Rights Reserved Copyright 2009 Yahoo! Inc. http://www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 16:21:08 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:21:08 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > I do not care much for Dan Brown, you know? Liked Da Vinci > and all that, but I am not going back to reread it ever, > and did not buy Lost symbol (this is the name, right?) > I think Stephenie Meyer tells a good romance story, but I think > she is a pretty bad writer. > JKR? Well, I love the books, but again I know her limitations > as well, even though I certainly think she is the strongest > one of the three. zanooda: I finally got to this thread today and realized that I'm not sure what exactly "bad writing" means :-). Is it *just* about the language, like poor vocabulary, for example? Or is there more? I remember how Steven King said that Stephenie Meyer can't write, and how she said that she is not a writer but a storyteller. I'm not sure though that I know the difference. I mean, if someone came up with a fascinating story but then wrote it down sooo badly that no one can get through it, would it still be a good story :-)? BTW, Alla, my reaction to both Brown and Meyer was exactly like yours :-). It was interesting to read "The Da Vinci Code", but I never had any desire to read in again, because the characters didn't grip me, so after the puzzle was solved there was nothing left to go back to :-). I didn't buy his next two books either. As for Meyer, I also liked the story, but I *do* feel like her writing is missing something, although I can't figure out what it is, that's why I asked my question about bad writing - to find out, LOL. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 16:32:22 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:32:22 -0000 Subject: Another DH question Message-ID: Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it mean that they were pushed forward to follow the gravel-covered driveway, or were they pushed down so that they fell onto that gravel? People translate it very differently, and I don't know what to say :-). It's on p.456 or p.369, "Malfoy Manor". I would really appreciate it if someone could explain... zanooda From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 16:38:03 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:38:03 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > zanooda: > > I finally got to this thread today and realized that I'm not sure what exactly "bad writing" means :-). Is it *just* about the language, like poor vocabulary, for example? Or is there more? I remember how Steven King said that Stephenie Meyer can't write, and how she said that she is not a writer but a storyteller. I'm not sure though that I know the difference. I mean, if someone came up with a fascinating story but then wrote it down sooo badly that no one can get through it, would it still be a good story :-)? > > BTW, Alla, my reaction to both Brown and Meyer was exactly like yours :-). It was interesting to read "The Da Vinci Code", but I never had any desire to read in again, because the characters didn't grip me, so after the puzzle was solved there was nothing left to go back to :-). I didn't buy his next two books either. As for Meyer, I also liked the story, but I *do* feel like her writing is missing something, although I can't figure out what it is, that's why I asked my question about bad writing - to find out, LOL. > Alla: Oh yes, OMG many times yes. The distinction bad writer but good storyteller escapes me too for the exact reasons you described - eh how the heck would you know that the story is good, if the writer is bad, however I do see that I pretty much used this expression to describe my reaction to Stephenie Meyer's writing lol, so let me clarify. I suppose what I meant is that first of all from technical POV her writing does not impress me much - her vocabulary, etc. And yes, I am saying it as ESL speaker, her vocabulary as English writer does not impress me much. No, I am not saying that one should use SAT words throughout the book just for the sake of using them or at all, but I suppose I expected more variety. Second of all, well, partially I am not impressed by her characters, not in a sense of liking or disliking them, but in a sense of them coming alive on page. Note that I said partially, because I think that both leads have great chemistry, especially in the first book, so she did sell to me their great love (or obsession), but I do not feel like anything else about characters is likeable or realistic. I doubt I can explain it better than that, but I suppose that in light of that distinction not being very clear to me I should take back "she is a bad writer" part and instead just say as you did, her writing is missing something for me. I mean, I am not getting into the merits of the story here, because if I will it will mean talking about hating her characters after book 4 (I read books 1 and 4 only), but that has nothing to do with her writing I guess. JMO, Alla From n2fgc at arrl.net Mon Oct 26 17:32:47 2009 From: n2fgc at arrl.net (Lee Storm (God Is The Healing Force)) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:32:47 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Another DH question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F05A17CAD7F4691AE14FEFA59B6D616@FRODO> [Zanooda]: | Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he | wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain | present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a | little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it | mean that they were pushed forward to follow the | gravel-covered driveway, or were they pushed down so that | they fell onto that gravel? [Lee]: I would lean toward the first thought. Being pushed down would be "into" the gravel, whereas "over" is usually on top of it. Gathering that they were treated none to gently, I would surmise that they probably did a lot of stumbling and such whilst being pushed by Greyback and other nasties, but their momentum was forward, toward the Malfoy door, over the gravel of the walkway. Hope that helps. Smiles, Lee :-) From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 17:46:06 2009 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kemper) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:46:06 -0000 Subject: Another DH question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > zanooda: > Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it mean that they were pushed forward to follow the gravel-covered driveway, Kemper now: Fwiw, I read it as your orignial. They were being lead to the manor and not the driveway. Kemper From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 18:21:14 2009 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kemper) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:21:14 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > zanooda: > > > > I finally got to this thread today and realized that I'm not sure what exactly "bad writing" means :-). Is it *just* about the language, like poor vocabulary, for example? Or is there more? I remember how Steven King said that Stephenie Meyer can't write, and how she said that she is not a writer but a storyteller. I'm not sure though that I know the difference. I mean, if someone came up with a fascinating story but then wrote it down sooo badly that no one can get through it, would it still be a good story :-)? > Alla: > > Oh yes, OMG many times yes. The distinction bad writer but good storyteller escapes me too for the exact reasons you described - Kemper now: I think the best example of a good storyteller and horrid writer is the creator/destroyer of Star Wars, George Lucas. Though I do admire his willingness to be made fun of by Robot Chicken and Family Guy. His story could have been so rich but it was watered down making a weak sauce. Kemper From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 18:19:00 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:19:00 -0000 Subject: Another DH question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: zanooda wrpte: > > Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it mean that they were pushed forward to follow the gravel-covered driveway, > > Kemper replied: > Fwiw, I read it as your orignial. They were being lead to the manor and not the driveway. > > Kemper > Carol responds: Very quickly, without looking up the passage to see whether I'm right, I think that they're led to the same gate that Snape and Yaxley pass through earlier by showing their Dark Marks. Presumably, since the Malfoys own neither a car nor a carriage, they follow a gravel walkway rather than a driveway to get there. Harry can't see well both because it's night (IIRC) and because Hermione's jinx has blurred his vision, so possibly he feels and hears the crunch of gravel under his feet. Odd--I never noticed the reference to gravel. But pushed *over* gravel suggests that the Snatchers were pushing them to make them walk faster (hard to do when you're bound back to back--or did someone untie them?) rather than pushing them *onto* the gravel-covered ground. Carol, hoping that she understood zanooda's question correctly From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 19:56:32 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:56:32 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Kemper now: > I think the best example of a good storyteller and horrid writer is the creator/destroyer of Star Wars, George Lucas. Though I do admire his willingness to be made fun of by Robot Chicken and Family Guy. > > His story could have been so rich but it was watered down making a weak sauce. Alla: I am not sure I understand how it is a good example? You are talking about destroying the story because he made the recent movies or you meant something else? If you are talking about that, then presumably you liked his writing AND storytelling in the original Star wars, right? I just do not understand how one can assess that story is good and that writing is horrid at the same time, you know? I mean I totally understand if for example we would say that in such and such book we have the good story and I don't know, say "less than perfect" writing, but not "bad" writing. Because to me, to enjoy the story, you (generic you) must enjoy *something* in the way how it was told. JMO, Alla From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 23:06:10 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:06:10 -0000 Subject: The Original Butter Beer Recipe Message-ID: Indirectly through a news source I discovered that Butter Beer existed before Harry Potter. Here is the original butter beer recipe, though we don't know that it in anyway duplicated HP butter beer. http://blogs.channel4.com/food/2009/03/17/feasting-on-butterbeer/ This is the article from which I found out about this recipe - http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/oct/26/harry-potter-halloween-warner-lawyers It seems this woman has what she calls an 'underground restaurant'. Though really she just host a few friends at here house every now an then. She was planning to host a Harry Potter themed Halloween party, and Warner Brothers thought that was an infringement on their trademark and copyrights. Even though this was a small event not holding more than say 30 people. The cost of entrance was to offset the cost of the food, props, and decorations. Warner even implied that it own the rights to all the food mentioned in the HP books, even though as this butter beer recipe shows, many of the foods in the books pre-date Harry Potter; as well as treacle tarts, pumpkin pasties, and many others. I know many fan groups have had to rename their events because they used words directly associated with Harry Potter. This seems extremely unwise. If you can have a Harry Potter fan convention that mentions Harry Potter, then ...well... you really can't have a convention can you? And if you can't throw a Harry Potter party that mentions Harry Potter, then it is difficult to throw a theme party. What Warner is doing is blocking all avenues by which fans can enjoy being fans. Which in my eyes means the fans will have no choice but to turn away from the fandom. How long before Warner institutes a law suit preventing schools and colleges from playing Quidditch? You simply can't kill your fans then wonder why you suddenly have none. As long as fandom is alive, Harry Potter is still alive, kill fandom = killing Harry. steve/bluewizard From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 23:15:40 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:15:40 -0000 Subject: Another DH question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "zanooda2" wrote: > > Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it mean that they were pushed forward to follow the gravel-covered driveway, or were they pushed down so that they fell onto that gravel? People translate it very differently, and I don't know what to say :-). It's on p.456 or p.369, "Malfoy Manor". I would really appreciate it if someone could explain... > > > > zanooda > bboyminn: Well you seem to be getting a consensus. They were not 'pushed over ON TO the gravel' they were 'pushed ALONG the gravel' road; meaning they were propelled forward as they were force to walk along the gravel road or gravel walkway. Do I understand correctly that you are working on your own translation of the Harry Potter books? If so, is this some official project, or just something you are doing on your own? Also, am I safe in assuming the translation is into Russian? I'm also finding many hints here and there that the official Russian translation is horribly flawed. They don't seem to have understood the book at all. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Oct 26 23:25:56 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:25:56 -0000 Subject: The Original Butter Beer Recipe In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: bboyminn: > Warner even implied that it own the rights to all the food > mentioned in the HP books, even though as this butter beer > recipe shows, many of the foods in the books pre-date Harry > Potter; as well as treacle tarts, pumpkin pasties, and many > others. Geoff: Hm. 'He (Harry) had never seen so many things he liked to eat on one table: roast beef, roast chicken, pork chops and lamb chops, sausages, bacon and steak, boiled potatoes, roast potatoes, chips, Yorkshire puddings, peas, carrots, gravy, ketchup and, for some strange reason, mint humbugs..... ...A moment later the puddings appeared. Blocks of ice-cream in every flavour you could think of, apple pies, treacle tarts, chocolate ?clairs and jam doughnuts, trifle, strawberries, jelly, rice pudding....' (PS "The Sorting Hat" pp. 92/93 UK edition) If they're going to lay claim to that lot, their legal eagles are going to be verrry busy. Plus the fact a group of very angry people armed with tennis rackets will be travelling from Wimbledon to do them over. :-) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon Oct 26 23:35:46 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:35:46 -0000 Subject: Another DH question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: zanooda: > > Another one of those silly questions: in the sentence "... he wrenched his mind back to his own body, fighting to remain present as the prisoners were pushed over gravel" I'm a little confused about the "over gravel" part :-). Does it mean that they were pushed forward to follow the gravel-covered driveway, or were they pushed down so that they fell onto that gravel? People translate it very differently, and I don't know what to say :-). It's on p.456 or p.369, "Malfoy Manor". I would really appreciate it if someone could explain... bboyminn: > Well you seem to be getting a consensus. > They were not 'pushed over ON TO the gravel' they were 'pushed ALONG the gravel' road; meaning they were propelled forward as they were force to walk along the gravel road or gravel walkway. Geoff: I think that the matter is resolved if you look a few lines further back. 'He (Harry) stumbled and was dragged on to his feet by Greyback; now he was staggering along sideways, tied back-to-back to the four other prisoners.' (DH "Malfoy Manor" p.369 UK edition) Your quote is a continuation of this same action. they are being dragged and pushed along the gravelled sections. I wonder if it might be a typo for "over THE gravel". By the by, why are we getting all this "gravel walkway"? What's the matter with "gravel path" or "gravel drive"? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Oct 26 23:47:57 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:47:57 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- "zanooda2" wrote: > > --- "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > I do not care much for Dan Brown, you know? Liked Da Vinci > > and all that, but I am not going back to reread it ever, > > and did not buy Lost symbol (this is the name, right?) > > > I think Stephenie Meyer tells a good romance story, but I think > > she is a pretty bad writer. > > > JKR? Well, I love the books, but again I know her limitations > > as well, even though I certainly think she is the strongest > > one of the three. > > > zanooda: > > I finally got to this thread today and realized that I'm not sure what exactly "bad writing" means :-). Is it *just* about the language, like poor vocabulary, for example? Or is there more? I remember how Steven King said that Stephenie Meyer can't write, and how she said that she is not a writer but a storyteller. I'm not sure though that I know the difference. I mean, if someone came up with a fascinating story but then wrote it down sooo badly that no one can get through it, would it still be a good story :-)? > > ... > bboyminn: Fan Fiction is probably the best example of a good story written badly; or at least, I have experienced it many times in fan fiction. The underlying story might be interesting, but the mechanics of writing it is so horrible you can hardly slog through it. So, in this sense, grammar, punctuation, construction, and similar more formal and technical aspects come into play. Without that basic level of techincal application, the story become so tedious as to be unreadable. However, a story can be technically correct and still be as dry as week old toast. Technically correct or not, the writer has to stimulate the reader imagination. Something I think JKR does with stunning ability. Look at the tradition of oral story telling. A good example of this would be Garrison Keillor's "Tales of Lake Wobegon". Keillor talks very slow, and tells rambling tales of small town life. Though through his words, his voice, and his pace, he is able to hold audiences spell bound. Other oral storytellers might speak in the vernacular; in the voice and speech patterns of some local dialect. What they do, oral story tellers, would never really work if it were written down. But they still manage to captivate audiences. So, a good story well told can overlook a lack of technical correctness, as long as it is consistent within its framework. But a technically correct story poorly told will never hold up. I feel this way about "Classic" literature, again to me it is as dry as week old toast. It is just too slow and plodding, and usually about people I couldn't care less about. But, it seems to have endured for many many many years, and sometimes centuries. But it is just too dull and slow for me. Will I say JKR is a technically perfect writer? No, probably not, but she is a masterful storyteller. She write just enough to ignite the imagination to fill in the details, and when your imagination is so engaged, the world becomes very real to you. I also don't think that JKR modifies her vocabulary. She doesn't dumb it down for kids, nor does she use hyper intellectual vocabulary. I think she says what she needs to say, in the words she needs to say it in, and if you run into something you don't understand, you either infer if from context, or you go look it up. I've not read Dan Brown or Meyers and have little interest in them, though I do enjoy the movies. So, if the technique is poor, the read become laborious. If sufficient technique is there, then the story must still be well told. I think that has more to due with structure than technique. You have to be able to say things in an engaging way without over doing it. A great first line or first paragraph lays the whole foundation for the book. If you haven't captivated your readers by the first paragraph, then likely they are not going to continue. First, you must have something to say, then you must say it well, in an engaging captivating way. Just a few random thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 00:54:52 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:54:52 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > bboyminn: >> Look at the tradition of oral story telling. A good example > of this would be Garrison Keillor's "Tales of Lake Wobegon". > Keillor talks very slow, and tells rambling tales of small > town life. Though through his words, his voice, and his pace, he > is able to hold audiences spell bound. > > Other oral storytellers might speak in the vernacular; in the > voice and speech patterns of some local dialect. What they > do, oral story tellers, would never really work if it were > written down. But they still manage to captivate audiences. > > So, a good story well told can overlook a lack of technical > correctness, as long as it is consistent within its framework. > But a technically correct story poorly told will never hold up. Alla: Ugh, deleted previous post without saving it. Oh well. With the oral storytelling this is the whole point to me - they do not write the story down, so it is just good story and if nameless writers did not eventually record it, I am not sure if we would have been able to enjoy it. IMO of course. Bboyminn: > I feel this way about "Classic" literature, again to me it is > as dry as week old toast. It is just too slow and plodding, > and usually about people I couldn't care less about. But, it > seems to have endured for many many many years, and sometimes > centuries. But it is just too dull and slow for me. Alla: Do you feel that way about every book written before 20th century? Or are you talking about just Greeks and Romans? I guess I am very surprised. Bboyminn: > Will I say JKR is a technically perfect writer? No, probably > not, but she is a masterful storyteller. She write just enough > to ignite the imagination to fill in the details, and when > your imagination is so engaged, the world becomes very real to > you. > > I also don't think that JKR modifies her vocabulary. She > doesn't dumb it down for kids, nor does she use hyper > intellectual vocabulary. I think she says what she needs to > say, in the words she needs to say it in, and if you run into > something you don't understand, you either infer if from > context, or you go look it up. > > I've not read Dan Brown or Meyers and have little interest in > them, though I do enjoy the movies. > > So, if the technique is poor, the read become laborious. If > sufficient technique is there, then the story must still be > well told. I think that has more to due with structure than > technique. You have to be able to say things in an engaging > way without over doing it. > > A great first line or first paragraph lays the whole foundation > for the book. If you haven't captivated your readers by the > first paragraph, then likely they are not going to continue. > > First, you must have something to say, then you must say it > well, in an engaging captivating way. > > Alla: But I would never call JKR a bad writer either, I find her writing style, while sometimes flawed often to be a pleasure to read. It is not "less than perfect writer but good storyteller" expression confuses me, it is "BAD writer, but good storyteller" From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 04:31:46 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:31:46 -0000 Subject: Another DH question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > Well you seem to be getting a consensus. zanooda: Yes, finally a consensus :-). Thank you very much, everyone :-). > Steve wrote: > Do I understand correctly that you are working on your > own translation of the Harry Potter books? zanooda: No, I can't do this translation myself, because (please don't laugh :-)) I just don't remember Russian well enough to translate literary works. I do technical translation sometimes, but it's different with books, with all this literary language etc. Very often I don't seem to be able to come up with the needed words and expressions anymore ;-(. I'm kind of stuck between the two languages, not knowing either one of them perfectly :-). However, I notice all the mistakes in someone else's translation, which makes me a very good translation editor :-). > Steve wrote: > is this some official project zanooda: No, it's just the readers are not satisfied with the official translation, so the fans that know English organize groups and try to translate it better, just for themselves :-). It's actually quite useless most of the time, because they are all young and inexperienced (although very enthusiastic :-)) translators, so usually the result is even worth than the official translation :-). I'm just in it because one of my friends in Russia asked me to help them out and look through their translation to eliminate the most bad mistakes. I'm glad to do it, because, as I already said, I think it would be great to have at least one correct translation, even if not many people will read it :-). At the very least Neville won't be the Potions master in it, LOL ... > Steve: > I'm also finding many hints here and there that the > official Russian translation is horribly flawed. Oh yeah, broad hints :-). It's really bad, especially the first four books, IMO. zanooda, thanking everyone again for the right answer From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 04:47:24 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:47:24 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > No, I am not saying that one should use SAT words throughout > the book just for the sake of using them or at all, but I > suppose I expected more variety. zanooda: Yeah, I noticed this too. I remember when I read the first book, I thought that if I meet the word "aggravated" one more time, I'll just get... you know, aggravated, LOL. > Alla wrote: Second of all, well, partially I am not impressed by her characters zanooda: I liked some of the secondary characters as well, but mostly in books two and three :-). > Alla: > it will mean talking about hating her characters after book > 4 (I read books 1 and 4 only) zanooda: I hated the fourth book as well. I thought it was gross :-). From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 04:59:56 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:59:56 -0000 Subject: What a snob! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "kemper" wrote: > I think the best example of a good storyteller and horrid > writer is the creator/destroyer of Star Wars, George Lucas. > > His story could have been so rich but it was watered down > making a weak sauce. zanooda: I see what you mean, but it's different with the movies, isn't it? Even if the screenplay is bad, you still can sit through the movie (it's only two hours of your life :-)) to have the whole story. If the book is very badly written, you may not even be patient enough to get to the end... :-). From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 17:08:20 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:08:20 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Alla wrote: > > I think Stephenie Meyer tells a good romance story, but I think > > she is a pretty bad writer. > zanooda responded: > > I finally got to this thread today and realized that I'm not sure what exactly "bad writing" means :-). Is it *just* about the language, like poor vocabulary, for example? Or is there more? I remember how Steven King said that Stephenie Meyer can't write, and how she said that she is not a writer but a storyteller. I'm not sure though that I know the difference. I mean, if someone came up with a fascinating story but then wrote it down sooo badly that no one can get through it, would it still be a good story :-)? Carol responds: I'm coming to this thread late and since I have nothing to say about the article that spawned it, I'll just add my two cents in response to zanooda's question. First, setting aside the distinction between writing and storytelling for a moment, it's possible to have a good *story* and a bad story*teller* (or, at least, a storyteller whose voice or style or approach to the story doesn't appeal to a particular listener or reader). Think how many versions of "Cinderella" you've read or watched or heard in your life, all essentially the same story (a little girl's mother dies, her father remarries, her father dies, the stepmother and stepsisters make the girl do all the housework and sleep by the fireplace, the girl's fairy godmother gives her a gown, glass slippers, and a coach made from a pumpkin, the prince falls in love and finds her through the glass slipper that she leaves behind)--always the same story with most or all of those elements but perhaps told with a new spin or told badly. (I hate the Grimm's fairy tale version where the stepsisters bite off heels and toes trying to fit their feet into the tiny glass slipper.)Or take a good joke that ought to be funny but is badly told. The joke is still good but the teller isn't. (Of course, even the best storyteller or joke teller needs a good story to work with.) So maybe the writer in question (Stephenie Meyer, whose name I always feel that I'm misspelling) knows how to invent a good love story, with events and characters that would work well in more skillful hands but just can't tell the story in a compelling way. (I haven't read her books, so I don't know. As for writing and storytelling, I'd say that storytelling is the voice of the narrator (think Uncle Remus or Huckleberry Finn or the avuncular narrator of "The Hobbit" who seems to be speaking directly to children (in contrast to the narrator of LOTR, who disappears as a separate entity and tells the story mostly from the PoV of the Hobbits). The story is what happens to the characters (somebody, I forget who, described it as "and then... and then..."). All that an oral storyteller (or joke teller or bard) has to do is to hold the attention of his audience--a complex skill, of course, but different from that of a writer, who needs not just a sequence of events but a plot that builds to a climax or series of climaxes, with one event leading to another; memorable characters who are distinct individuals, not stereotypes; a clear, concise style that may not be as folksy or poetic as a storyteller's (or matches the voice of the storyteller or narrator if the narrator is a character in the story); and, theoretically, no mechanical errors unless they're part of a speaker's style (though, of course, it's usually the copyeditor's style to clean those up and fix stylistic infelicities like unnecessary passive voice and dangling modifiers, as well.) Anyway, my guess is that someone like Stephenie Meyer (whose books, again, I haven't read) can come up with the elements or makings of a good story (what happens to whom) but can't put them together in a readable, compelling way. And I would guess that it's her style that gets in the way, just as it's apparently style that makes books from, say, the nineteenth century boring to modern readers who expect them to get to the point--or rather, the action--without so much exposition and (despite the impossibility of their doing so) to speak modern English without all of Jane Austen's polite conversation or Charles Dickens's criminal slang ("Oliver Twist") or dialects and without expressing any moral judgments (or without essays on whaling and other topics interrupting the story like those in "Moby Dick"). Imagine a love story (not necessarily Meyer's) that leaves out key elements (such as how the lovers keep their trysts secret from their friends and families), that passes moral judgments on the characters instead of letting the reader make or withhold her own judgments, and has no plot to speak of--things happen, such as midnight trysts and walks on the beach, but one event does not lead to another. The story ("and then... and then...") is there; but the plot isn't. The characters are not compelling; the events are not believable. A copyeditor could, in theory, make the style more readable and natural and correct the mechanical errors, but nothing except a complete rewrite can make this hypothetical manuscript into a good book. Carol, feeling that she's added to the confusion rather than clearing it up From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 18:37:58 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:37:58 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Carol: So maybe the writer in question (Stephenie Meyer, whose name I always feel that I'm misspelling) knows how to invent a good love story, with events and characters that would work well in more skillful hands but just can't tell the story in a compelling way. (I haven't read her books, so I don't know. Alla: See, no to me that's not it. The story of the first book does not have much action, but typical romance plot is there, two people falling in love. And as I also mentioned to me, one of the main things of what I am looking for in romance genre is there ? tension, undeniable (IMO) chemistry between two leads. But something pretty big is missing and I wish I could articulate what that something is. As I mentioned before I would not mind more diverse vocabulary, but again if she makes her point with the vocabulary she uses, if she can show the chemistry, the love (or obsession) come alive on the page, does it even matter that she does not use many different words? Can I really call her a bad writer? There is also quite a lot of eye roll from me when I think about main character and after book four I plain out despise her, but again whether we find character likeable or not does not really matter if we are talking about writer's skill, right? Unless of course we know that writer wanted to portray something drastically different than what a lot of readers got out of the books I suppose. Carol: Anyway, my guess is that someone like Stephenie Meyer (whose books, again, I haven't read) can come up with the elements or makings of a good story (what happens to whom) but can't put them together in a readable, compelling way. Alla: No, I would not say that, I could not put the first book down till I finish it, thus I found it pretty compelling. I do not want to reread it, but this has a lot to do with the events in the last book. I just cannot muster any sympathy for the characters anymore. I wonder if it really just a technical skill, when we say bad writer, but then I am back where I started, if writing is horrible, I am really not sure how we can appreciate story. Carol: Imagine a love story (not necessarily Meyer's) that leaves out key elements (such as how the lovers keep their trysts secret from their friends and families), that passes moral judgments on the characters instead of letting the reader make or withhold her own judgments, and has no plot to speak of--things happen, such as midnight trysts and walks on the beach, but one event does not lead to another. The story ("and then... and then...") is there; but the plot isn't. The characters are not compelling; the events are not believable. A copyeditor could, in theory, make the style more readable and natural and correct the mechanical errors, but nothing except a complete rewrite can make this hypothetical manuscript into a good book. Alla: Well, no I did not feel it leaves out key elements either, I mean it begins as love from the first sight, which usually I have tremendous trouble buying in the books and she even sold me on that. Carol, feeling that she's added to the confusion rather than clearing it up. Alla: Could you give an example of the book which you would apply the expression "bad writer, good storyteller" to? From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 27 20:20:23 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:20:23 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > As I mentioned before I would not mind more diverse vocabulary, > but again if she makes her point with the vocabulary she uses, > if she can show the chemistry, the love (or obsession) come > alive on the page, does it even matter that she does not use > many different words? zanooda: Besides, if an author uses the first-person narrative, like Meyer does, she always has an excuse that it is her character who has a limited vocabulary, not herself, LOL. I suppose we should be grateful that her teenage heroine is an old soul and not your typical teenage girl, otherwise Meyer would be forced to write like this: "And then I, like, saw him for the first time, and he was, like, sooo hot... and, like, totally cool... and I was, like, 'whatever'..." :-). > Alla: > whether we find character likeable or not does not really > matter if we are talking about writer's skill, right? zanooda; I think so too. For example, I really hate Scarlett O'Hara, but I love the rest of the "Gone with the Wind"... :-). > Alla: > I could not put the first book down till I finish it, thus I > found it pretty compelling. I do not want to reread it, but > this has a lot to do with the events in the last book. I just > cannot muster any sympathy for the characters anymore. zanooda: How did you manage to skip books 2 and 3 and go directly to book 4 :-)? These books don't have isolated plots, IMO, they are all intertwined. They are all one and the same story, and I think that without reading books 2 and 3 I wouldn't have understood what was going on in book 4. Well, it's too late for you now :-), and I totally understand the aversion you feel to the rest of the story. I would have probably felt the same way in your place. As it is, I only feel aversion to the fourth book alone... :-). > Alla: > Well, no I did not feel it leaves out key elements either, > I mean it begins as love from the first sight, which usually > I have tremendous trouble buying in the books and she even > me on that. zanooda: LOL! More than that, the simple fact that I have even read her books to the end should be considered a compliment to the writer, because I don't like love stories much, and I usually simply hate vampire stories, and hers is a little bit of both :-). Still, something is off in her books, even though I can't put my finger on it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 28 17:08:01 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:08:01 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: zanooda: Besides, if an author uses the first-person narrative, like Meyer does, she always has an excuse that it is her character who has a limited vocabulary, not herself, LOL. I suppose we should be grateful that her teenage heroine is an old soul and not your typical teenage girl, otherwise Meyer would be forced to write like this: "And then I, like, saw him for the first time, and he was, like, sooo hot... and, like, totally cool... and I was, like, 'whatever'..." :-). Alla: Oh yeah, could have been much worse, you are totally right. Alla before: > whether we find character likeable or not does not really > matter if we are talking about writer's skill, right? zanooda: I think so too. For example, I really hate Scarlett O'Hara, but I love the rest of the "Gone with the Wind"... :-). Alla: You know, as an aside, it is funny, Scarlet O'Hara is the type of character I would usually really hate, because of how she treated human beings around her, specifically Rett. Sense of entitlement/ownership over another human being is usually enough for me to hate the character, but funnily I do not hate her. I wonder why. Maybe because I think that she did it to herself too, that she really will be that miserable without him? I wonder, but yes, sure we agree on that point. Alla: > I could not put the first book down till I finish it, thus I > found it pretty compelling. I do not want to reread it, but > this has a lot to do with the events in the last book. I just > cannot muster any sympathy for the characters anymore. zanooda: How did you manage to skip books 2 and 3 and go directly to book 4 :-)? These books don't have isolated plots, IMO, they are all intertwined. They are all one and the same story, and I think that without reading books 2 and 3 I wouldn't have understood what was going on in book 4. Well, it's too late for you now :-), and I totally understand the aversion you feel to the rest of the story. I would have probably felt the same way in your place. As it is, I only feel aversion to the fourth book alone... :-). Alla: Ah, sure I agree with you, they are intertwined and not the separate story, I however disagree with you that it is not possible to do so and understand everything that occurred in book 4 heh. You know me, I have no aversion to spoilers, so I just read the plot summaries on Wikipedia and it was not enough for me to understand the plot lol. As to why I did it, well there was a reason for that. See, as I mentioned before I enjoyed book 1 well enough, however, I started despising Bella at the end of book one already. S P O I L E R See, I found her desire to be with boy she loves so to be totally understandable, however however I found her way to do so to be selfish and quite despicable and this is just my opinion of course. Now if her thoughts were to wish for Edward to become human, I totally get it. She however wanted herself to become a vampire. And while I totally do not mind reading vampire stories and sometimes even love them, in my mind vampires are monsters, you know? I love vampire struggling for his humanity (a la Angel and Spike and Buffy), I love vampire understanding who he is and finding ways around it or not, I however cannot think of vampires as anything else but monsters and to me, no boy is worth being with if you have to become a monster herself. So anyway that is the reason why I skipped books 2 and 3, I just did not care much and to me, the book 1 stood pretty much on its own, however I caved in and did decide to find out how this all end heh. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 00:08:28 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:08:28 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Alla: > > Could you give an example of the book which you would apply the expression "bad writer, good storyteller" to? > Carol responds: Well, the one I described is a manuscript I edited that had the *potential* to be a good book in the hands of a better writer, but I couldn't fix the organizational and content flaws, only the style and mechanics. But to bring in writers familiar to people on this list, I would probably call Dickens a good storyteller (great characters, sometimes memorable dialogue) but a bad writer--in part because he was writing in monthly or weekly installments at high speed with no time to revise (and, in contrast to, say, Tolkien, no interest in revision). In consequence, some of his stories are rambling. The Pickwick Papers, of course, have no plot at all and aren't meant to, and some of his other books, especially the long ones, are weak on plot--lots of digressions and some occasionally sarcastic moralizing. Part of that is the era he was born into, of course. Tastes change and we modern people have grown impatient with exposition thanks to TV and movies. We (I'm speaking in general, not specifically of you and me) want action and to a lesser degree, character development, without any commentary, especially moralizing, by the narrator. I love "Moby Dick," to switch to another nineteenth-century author, but it's impossible to teach because of all the interruptions (essays) and the altered point of view (aCarollmost a loss of Ishmael's perspective) about a third of the way through) and all those weird experiments with soliloquies as if Melville is trying to be Shakespeare but sounding more like Colley Cibber (an eighteenth-century actor/playwright who tried to "improve" Shakespeare's plays). And look at the paragraph-long sentences in "Moby Dick." (As for punctuation, Melville asked his editor to "sprinkle in a lot of commas" because he didn't know where to put them!) So I suppose I would call Melville, at least in MD, a good storyteller but a bad writer and "Moby Dick" a seriously flawed masterpiece or a "great, bad book." Just some thoughts. I still think it's usually a matter of a good or potentially good story badly written. I'm not talking about Stephenie Meyer since I haven't read her books. Carol, who meant to mention Henry James, who has changed our ideas of what constitutes good writing, especially point of view, and yet his own works are dull as dust From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 00:31:48 2009 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:31:48 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: zanooda wrote: > > LOL! More than that, the simple fact that I have even read her books to the end should be considered a compliment to the writer, because I don't like love stories much, and I usually simply hate vampire stories, and hers is a little bit of both :-). Still, something is off in her books, even though I can't put my finger on it. > Carol responds: I just read an online excerpt from "Twilight," the first few pages of the first chapter. Setting aside tiny things like not knowing that Valley of the Sun is a proper noun and should be capitalized despite living in Phoenix, I agree that "something is off." She's relying too much on exposition (telling rather than showing), but even when she uses narrative strategies like description and dialogue, the story is lifeless. The narrator has no distinctive personality, no "voice," and the style is drab and dull. I didn't bother to finish the excerpt. Now I know why I like J. K. Rowling. She may have the math skills of a second grader and too many inconsistencies to count, but she's lively and she creates an imaginary world that immediately seems real, along with memorable (if not always realistic) characters--Dickens without the rambling and moralizing, I suppose. Carol, who has developed a serious aversion to exposition through overexposure to it From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 05:01:55 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:01:55 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: S P O I L E R > Now if her thoughts were to wish for Edward to become human, > I totally get it. zanooda: But this is physically impossible, so what's the point for her to wish that :-)? He can't turn back human, the poor boy can't even die properly, even when he wants to ;-(. But I agree with you about Bella becoming a vampire, and I must say that after she was not human anymore I lost all interest in the book :-). I think that the writer also understands that it's all wrong, that's why she invented other (and more important) reasons for her heroine to become a vampire, except for her desire to be with her love (who doesn't want to change her either). > Alla: > I however cannot think of vampires as anything else but > monsters and to me, no boy is worth being with if you > have to become a monster herself. zanooda: No, I don't see Meyer's vampires as monsters at all (I mean the Cullens, of course, not the evil vampires, LOL), especially someone like Carlisle, who didn't kill one single human in his very long life. I think someone who devoted his life to serving humans instead of killing them and feeding off them doesn't deserve to be called a monster :-). Some human serial killer is a thousand times more of a monster, IMO. However, I agree with you that it's creepy to wish to become one of them, that's why the last book felt for me like some kind of a not very good horror movie :-). > Alla: > So anyway that is the reason why I skipped books 2 and 3 zanooda: You didn't miss much, I guess :-). They (2 and 3) kind of drag on and on, with just a little action in the very end :-). From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 07:30:34 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 07:30:34 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? Message-ID: I don't want to get too deeply into the whole Twightlight thing since this is a Harry Potter group, but I think I can bring some relevance to the current discussion of goof writing and bad. To some extent Harry Potter is illogical in that the magic, the presence of magical people, not to mention a full range of magical beasts, and so forth are written as if they actually exist. But illogical and irrational as it might be it is written in such a casual style that we believe or accept that it does exist. By 'casual style' I mean that JKR doesn't try to convince us that they exist; she simply proceeds as if they do. Now, we could day Meyer's does the same, she proceeds as if vampires and werewolves did exist. But, let's look at the logic of that existance? If you were a young healthy 500 year old person (or however old Edward Cullen is) would you really be content to spend your life in a small town high school. You will have lived through history, you will have experienced countless wars, politicians and leaders that were good, inept, kind, cruel, vicious, and everything in between. Why would you want to spend a couple years in this town, another couple years in that town, perpetually hanging around with tyrannical teachers and whiny angst ridden school kids? That seems a flaw in the internal logic of the story. Now to some extend, as with Harry Potter, to be entertained, we must suspect critical logic and rational thinking. But, you can only just suspend it so far. I can understand the internal logic of Artemis Fowl or Harry Potter. But, I can't understand why someone as old and experienced as Edward Cullen and his 'family' would hang around the high school. That had to be painfully boring for them. I mean, I suppose they could be hanging around hoping to 'score' some young stuff. But, it doesn't seem like, from the internal logic of the movie, that is something they would want to do or would be able to do. We see how difficult it is for Cullen to bring his human girlfriend into the group. So, the 'score' path would not seem logical justification. I doubt that they could learn anything that they couldn't learn better from other sources. It would seem college would make more sense if they were intent on gathering modern knowledge that they could apply to their advantage. Also, one small investment made 500 years ago, would be worth a fortune today. So, dabbling in the background of big business even makes more sense than hanging around high school. In our discussion of Harry Potter, we have found or at least discussed what we feel are logical inconsistencies in the story. But these are very small things, that are only seen by deep probing critical minds. I don't that most people are even aware of them. But I think a 500 year old vampire that has nothing better to do than hang around high schools, is a far bigger illogical inconsistency, that the minor points we've brought up about Harry Potter. So, while Meyer was able to weave a nice romantic tale, you really have to look at the story with THE MOST uncritical eye to buy it. Sorry for running off on a tangent, but if I were 500 years old with the body of a 17 year old, I'm not sure I would hang around the small town high school. The first time was bad enough, I have no desire to repeat it over and over and over again for 500 years. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 07:35:12 2009 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (bboyminn) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 07:35:12 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Sorry for all the errors and typos in my post, should have proofread better. Though I'm sure you can figure it out. Steve From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 12:10:12 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:10:12 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > zanooda: > > But this is physically impossible, so what's the point for her to wish that :-)? He can't turn back human, the poor boy can't even die properly, even when he wants to ;-(. But I agree with you about Bella becoming a vampire, and I must say that after she was not human anymore I lost all interest in the book :-). I think that the writer also understands that it's all wrong, that's why she invented other (and more important) reasons for her heroine to become a vampire, except for her desire to be with her love (who doesn't want to change her either). Alla: I know, I was just saying that the reason to be with her love in that interpretation is not good for me, if she wished for him to become human no matter how impossible it was and then by accident or necessity she had become a vampire I would have still felt better. But when she coldly and selfishly wanted to be someone who drinks human blood, um, sorry I hate you stupid selfish twit, very very much. > > > > Alla: > > > > I however cannot think of vampires as anything else but > > monsters and to me, no boy is worth being with if you > > have to become a monster herself. > > > > zanooda: > > No, I don't see Meyer's vampires as monsters at all (I mean the Cullens, of course, not the evil vampires, LOL), especially someone like Carlisle, who didn't kill one single human in his very long life. I think someone who devoted his life to serving humans instead of killing them and feeding off them doesn't deserve to be called a monster :-). Some human serial killer is a thousand times more of a monster, IMO. However, I agree with you that it's creepy to wish to become one of them, that's why the last book felt for me like some kind of a not very good horror movie :-). Alla: I meant that all vampires to me are monsters by default, definitely some of them do not want to be monsters and exorcise monsters out, but to me it is still there. I know she did not want to portray Cullens as monsters, but no matter how "vegan" they are lol, they are still portrayed as fighting against wanting human blood, right? Of course they do not want to kill humans and Carlisle did not even, but even Edward did, right during his eh retreat, unless I am misremembering (before books started I mean, what he tells Bella). Like werewolves are monsters for me, and I do not consider Jacob or Remus Lupin to be one. And yes, fourth book gave me same creepy feeling, adding to that a big EWWWWWWWW when Jacob bonded with her daughter. Half of the book I was screaming, please do not be such self absorbing twit anymore than you already are, please you dolt, please let poor boy go, LET HIM GO. You have one, do not let him suffer any more (Jacob I mean). And no, I was not invested in them as a couple, or anything like that, as I said, I read books 2 and 3 in one page plot summary, no time to get invested in Jacob alone or Jacob and Bella, I did like his narrative though in book 4. And lo and behold here we go, he bonds to her newborn, EWWWW, just EWWW and Gross if you ask me. JMO, Alla From md at exit-reality.com Thu Oct 29 17:15:46 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:15:46 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000601ca58bb$75c9ab80$615d0280$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of zanooda2 zanooda: You didn't miss much, I guess :-). They (2 and 3) kind of drag on and on, with just a little action in the very end :-). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :> : : : : : : : : : : : : :> : : : : : : : : : : : : :> All the books dragged on and on and on and on. It was definitely a read to find out what happens, not because I care thing. The vampire baby, IMO, was a horrid idea, I never thought of the child as anything but creepy. To me it reeked of amateur writing, world building and storytelling on the heels of one good spark that began the first book. The characters spent so much time talking about everything and talking and talking and talking and rationalizing and explaining, it was clear Meyers was having issue buying her own ideas. I think three books, 400 pages each would have told the story just fine, I think the vamp baby with the seven year growth cycle had no rational explanation except that it promised a solid, happy ending. Once she was pregnant I rather wanted to toss the book in the garbage and was hoping she'd die, the end. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 19:49:57 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:49:57 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: S P O I L E R S > If you were a young healthy 500 year old person (or however old > Edward Cullen is) would you really be content to spend your > life in a small town high school. zanooda: I must admit that I didn't watch the movie, so I wouldn't know how it was explained there, but in the book Edward is *only* 100 year old, LOL. He was born in 1901 (iirc - I only read it once :-)) and became a vampire in 1918, during that Spanish flu epidemic, or how this was called. As for spending his life in high school, LOL, maybe you are right to some point, but I wouldn't have called it his entire life. Meyers' vampires don't sleep, so a few hours of school a day don't take much of their time :-). Vampires that drink human blood are nomads, but the Cullens are not, they live among humans, with Carlisle working at hospitals and all that, so they need some legitimate facade and more or less realistic story to present. As it is, they need to move every few years so that people couldn't notice that they don't age. All the Cullen "children" go to high school in every new place, because this way they can stay in every given place longer. Then they all go off to college, always to a different one, I assume, and study something different every time. They have superior mental ability and memory, and also unlimited time to study, so they are very educated. I don't know the details, but Edward, for example, speaks every language in the world and seems to know everything, LOL. So he doesn't really need school, it's just a facade :-). I suppose they wouldn't need all that if they went their separate ways (and sometimes they go away for a while), but they seem to need each other to go on with their "vegetarian" lifestyle :-). It's something like a support group, you know? "Hi, I'm Edward Cullen and I'm a vampire...", LOL. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 20:11:26 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:11:26 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: S P O I L E R > I meant that all vampires to me are monsters by default, > definitely some of them do not want to be monsters and > exorcise monsters out, but to me it is still there. zanooda: I don't know, to me Bella\Edward situation was a little creepy mostly because those vampires are *too* different, like some alien species, not because they are monsters in a moral way. They fight against their nature, trying not to be monsters, and I respect that :-). > Alla: > Of course they do not want to kill humans and Carlisle did > not even, but even Edward did, right during his eh retreat, > unless I am misremembering (before books started I mean, > what he tells Bella). zanooda: No, you remember right (I just read it last month, so I didn't forget it yet :-)). That was a "vigilante" stage of his life (or existence, more like), LOL. > Alla: > Like werewolves are monsters for me, and I do not consider > Jacob or Remus Lupin to be one. Jacob is not a real werewolf, like Lupin. He is a shape-shifter, like Sirius Black (Animagus, LOL). He transforms at will and he keeps his human mind... zanooda, noticing that this thread took somehow a Halloween-ish turn... vampires, werewolves, monsters... boo :-)! From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 29 20:17:15 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:17:15 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight In-Reply-To: <000601ca58bb$75c9ab80$615d0280$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > All the books dragged on and on and on and on. It was > definitely a read to find out what happens, not because > I care thing. The vampire baby, IMO, was a horrid idea, > I never thought of the child as anything but creepy. To > it reeked of amateur writing, world building and storytelling > on the heels of one good spark that began the first book. zanooda: Agreed on all counts :-). From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 00:45:45 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:45:45 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > > I don't want to get too deeply into the whole Twightlight thing > since this is a Harry Potter group, but I think I can bring some > relevance to the current discussion of goof writing and bad. Alla: Why not? I was always under impression that we can discuss on OTC anything we like - be it things about Harry Potter which does not directly discuss canon, or something completely unrelated to Harry Potter. :) Steve: > In our discussion of Harry Potter, we have found or at least > discussed what we feel are logical inconsistencies in the > story. But these are very small things, that are only seen by > deep probing critical minds. I don't that most people are > even aware of them. Alla: Very true, I can attest to bringing up to couple real life HP fans which I am friends with some things we discussed on Main and asking people if these things pull them out of the story and they were very amused. And they ARE critical thinkers, they just do not discuss every tiny detail of the stories as we do. Steve: > But I think a 500 year old vampire that has nothing better to > do than hang around high schools, is a far bigger illogical > inconsistency, that the minor points we've brought up about > Harry Potter. > > So, while Meyer was able to weave a nice romantic tale, you > really have to look at the story with THE MOST uncritical > eye to buy it. > > Sorry for running off on a tangent, but if I were 500 years > old with the body of a 17 year old, I'm not sure I would > hang around the small town high school. The first time was > bad enough, I have no desire to repeat it over and over and > over again for 500 years. > Alla: I agree with Zanooda, to me it works as their cover. I mean, I see what you are saying, but this is certainly something I can suspend disbelief and even to a degree understand. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 00:58:37 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:58:37 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: zanooda: I don't know, to me Bella\Edward situation was a little creepy mostly because those vampires are *too* different, like some alien species, not because they are monsters in a moral way. They fight against their nature, trying not to be monsters, and I respect that :-). Alla: Oh sure they were different, lol, they were different to such degree that I at some point wondered if we could truly call them vampires, since while I do not mind author making folklore creatures to be their own, this was a bit over the top IMO. However, again since they had an urge to drink blood, I still think of them as vampires. And yes, many vampires I like do fight against their nature in one way or another. Angel will always be my favorite example of course. But these ones, they are special of course, sparkling ones! Alla: > Like werewolves are monsters for me, and I do not consider > Jacob or Remus Lupin to be one. Zanooda: Jacob is not a real werewolf, like Lupin. He is a shape-shifter, like Sirius Black (Animagus, LOL). He transforms at will and he keeps his human mind... Alla: Yeah, he is Meyer!werewolf lol, same as Remus is JKR!werewolf. zanooda, noticing that this thread took somehow a Halloween-ish turn... vampires, werewolves, monsters... boo :-)! Alla: Let's make it real scary. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Scared yet? ;) From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 05:23:35 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:23:35 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bboyminn" wrote: > > I don't want to get too deeply into the whole Twightlight thing > > since this is a Harry Potter group, but I think I can bring some > > relevance to the current discussion of goof writing and bad. > Alla: > Why not? I was always under impression that we can discuss > on OTC anything we like zanooda: I thought so too :-). If we can discuss my English questions and brick houses, LOL... Besides, we don't discuss this twilight stuff seriously, like we discuss HP books. I have a friend who is a huge twilight fan (it was she who made me read it :-)), she is often at some twilight forums, where they discuss everything in detail, I suppose. Here it is just something that came up :-). > Alla: > I agree with Zanooda, to me it works as their cover. > I mean, I see what you are saying, but this is certainly > something I can suspend disbelief and even to a degree > understand. zanooda: Yeah, I find it more unbelievable that this Bella girl and her mother don't have cellphones :-). All this murder plot in the first book is based on them not being able to communicate directly. Come on, who doesn't have a cellphone these days :-)? Pleease... From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 05:41:09 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:41:09 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Oh sure they were different, lol, they were different to > such degree that I at some point wondered if we could > truly call them vampires zanooda: I kind of meant they are too different from us, that's why it creeps me out :-). But yes, they are different from other literary vampires, and honestly, I liked that. If they were sleeping in coffins and running away from garlic, I'm not sure I could have gotten to the end of the story :-). > Alla; > Angel will always be my favorite example of course. zanooda: I never watched Buffy :-). Did Angel or Spike sleep in coffins :-)? I've always found sleeping in coffins silly, although I read only one other book about vampires - "Interview with the Vampire". I'm not much into it... > Alla: > Let's make it real scary. > BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Scared yet? ;) zanooda, shaking with fright... :-) From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 06:13:44 2009 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:13:44 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steve/bboyminn: > In our discussion of Harry Potter, we have found or at least > discussed what we feel are logical inconsistencies in the > story. But these are very small things, that are only seen by > deep probing critical minds. I don't that most people are > even aware of them. SNIP > So, while Meyer was able to weave a nice romantic tale, you > really have to look at the story with THE MOST uncritical > eye to buy it. Ali: See, I would take a totally different view on this. I think I would put both JKR & Meyer in the same writing category of good storytellers and mediocre writers, and neither are on the level of, to cite someone whose name has been around the list, Jim Butcher. With Twilight, your problem doesn't seem to be the internal logic of the story but with the logic of the story as it relates to you. That's not a problem an author can solve nor should be expected to solve. You didn't understand how an old vampire could stand to go to high school, but within the context of the story, I think this explanation of why the Cullen "kids" were in high school was one of the few things Meyer did well (and despite owning the books and movie and liking the first book, I still think Meyer is more of a hack than Dan Brown, so I'm not likely to go defending her randomly). I will go so far as to say that, as far as internal logic, Twilight and HP are on the same level, a few stumbles but nothing major. The problem is, of course, JKR had a better handle on her story and her writing improved immensely as the books moved forward. With HP, certain elements just never worked for me (Snape, Lily, James, etc. - that entire previous generation had zero appeal, personally) but her writing flowed well enough that it overrode my brain's reactive instinct to jump out of the story. There was a certain appeal to the writing that compensated for the bad storytelling. Meyer's writing, however, was not noticeably better after book 1, and she seemed to have major issues reining in her story, so her lack of writing skills couldn't help alleviate the poor logic of her story. With Twilight, elements that didn't appeal (the baby, Jacob, the imprinting, and the oh so many others) had nothing to help them along. Meyer's writing was without flow, without technical skills, by which I mean her story ran away with her. Does the crazy baby story work logically within the story's logic? Yeah, I could see how it could. Do I care about it? No because there was no proper introduction of the story, no proper reasoning of the reason to introduce this pointless plot point - if the point of the story is to get Bella & Edward together, what does a baby have to do with it? Channeling my 12th grade English teacher: Meyer's editor apparently never asked "so what?" All in all, though, good storytellers and mediocre writers is how I would term both JKR and Meyer. JKR has the potential to be a great writer, I think - her writing, technical skills-wise, seemed to improve as the books progressed but I did think her story seemed to have less charm as her writing improved. With Meyer, I feel like maybe she's not cut out for the series writing - Twilight (as in the first book) had a bit of magic to it, the draft of Twilight retold (Midnight Sun?) from Edward's point of view shows glimmer of good writing with natural flow - because the bad writing didn't really become the show at center stage until the later books. Let's just all read Jim Butcher or Dumas, pere, in either the original French or a great translation. They've both got Meyer and JKR beat. :) ~Ali From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 06:27:14 2009 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:27:14 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: zanooda: > I never watched Buffy :-). Did Angel or Spike sleep in coffins :-)? I've always found sleeping in coffins silly, although I read only one other book about vampires - "Interview with the Vampire". I'm not much into it... > Ali: Angel did spend a lot of time in a mausoleum. Does that count? :) I loved Angel (not the show but the character), but I'm a sucker for the "man against himself" story (just has a lot more appeal for me than the external "man against man" or "man against nature" stories). Angel is definitely a part of the new age reimagining of the vampire as a monster struggling against his nature, so if that's your thing, it's worth checking out. I do agree about that sleeping in coffins thing, though, but I can understand it. Coffins do go along with the rising from the dead element of the mythos. ~Ali From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Oct 30 07:35:02 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:35:02 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: zanooda: >Come on, who doesn't have a cellphone these days :-)? Pleease... Geoff: I don't. I have a mobile - as do millions of folks in the UK. :-) From sherriola at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 14:35:59 2009 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:35:59 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00fb01ca596e$4d5b1590$e81140b0$@com> zanooda: I kind of meant they are too different from us, that's why it creeps me out :-). But yes, they are different from other literary vampires, and honestly, I liked that. If they were sleeping in coffins and running away from garlic, I'm not sure I could have gotten to the end of the story :-). Sherry: I like the Twilight series a lot. But I'd never willingly read any vampire fiction or watched vampire movies before. I think I read Interview with a vampire years ago and was unimpressed. I've never even read Dracula. When Twilight came out, I scoffed. It took two very good friends, friends who were not teenage girls, to convince me to give the first book a try. I was sure they were just Teenage vampire love stories. By the time I finally read Twilight, the first three books were out and fans were waiting breathlessly for the fourth. I was blown away by Twilight. I found the characters very likable and believable. Maybe it was the whole thing of the Cullens trying so hard to go against their nature, that constant internal struggle of theirs. I found the Cullens far more interesting even than Bella, most of the time, loved Charlie, hated Jacob, till the last book. I know many adults have said that they didn't find Bella's over the top reactions very believable, but I was a teenage girl once, and I remember how I felt and thought when I fell in love. Hell, I still tend to react and feel that way; I just know to keep it to myself! Yeah, Meyer repeats phrases too much. Have you noticed how often Edward chuckles? But overall, I felt she created compelling, conflicted and interesting characters, gave them a sort of mythical world and ran with it. I didn't like everything about them, but through the last few months since I lost my job and have been worried all the time, they've been good mind candy for me to read over again. No, to me they will never come up to the Harry Potter standard, but they are completely different. They make me feel comforted and happy in the end, because they live happily ever after. LOL. Sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 15:11:21 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:11:21 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: <00fb01ca596e$4d5b1590$e81140b0$@com> Message-ID: > Sherry: > I like the Twilight series a lot. But I'd never willingly read any vampire > fiction or watched vampire movies before. I think I read Interview with a > vampire years ago and was unimpressed. I've never even read Dracula. Alla: Oh I have not read Dracula or Interview with the Vampires either. I think I will definitely read the story where vampires are SOME of the characters, but do not like much the stories ONLY about vampires if that makes sense, too often they are of horror genre which I do not read. However, I adore Thomas for example from Jim Butcher's Dresden files and some other vampires, but again they are usually tend to be just some of the characters in the multilayered fantasy world. Sherry: >I > know many adults have said that they didn't find Bella's over the top > reactions very believable, but I was a teenage girl once, and I remember how > I felt and thought when I fell in love. Hell, I still tend to react and > feel that way; I just know to keep it to myself! Alla: That's a good point, maybe the whole point was to show indeed how much teenager can obsess and of course they can, but see the thing is book four to me was saying that this is what true love is and I am not sure about that. I mean, I understand everything Bella went through (as applied to RL of course, lol, not exactly what she went through about vampires) emotions wise in Twilight up till that last request and then it went all downhill for me. I guess there is a degree of selfishness and obsession over which I cannot sympathise even with love stricken teenager, which I was too of course at one point. > Sherry: > No, to me they will never come up to the Harry Potter standard, but they are > completely different. They make me feel comforted and happy in the end, > because they live happily ever after. LOL. Alla: Sure. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 15:27:56 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:27:56 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Let's just all read Jim Butcher or Dumas, pere, in either the original French or a great translation. They've both got Meyer and JKR beat. :) Alla: I believe I mentioned on this list more than once that I adore Dresden Files. I think for someone who wrote eleven books already Jim Butcher has amazing hold on his world building and storyline, but seriously I am not sure I agree he got JKR beat. I mean, no, no scratch that, by sheer quantity of writing, I totally agree that he has her beat by now and I also think that his writing skills are improving with every book he writes and OMG, I could not catch my breath when I read Turn Coat, literally, non stop action and twists and turns and yes I was even crying at one point. However, really, first couple of books in Dresden files? Especially first one, was really trying my patience to get through, really trying my patience. Now, of course I did get through since I started reading from book 6, found it awesome then went back and then read everything in order, but if I were to compare writing wise, I would have preferred PS?SS as a first book in the series. Of course they write for different audiences, and sure, Butcher's last books beat JKR, I agree, but again I think part of it is because his plan is so much more ambitious, I mean really 22 books? I hope he pulls it off, but so far I have not heard of the writer who managed to produce such series and whose books quality did not go down. Even Patrick O'Brian series, which I am now at book 10, while of admirable quality, I heard last couple of books were still not as good, but at least he managed to do seventeen or eighteen of top notch adventure, so yeah fingers crossed for Butcher. So yes of course over the course of eleven books his characters are developing with more complexity than JKR's ever would, but even over the course of eleven books, how many of his secondary characters are than complex? Obviously Harry and Thomas are very complex, Harry's mentor from White counsel is complex enough and couple other senior members and... Frankly I am not sure who else? We had been known Michael since book 3, right? What else do we know about him besides him being you know, Knight of the Cross and a very dedicated one at that? He is Harry's friend, he is willing to do anything to serve God, to get hurt and all. But I would have expected more character development from him, especially after what happened to him. You know, some doubts at least? Dumas, well you do not have to convince me, but do you know how many times I heard that it is dry and boring and language is archaic? I do not understand or agree, but well I am just saying that enough people do not consider Dumas to be a good writer. JMO, Alla From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 22:31:57 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:31:57 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "P. Alexis Nguyen" wrote: > You didn't understand how an old vampire could stand to go to > high school, but within the context of the story, I think this > explanation of why the Cullen "kids" were in high school was one of > the few things Meyer did well zanooda: My understanding is that Steve didn't read the book, he only watched the movie :-). You know how they change things in screen adaptations :-). The lifestyle of the Cullen family was probably not explained well enough in the movie. I don't know for sure, because I didn't see it yet, I only finished the books recently, but I heard that they skipped practically all their family history, Carlisle's life story etc. Also, I watched several trailers of the "New Moon" and I can tell that they changed some things, so this is probably the reason why it is not very clear from the movie alone why poor Edward is stuck in high school :-). > Ali wrote: > Let's just all read Jim Butcher or Dumas, pere zanooda: I was thinking of starting reading Butcher (I've read almost all of Dumas books when I was still a kid :-)), but I'm beginning Jane Austen at the moment, because I was always a little embarrassed that I haven't read any of her books. Only I don't know where to start - "Pride and Prejudice", maybe? > Geoff wrote: > I have a mobile - as do millions of folks in the UK :-) zanooda: Hehe, being all British, aren't we :-)? But they use "mobile" over here too, you know... :-). From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 22:43:23 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:43:23 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "P. Alexis Nguyen" wrote: > > zanooda: > > Did Angel or Spike sleep in coffins :-)? > Ali: > Angel did spend a lot of time in a mausoleum. Does that count? zanooda: That depends :-). Was he actually sleeping in there or just spending time :-)? > Ali wrote: > Angel is definitely a part of the new age reimagining of the vampire > as a monster struggling against his nature, so if that's your thing, > it's worth checking out. zanooda: I guess I like it, only if there is not too much of it :-). If the entire book/movie is *only* about this struggle (man against himself, as you say) without a good external story, I would probably get bored :-). > Ali: > I do agree about that sleeping in coffins thing, though, but I can > understand it. Coffins do go along with the rising from the dead > element of the mythos. Really? I thought vampires get recharged in there or something, LOL. zanooda, who is definitely not an expert on vampires... From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri Oct 30 23:26:53 2009 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:26:53 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" wrote: Geoff: > > I have a mobile - as do millions of folks in the UK :-) zanooda: > Hehe, being all British, aren't we :-)? But they use "mobile" over here too, you know... :-). Geoff: Well, of course I am. Mobile is a nicer word. Cellphone sounds like a hot line to the nearest jail. :-) From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 23:38:02 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:38:02 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: <00fb01ca596e$4d5b1590$e81140b0$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > It took two very good friends, friends who were not teenage > girls, to convince me to give the first book a try. zanooda: Same here :-). My friend, who is a Twilight fan, went as far as to give me the Twilight Saga book set as a present, LOL! It would have been just not polite not to read it after that :-)! > Sherry wrote: > I found the Cullens far more interesting even than > Bella, most of the time, loved Charlie, hated Jacob, > till the last book. zanooda: I liked the Cullens (especially Alice for some reason :-)), Bella in the first and second books, Charlie in all the books. As for Jake, I liked him a lot in the first book and in the first half of the second book, but then he started to really get on my nerves, especially in the third one :-). I liked him back in that part of the forth book where he is the narrator, although that part was about all the yucky stuff that I hated, unfortunately :-). > Sherry: > I know many adults have said that they didn't find Bella's > over the top reactions very believable, but I was a teenage > girl once, and I remember how I felt and thought when I fell > in love. zanooda: I don't know, to me Bella is not a normal teenage girl (except for hormones :-)), and her love is not just a teenage crush. It's more of a Romeo/Juliette kind of thing, destiny and all that, which is not supposed to be "believable", IMO :-). IIRC, it was stressed a few times in the books that Bella is *not* a teenager, remember how her mother said that Bella was born thirty five :-)? She takes care of her mother and father as if she is much older than them... If Bella was a typical teenage girl, Edward's love for her would have been close to pedophilia, if you ask me, LOL! He is a hundred years old, for crying out loud! If it was her youth and youthful behavior that attracted him, I personally would have felt suspicious :-). But, as I said, I emphasized with Bella in the first book (except for the love part :-)) - to me PE lessons at school were real torture, just like to her, LOL. > Sherry: > No, to me they will never come up to the Harry Potter standard, > but they are completely different. zanooda: I agree about HP being better and, of course, these books are completely different - Twilight is first of all a love story (with some elements of supernatural). Although there is a little bit of a thriller in it too, maybe :-). From sherriola at gmail.com Sat Oct 31 00:12:33 2009 From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:12:33 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: zanooda: I don't know, to me Bella is not a normal teenage girl (except for hormones :-)), and her love is not just a teenage crush. It's more of a Romeo/Juliette kind of thing, destiny and all that, which is not supposed to be "believable", IMO :-). IIRC, it was stressed a few times in the books that Bella is *not* a teenager, remember how her mother said that Bella was born thirty five :-)? She takes care of her mother and father as if she is much older than them... Sherry: I was much like Bella, actually. When my dad and his second wife split up when I was 13, I was the one who took care of my stepmom and my younger siblings till dad moved me out of the home. I was always like that, taking care of the people who should have been taking care of me. I never thought of it before, but maybe that's partly why Bella was mostly believable to me. I wanted to throttle her in the third book, most of the time, but that's beside the point! grin. zanooda: But, as I said, I emphasized with Bella in the first book (except for the love part :-)) - to me PE lessons at school were real torture, just like to her, LOL. Sherry: Yes, me too. well, I didn't have to take PE because of my disabilities, but in general, I never did fit in anywhere in high school, and it was four years of hell. > Sherry: Sherry From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 31 02:10:42 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:10:42 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff" wrote: > Cell phone sounds like a hot line to the nearest jail :-) zanooda: Or to a monastery... :-). From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 31 02:26:45 2009 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:26:45 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > Ali wrote: > > > Let's just all read Jim Butcher or Dumas, pere > > > zanooda: > > I was thinking of starting reading Butcher (I've read almost all of Dumas books when I was still a kid :-)), but I'm beginning Jane Austen at the moment, because I was always a little embarrassed that I haven't read any of her books. Only I don't know where to start - "Pride and Prejudice", maybe? Alla: Hey at least you know who Jane Austen is, I will never forget how some of my friends whom I made here in New York had no idea. Oy. Yes, I highly recommend starting with Pride and Prejudice :-) And when you start Butcher, please please even if you find book one slow, please hang in there, starting with book 3 it is SUCH A RIDE IMO of courae. And Thomas is so so hot if you ask me heh. From md at exit-reality.com Sat Oct 31 05:30:03 2009 From: md at exit-reality.com (Child Of Midian) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:30:03 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003801ca59eb$32bffcf0$983ff6d0$@com> -----Original Message----- From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dumbledore11214 Oy. Yes, I highly recommend starting with Pride and Prejudice :-)>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With Zombies. md From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 31 05:35:29 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 05:35:29 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Yes, I highly recommend starting with Pride and Prejudice :-) zanooda: Thanks :-). I couldn't decide between "Pride and Prejudice" and "Sense and Sensibility" :-). She wrote "Sense" earlier, I think, but I hear people talk about "Pride" much more :-). > Alla wrote: > And when you start Butcher, please please even if you find > book one slow, please hang in there zanooda: This is not a problem :-). I read really fast, so I usually skim through really boring parts :-). Then, after the book is finished, and if I like it, I go back and reread the boring parts more carefully :-). I do this with some Stephen King's books - I usually quite enjoy them, but there are some parts that I find annoyingly boring. So, not to loose interest, I do this skimming thing, LOL. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 31 05:57:32 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 05:57:32 -0000 Subject: Good story/bad writer: (Was: What a snob!)/SPOILER for Twilight and Dawn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > I was much like Bella, actually. When my dad and his second > wife split up when I was 13, I was the one who took care of my > stepmom and my younger siblings zanooda: Yeah, my mom and my stepdad had my half-brother when I was 15, and I was helping to take care of the baby a lot and doing other stuff around the house. I don't remember ever being a rebellious teenager :-). OTOH, my mom was never childish, like Bella's mother is, so in our family it was never like in this book, where daughter/mother roles are practically reversed. > Sherry: > I wanted to throttle her in the third book, most of the time zanooda: Yeah, all this "loving two guys at the same time" in the third book was very annoying. And confusing :-). And all this talking... :-). OTOH, there was a good battle at the end... :-). From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 31 19:19:13 2009 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:19:13 -0000 Subject: Writing - Good & Bad - Edward Cullen? In-Reply-To: <003801ca59eb$32bffcf0$983ff6d0$@com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Child Of Midian" wrote: > Yes, I highly recommend starting with Pride and Prejudice :-)>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > With Zombies. zanooda: Oh, "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" - I read this book review in EW. They think it's good, LOL! Is it even possible :-)? Anyway, very suitable for today...