ForumGarden

koan;464502 wrote: Samuel Barclay Beckett (13 April 1906 – 22 December 1989) was an Irish dramatist, novelist and poet. Beckett's work is stark, fundamentally minimalist, and, according to some interpretations, deeply pessimistic about the human condition. The perceived pessimism is mitigated both by a great and often wicked sense of humour, and by the sense, for some readers, that Beckett's portrayal of life's obstacles serves to demonstrate that the journey, while difficult, is ultimately worth the effort. Similarly, many posit that Beckett's expressed "pessimism" is not so much for the human condition but for that of an established cultural and societal structure which imposes its stultifying will upon otherwise hopeful individuals; it is the inherent optimism of the human condition, therefore, that is at tension with the oppressive world. His later work explores his themes in an increasingly cryptic and attenuated style. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1969 "for his writing, which—in new forms for the novel and drama—in the destitution of modern man acquires its elevation". Beckett was elected Saoi of Aosdána in 1984.



What I'm quoting is from "Waiting for Godot" and the bio is the first result in a google search of his name. You could have done that part yourself and appeared much wiser than you are.


Ok he's an interesting dude

In practice, The Theatre of the Absurd departs from realistic characters, situations and all of the associated theatrical conventions. Time, place and identity are ambiguous and fluid, and even basic causality frequently breaks down. Meaningless plots, repetitive or nonsensical dialogue and dramatic non-sequiturs are often used to create dream-like, or even nightmare-like moods.

yorkster;464504 wrote: Ok he's an interesting dude


I have no interest in being wise nor do I look to literature to legitimise myself or put others down. when I speak of multi-culturism is speak first hand.

yorkster;464511 wrote: I have no interest in being wise nor do I look to literature to legitimise myself or put others down. when I speak of multi-culturism is speak first hand.


you've advanced your interests with this post then. well done.

koan;464506 wrote: In practice, The Theatre of the Absurd departs from realistic characters, situations and all of the associated theatrical conventions. Time, place and identity are ambiguous and fluid, and even basic causality frequently breaks down. Meaningless plots, repetitive or nonsensical dialogue and dramatic non-sequiturs are often used to create dream-like, or even nightmare-like moods.


You are employing an all too familier tactic here.

yorkster;464519 wrote: You are employing an all too familier tactic here.


yep. it's called "informing the thread"

you find the comparison faulty?

VLADIMIR:

One out of four. Of the other three, two don't mention any thieves at all and the third says that both of them abused him.

ESTRAGON:

Who?

VLADIMIR:

What?

ESTRAGON:

What's all this about? Abused who?

VLADIMIR:

The Saviour.

ESTRAGON:

Why?

VLADIMIR:

Because he wouldn't save them.

koan;464517 wrote: you've advanced your interests with this post then. well done.


So we revert to the moral high ground. Your funny..... metaphsycal Ha ha ha pls stop trying to mind ******* people & loose your "EGO"

ESTRAGON:

Who believes him?

VLADIMIR:

Everybody. It's the only version they know.

ESTRAGON:

People are bloody ignorant apes.

(He rises painfully, goes limping to extreme left, halts, gazes into distance off with his hand screening his eyes, turns, goes to extreme right, gazes into distance. Vladimir watches him, then goes and picks up the boot, peers into it, drops it hastily.)

VLADIMIR:

Pah!

(He spits. Estragon moves to center, halts with his back to auditorium.)

ESTRAGON:

Charming spot. (He turns, advances to front, halts facing auditorium.) Inspiring prospects. (He turns to Vladimir.) Let's go.

VLADIMIR:

We can't.

ESTRAGON:

Why not?

VLADIMIR:

We're waiting for Godot.

yorkster;464527 wrote: So we revert to the moral high ground. Your funny..... metaphsycal Ha ha ha pls stop trying to mind ******* people & loose your "EGO"


KOAN

But it's going well

YORKSTER

Well? What?

KOAN

You've quoted the right post.

YORKSTER

Post? I don't see a post. (looks around) Ah. You'll not fool me.

KOAN

It's not my boot

YORKSTER

It had better not.

KOAN

I left my boot in London. Best place for it, really.

sorry but i have done the hit a tree at 70 mph & done the re-think which goes with it. Unfortunate thing is I also have an intimate knowledge of Muslims......//Well aint I the small minded racist

koan;464530 wrote: KOAN

But it's going well

YORKSTER

Well? What?

KOAN

You've quoted the right post.

YORKSTER

Post? I don't see a post. (looks around) Ah. You'll not fool me.

KOAN

It's not my boot

YORKSTER

It had better not.

KOAN

I left my boot in London. Best place for it, really.


now this is interesting but i do think you should lean to think like Ghandi

yorkster;464537 wrote: now this is interesting but i do think you should lean to think like Ghandi


I think we should let Godot decide. When he arrives, that is.

yorkster;464537 wrote: now this is interesting but i do think you should lean to think like Ghandi


well you have made me laugh like hell

& i gotta go to bed now. by eck thas kiked me as. good night

might as well sleep.

VLADIMIR:

Extraordinary the tricks that memory plays! (Estragon tries to speak, renounces, limps to his place, sits down and begins to take off his boots. To Boy.) Well?

BOY:

Mr. Godot—

VLADIMIR:

I've seen you before, haven't I?

BOY:

I don't know, Sir.

VLADIMIR:

You don't know me?

BOY:

No Sir.

VLADIMIR:

It wasn't you came yesterday?

BOY:

No Sir.

VLADIMIR:

This is your first time?

BOY:

Yes Sir.

(Silence.)

VLADIMIR:

Words words. (Pause.) Speak.

BOY:

(in a rush). Mr. Godot told me to tell you he won't come this evening but surely tomorrow.

( Silence.)

ah but your playing to a gallery of like minded people. all naive & i suspect all guardien readers & public sector workers. nick griffin loves your kind as you have given him & his people the window into local government.Intolerant liberals have no idea of the damage they have done. Now feel free to use a quote to patronise me or may be you could even speak for your self but i doubt that

yorkster;464567 wrote: ah but your playing to a gallery of like minded people. all naive & i suspect all guardien readers & public sector workers. nick griffin loves your kind as you have given him & his people the window into local government.Intolerant liberals have no idea of the damage they have done. Now feel free to use a quote to patronise me or may be you could even speak for your self but i doubt that


What no thanks to the foreigner for introducing you to a classic piece of literature?

I thought you were going to sleep. No rest for the wicked, I suppose. :sneaky:

koan;464573 wrote: What no thanks to the foreigner for introducing you to a classic piece of literature?

I thought you were going to sleep. No rest for the wicked, I suppose. :sneaky:


Sorry for being so ungratefull but im just coming to terms with the fact that the sport ain't literature. maybe i'll switch to the guardian.

being a foreigner is not an issue (suprised)

Sneaky quotes are ok when they make me laugh.

My God i'm turning into a liberal. I think Ill have to get of my ass & leave the house & experience some reality. That should cure it

Sorry i missed this to busy reading spots naive **** & williams arument for the sake of arument are you a driud brin?

Bryn Mawr;457501 wrote: Civilised is being able to interact with your fellows in a civil manner. The foulmouthed outburst you produced was not civilised.

So how civilised is moral superiority? very british but not my british



Nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing - if you cannot keep from personnal insults (and coming out with that within you first 10 posts suggests very strongly that you cannot) they the Garden is better off without you.

State your point. Please do not hide. what you mean is you don't like my posts which is fine by me. Simple fact is I am more honest about being rude



No. It was a subject I would rather not have become involved in - especially when it became a mutual appreciation society.

Well arnt you the main guy..It seems to me you are attempting to deliver a velvet coated hammer & my reaction is to use a word that the american english filter will miss. Tosser

THE SPECIALITY OF A LIBERAL IS TO BE INTOLERANT WHILE MAINTAINING THE MORAL HIGH GROUND



You are the one who denied your ancester's association with the British Empire.

I did not intend to deny my ancesters association from the Empire but i did attept to suggest they did not benefit from it. I will not bore you with the history of the west yorkshire mill towns .

You are also the one who, with zero provocation, decended into personnal insult and rudeness - very un-British Sir.


TRUE. but im not a fake like you IE i do not hide my intolerance behind fake tolerance

Only just noticed this post ru a student?

yorkster;466868 wrote: Only just noticed this post ru a student?Spot howls with involuntary helpless laughter and heads to the kitchen to wash up

It's either the speling or the inexorable underlying communism, I bet.

spot;466887 wrote: Spot howls with involuntary helpless laughter and heads to the kitchen to wash up

It's either the speling or the inexorable underlying communism, I bet.


Nope your just a pathetic snob & an intolernt snob at that

yorkster;466919 wrote: Nope your just a pathetic snob & an intolernt snob at thatThank you Yorkster. When you've used online forums a bit longer you'll realise that personal attacks are entirely self-defeating. Until then, do please carry on.

"Spot howls with involuntary helpless laughter and heads to the kitchen to wash up"

not cool to talk about yourself in the first person. a sure sign of an out of control ego.

yorkster;466925 wrote: not cool to talk about yourself in the first person. a sure sign of an out of control ego.When you've used forums a bit longer you'll realise that self-referencing is a bit different online than it is in person, too. It's a sufficiently unsubtle medium that it can take the weight. Keep trying though, you'll get the hang of it in a few years.

spot;466922 wrote: Thank you Yorkster. When you've used online forums a bit longer you'll realise that personal attacks are entirely self-defeating. Until then, do please carry on.


Pan's do tend to call the kettle black. even hypocritical pc pans with a 1977 political agenda.

yorkster;466925 wrote: "Spot howls with involuntary helpless laughter and heads to the kitchen to wash up"

not cool to talk about yourself in the first person. a sure sign of an out of control ego.


Actually, it is very "cool"

It's something a lot of forum regulars do. I've noticed the popularity of the style growing into a bit of a fad. That ought to horrify spot well enough. He's.....trendy :wah:

yorkster;466931 wrote: Pan's do tend to call the kettle black. even hypocritical pc pans with a 1977 political agenda.What *would* be uncool would be to ask the purpose of the apostrophe. Make sure you never make that sort of mistake, my son.

1977 was... Dennis Healey squeezing the rich until the pips squeaked? Farmer Jim jetting back from holiday when the world caved in? Ted Heath rounding the Solent during Cowes Week pretending to be Han Solo? That wretched woman planning her destruction of society into a disconnected set of individuals puking champagne outside the Stock Exchange every evening between six and seven? Do expand, if you feel it's that interesting a year.

koan;466934 wrote: Actually, it is very "cool"

It's something a lot of forum regulars do. I've noticed the popularity of the style growing into a bit of a fad. That ought to horrify spot well enough. He's.....trendy :wah:


sorry i must have missed something in my old age. Like er ....um spot is trendy... If im not carefull il trip over my flares

yorkster;466949 wrote: sorry i must have missed something in my old age. Like er ....um spot is trendy... If im not carefull il trip over my flares


no. you just missed it. it's ok. the joke still lives with or without you.

btw it is pots not pans and in the scenario the poster incessantly forgets that both are black not just one or the other (by using it you are admitting guilt)

spot;466939 wrote: What *would* be uncool would be to ask the purpose of the apostrophe. Make sure you never make that sort of mistake, my son.

1977 was... Dennis Healey squeezing the rich until the pips squeaked? Farmer Jim jetting back from holiday when the world caved in? Ted Heath rounding the Solent during Cowes Week pretending to be Han Solo? That wretched woman planning her destruction of society into a disconnected set of individuals puking champagne outside the Stock Exchange every evening between six and seven? Do expand, if you feel it's that interesting a year.


kinda thought it was a reaction commie infiltration of the unions which caused all that. I mean isn't that why maggie was given the ok to kick ass

koan;466955 wrote: no. you just missed it. it's ok. the joke still lives with or without you.

btw it is pots not pans and in the scenario the poster incessantly forgets that both are black not just one or the other (by using it you are admitting guilt)


straws

yorkster;466957 wrote: kinda thought it was a reaction commie infiltration of the unions which caused all that. I mean isn't that why maggie was given the ok to kick assGood God, that was Red Robbo, you're an entire decade out. Maggie got her shot because of an unfortunate photo of Michael Foot at the cenotaph in what the press unfairly insisted was a donkey jacket. You can always read a book about the period first, you know.

spot;466961 wrote: Good God, that was Red Robbo, you're an entire decade out. Maggie got her shot because of an unfortunate photo of Michael Foot at the cenotaph in what the press unfairly insisted was a donkey jacket. You can always read a book about the period first, you know.


so it was a donkey jacket! Thanks for educating me

spot;244442 wrote: Chapter and verse I already have, thank you. The article in the Guardian covers the aftermath and gives a far better summary than I could manage - people following the thread would do well to read it, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story ... 66,00.html

Pulling the initial broadcast - which postponed it from May to August eighteen months ago - seems to have been strongly influenced by the timing, since European Elections were due ten days afterward and a foul campaign was being run at the time in Yorkshire by our far-right and racially bigoted British National Party. I'm not at all surprised that the police were fearful of violence in the aftermath of such a broadcast. The relevant condition triggering the postponement is ""No programme should be transmitted which is intended to stir up racial hatred or, taking into account the circumstances, is likely to do so". The elections fell well into the category of "taking into account the circumstances".

The core of the Guardian argument - "Presenting this abuse as an Asian problem does not help girls of any race; it tells us nothing about why or how it occurs. If we really want to be brave, we should stop blaming a marginalised community and take responsibility for a problem that goes far beyond Bradford" - speaks volumes.


So spot tell me all about it.

yorkster;466998 wrote: So spot tell me all about it.


at the moment spot is saying "zzzzzzzz"

koan;467004 wrote: at the moment spot is saying "zzzzzzzz"


Just followed the link you put on your posts. my word your a deep one. The most interesting angle is, You trumpet the unprovable but yet in other posts you rely on quotes to justify yourself. Just a thought

yorkster;464533 wrote: sorry but i have done the hit a tree at 70 mph & done the re-think which goes with it. Unfortunate thing is I also have an intimate knowledge of Muslims......//Well aint I the small minded racist


My father many years ago served in the army in Egypt and thought all arabs were lying cheating thieving scumbags who would steal your blankets while you slept on them. Is it the religion or the place?

twizzel;467506 wrote: My father many years ago served in the army in Egypt and thought all arabs were lying cheating thieving scumbags who would steal your blankets while you slept on them. Is it the religion or the place?


twiz, the religion is a dark brotherhood, a crime committed against a non member is not considered a crime in fact a crime committed against a non member can be legitimised as a form of jihad.

yorkster;467515 wrote: twiz, the religion is a dark brotherhood, a crime committed against a non member is not considered a crime in fact a crime committed against a non member can be legitimised as a form of jihad.


I've heard of that. "Fair Game". Those Scientologists sure are nutty.

koan;467542 wrote: I've heard of that. "Fair Game". Those Scientologists sure are nutty.


it would be appreciated if you would stop making me laugh. So whats happened to good old fashioned rudeness & moral superiority ? The last thing i wish to find here is a genuinly tolerant liberal

I am willing to bet that the violence is mostly between blacks and Asians. Until we repatriate aliens from our rightful homeland, the problem will continue to get worse. You cannot force diversity, liberals. You are wrong. Deal with it.

Irmin;664702 wrote: I am willing to bet that the violence is mostly between blacks and Asians. Until we repatriate aliens from our rightful homeland, the problem will continue to get worse. You cannot force diversity, liberals. You are wrong. Deal with it.


You can force repatriation, though? I think not. Deal with it. You picked a losing team to bat for.

spot;664703 wrote: You can force repatriation, though? I think not. Deal with it. You picked a losing team to bat for.
Methinks he's just happy to swing the bat.

Accountable;664725 wrote: Methinks he's just happy to swing the bat.


This thread is a deliberate trap, it draws the WASPs in like a honey trap draws wasps. The OP is currently floating around the site calling himself Victor Meldrew at the moment, he keeps changing his name thinking people will forget his previously expressed attitudes.

So waht do YOU propose to do about racial crime then?!

Psst. Most hate crimes are committed by non-whites againts whites but the media refuses to report them, mostly olny those carried out by whites. No doubt everyone up and down the country has heard of poor old Stephen Lawrence.

I might let my Alsation **** on his plaque one day.

Irmin;666229 wrote: So waht do YOU propose to do about racial crime then?!

Psst. Most hate crimes are committed by non-whites againts whites but the media refuses to report them, mostly olny those carried out by whites. No doubt everyone up and down the country has heard of poor old Stephen Lawrence.

I might let my Alsation **** on his plaque one day.


irmin are you a complete idiot

Irmin;666229 wrote: So waht do YOU propose to do about racial crime then?!Is racial crime worse than other types of crime? Do the other races punch harder than yours or something?

Irmin;666229 wrote: So waht do YOU propose to do about racial crime then?

Nothing. Crime is crime. There is no such thing as racial crime.

Psst. Most hate crimes are committed by non-whites againts whites but the media refuses to report them, mostly olny those carried out by whites.



And since the media reported wrong, you got your numbers from where?

No doubt everyone up and down the country has heard of poor old Stephen Lawrence.



Who?


....

RedGlitter;666490 wrote: Who?England - and I exclude the rest of the UK from this - had a hefty debate nearly ten years ago about whether the police in London at the time were an incompetent bunch of tossers who couldn't organize a drinking session in a brewery or whether they were institutionally racist. The official verdict was institutionally racist, and a stack of changes were implemented to make sure they couldn't stay that way. I'm not sure they called it right, I think a verdict of drooling power-crazed wankers would have come far closer to the mark. The trigger for the enquiry was the shoddy nature of the investigation into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, a blameless black British teenager living in London who was murdered in April 1993 at the age of 18.

The police force these days is an entirely different beast, I think we're about to see a golden age in forensic brilliance and not before time.

It's very difficult to quote on FG when people put their own text inside quote markers.

"Nothing. Crime is crime. There is no such thing as racial crime."

Only when the victim of an apparent 'hate crime' (should be no such thing as that either) happens to be non-white.