Monday, May 07, 2007

Ciao, Ragazzo

Navy Buddy is shipping out in a submarine for his four years of "at sea" navy requirement. He brought all his worldly possessions to my house to store for the next four years, and I spent a lot of time finding places for his things.

Navy Buddy lives pretty light except for one aspect: books. The boy is out of control with books. While putting up his books, I found four copies of Milton's Paradise Lost. Four copies! But more importantly, I found Navy Buddy in those books. Nothing says more about his personality than those boxes of books I just went through.

There's the giant shelf of what I call "sciency" books, which makes him laugh. That's his advanced Calculus books, all his math textbooks, really, his physics pulp that he reads for pleasure like I read James Bond novels. It reminded me that he was only one or two classes away from a math degree when he gave up the pursuit of that and finished out with an Economics degree instead and joined the Navy. I put those on the shelf as well. Including the one for the Labor Economics class we had together, where one of our favorite professors went to Ireland and died suddenly and too young. We were both pretty upset.

There's the shelf of his Isaac Asimov collection. He first got me into the Foundation Trilogy, which I absolutely loved (and which beat out Lord of the Rings for a prize, by the way). I didn't expect to love Sci-fi, but I loved Asimov.

I put up his Ayn Rand book Atlas Shrugged (I stole the rest of his collection four years ago, and it's on my bookshelf now). We once played around with being Objectivists, and then decided that they were a bunch of assholes, at least at the university level. But it was fun when it was new.

I put up his Great Books collection, in hardback. I remember how excited he was to get them, as though all he had to do was read through that collection and "knowledge" would happen. They're awfully pretty.

I put up his little collection of Russian short fiction plus Dostoevsky. Most of that he snagged from the office of my favorite professor who was retiring. I always pouted that they were rightfully mine, as I was the prof's pet, but I guess it all worked out in the end. ;) I had even tagged those books with the year and name of the prof. I'd forgotten I'd done that.

I found his Japanese/English dictionary that I'd bought him for Christmas some years ago. It's in a nice smooth leather cover. It was more expensive than I could afford at the time, but I wanted to get him something nice. I found the rest of his Japanese language books. He was a "FLIE" major when we met--Foreign Language and International Economics. He also studied German (I put those books up, too) language and culture, and is still reasonably decent at it. I hope when he gets out, he considers getting a Master's in Foreign Languages & Literature under the G.I. bill. Languages were always so easy and natural for him.

I found The Sorrows of Young Werther by Goethe, that I'd apparently given over to him after I was done with it some years ago. I had written in it. I had completely forgotten.

I wonder what my own collection of books says about me.

We may have had our differences, but I hope he finds his peace.

-- Virgil

22 Comments:

Blogger Meg_L said...

I have to laugh at the multiple copies of Paradise Lost.

I recently was reorganizing books (with unpacking them after returning from our sabbatical) and discovered that Hubby has 4 copies of Dante's trilogy. FOUR! All by different translators. He did not appreciate my suggestion that we might be able to thin it down a little.

Monday, 07 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We once played around with being Objectivists, and then decided that they were a bunch of assholes, at least at the university level."

I could argue that our world would be a lot better off if Objectivists were in charge. Why?

- No bullshit war on drugs that incarcerates millions of black people, mexicans and teenagers

- No Theocratic Horseshit, including stoning of arab girls, fundie indoctrination, arrests for blasphemy, legalized persecution for different beliefs, maniacs like Pat Robertson with power, war on science, etc.

- No people to collect welfare checks while spending their lives watching TV

- No eminent domain thievery of houses/stores/farmland to give to friends of politicians

- No stupid international wars

- cheaper food, because american food would be cheaper without the US government

- No political prisoners

- No corporate welfare

- No oppressive legalized monopolies that exploit consumers

- No forcing of kids to go to school to be indoctrination

- Cheaper health care without burdensome red tape or crooked protectionism

- Corrupt or inferior businesses would go out of business sooner without govt. handouts, as a result, business and commerce would improve across the board

- Lower crime due to higher number of citizens owning guns

- Small businesses would have an easier time to start up without piles of regulations or high taxes

- Housing would be cheaper (don't believe me? Compare places like Houston or San Antonio, Texas to the blue state cities)

- Higher number of medical doctors without the current bloated system to shoot so many down, which would increase the supply of service, which in turn, reduces prices

- No worry about the things you say, since the first amendment would actually be taken seriously by people other than the ACLU.

- No worry of being censored for artists by some cranky bureaucrat who finds the artwork to be 'offensive'

- Get to watch movies on TV the way they were meant to be shown, without the nonsensical bleeping or scene cutting

- Could listen to Howard Stern without forking over Twelve bucks a month

- The Patriot Act would have never been written

- The Federal Reserve would either not exist (government would actually print own money), or there would be competing agencies who would do the same thing, held fully accountable to the american people

- No personal income tax, since it only represents 12% of federal income. The people obviously need their money more than the government

- No inflation, due to money being held to gold standard

- Land would be cheaper, since people would be able to use the federally owned lands as they see fit

- Unions would be better off, as there would be few to no restrictions on striking, organizing, associating or collectivizing. There would be no Taft-hartley act around to enrich managers, at the expense of employees

- Supersonic airplane usage would be more frequent, as the ban over the USA would be lifted

- People would go into outer space sooner, as rocket liftoff restrictions would be gone

- far Cheaper electricity due to liberal usage of Nuclear Power, like in france and the rest of europe

- As a result, cheaper fresh water, due to the fact that nuclear powered desalinization is far cheaper than the regular kind


I mean, yeah, those Objectivists may come across as cold, but I will take an Objectivist over a Neo-conservative, a nanny stater, an islamofascist or a communist any day of the week.

Besides, the aforementioned groups are actually real threats in today's world, wheras Objectivism has a much smaller following.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

Meg--I can sort of see the different translators. He had multiple copies of a lot of different books, but when you have something translated by Alexander Pope, that's sort of something to hang on to even if there is a more modern, readable copy, know what I mean? I had set out two boxes of books he didn't even know he had!

Mad Dog--babe, you're going to have to learn how to post on a blog! That's wa-ay to long a comment for a blog. But to address your point, they are also anti-environmentalism and zero social services. That's just not a sustainable viewpoint in the world we live in.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Mad Dog--babe, you're going to have to learn how to post on a blog!"

I've done it numerous times! Just type stuff, add your name, and add the code you see in the security image :)


"anti-environmentalism and zero social services"

I can understand being against anit-environmentalism, but what kinds of social services are they against that you consider crucial?

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"That's just not a sustainable viewpoint in the world we live in."

I find the current system to be unsustainable, as well as unacceptable, leading into tyranny.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

MD-I'm referring to the length of your posts, of course.

"No international wars?" Not so. Go to their Ayn Rand Institute website and find all the stuff they have about Israel, etc. Obj. are in favor of nuking the living daylights out of any country that doesn't fall in line with their American interests first agenda. I don't agree with that.

Zero social services means zero--nada, zip. And I work in an area where people would be in a far worse position without social services (which includes things like educational revenue)than they are now. It's a misconception that people stay home & watch TV & collect welfare, and that equals "social services." Social services also includes things like vaccinations for kids under five years of age for free--which is why we don't suffer from things like polio epidemics anymore.

I, for one, don't understand being anti-environmental, because if you read their material (and you have read it, right, you're not just asking me to give you the Cliff Notes version of it?), you'll see that they are 100% business interests at the expense of everything else.

You wouldn't have your clean water with Objectivists, because they wouldn't have any restraints on the use of the environment. Your air would also be a lot nastier.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know I am not anti-environmental. Is there any particular ideology you claim to be your favorite?

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

I like the Greens, but as we've talked about it before, I'm not so sure I understand/agree with how they plan on pulling them off. I just got accused of "always being too logical", so I guess I still have some objectivism in me. I'm really a hodgepodge of things. No one thing stands out to me over others.

I'm busy checking into the label of "secular humanist", though.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just want to let you know that I am not trying to make you feel uncomfortable about anything. I would never intend to bully anyone.

There are other related factions that interest me, including the Georgist Libertarians, the Anarcho-Syndicalists, the Rothbardians, Anarcho-Socialists, Gift-economists, Democrat Freedom Caucus, Free Liberals and perhaps a few others that I will think of after I posted this message.

Unlike the Objectivists, I feel that reason is a tool, rather than the master. More specifically, I think of reason as a tool of emotion. It is used by emotion to achieve goals, or change course if the goals are not obtainable.

I believe emotion is what seperates life from automation.

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

Sweetie, it takes a lot more to bully me than anything you've posted here. Ask my sister's new puke of a boyfriend. Quite the story there. Maybe I'll blog about it.

I agree with reason being a tool rather than a master. The gift-economist thing pricks my ears because of my degree! :)

Tuesday, 08 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is your degree?

Wednesday, 09 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

I have a bachelor's of science in Economics & a bachelor's of arts in English. I did a double degree as an undergraduate. Next Spring I'll have a Master's in English and a few years after that a PhD in English with a concentration in Composition & Rhetoric. But I have a secret love for Economics.

Wednesday, 09 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who are your favorite economists, and what schools of economics do you follow (Austrian, Chicagoan, Keynesian, etc.)?

Wednesday, 09 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

I really liked Ludwig von Mises, who, I guess, is part of the Austrian school. I like Milton Friedman a whole lot. He makes the most sense to me. Adam Smith, while cliche, was a fantastic experience in undergrad for me. I had a whole class devoted just to the Wealth of Nations, and my prof let me write a paper on the Wealth of Nations and a work of literature called Tom Jones, which the prof claimed he had been waiting years to see.

Slight tangent, but I often did well in my Econ classes solely because of literature. For example, on a particularly difficult class on the economics of money (run be a prof who was a former Objectivist and who helped me get over the gold standard), I got to write an analogy of The Wizard of Oz (which was written as an economic metaphor) comparing the Wizard to Alan Greenspan. Got an A, lol.

Did you know that Alan Greenspan was a former follower of Ayn Rand? He wrote the best essay on the gold standard I've read, which is really ironic, considering the job he was offered. Apparently he and her talked about going to the Fed Reserve, and he thought he could "fix it" from the inside, while she thought it should fall apart and die, to be replaced by something better. They didn't have hard feelings, though.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

Wow. There were all kinds of grammatical malfunctions in that last post. Sheesh. Give me a few weeks off, and it all falls apart.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I personally think the Federal Reserve should die, because it is a private monopoly that does nothing to help this nation. It does not perform a single function that the treasury department can and should do. All it does is print our money, but with added fees. 13% percent of the federal budget goes to pay for the interest on our debt. The Federal Reserve is no more Federal than Federal Express.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

Have you read Ayn Rand?

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, just loose quotes here and there. But I intend to read her.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Blogger Meg_L said...

Mad Dog, If you haven't read Ayn Rand, you should avoid commenting on her. I was a big fan while I was in high school an read most of her novels, I still wouldn't try to argue about her views. Though Atlas Shrugged probably helped me be a better engineer. (BTW, I skipped a lot of your discussion, so if my point is out of touch, please excuse me.)

Anyway, Contemplator, I couldn't find a free link to this article from the WSJ, but with your connections at a university, you may be able to, so I'll give you the link. Hubby pulled the article for me, and I've kept it around.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/wsj/access/1217170611.html?dids=1217170611:1217170611&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Feb+16%2C+2007&author=Tunku+Vararadajan&pub=Wall+Street+Journal&edition=Eastern+edition&startpage=W.13&type=8_90&desc=WEEKEND+JOURNAL

I love the line "... a cultured man should have very few friends but very many books."

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have not commented on Ayn Rand specifically. I have also not read her books. But I have read about the things that she stands for, namely Objectivism. That is what we were talking about.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Blogger contemplator said...

Meg's point stands. You can't comment on Objectivism without having read her books and philosophy. You might have scanned Peikoff's (spelling?)work with the Ayn Rand Institute, but that's like reading the political documents of the early 1800s without having read the Federalist & Anti-Federalist papers. The philosophical points of Objectivism are in her books, and her literature is used as the basis for explaining the stance the ARI takes on certain issues. So you have to know her work first.

Plus, in one of your previous comments you listed a whole bunch of things they actually don't stand for.

I'd get started with her book "For the New Intellectual" if you want a smattering of her stuff. It's got short essays on her philosophy.

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You might have scanned Peikoff's (spelling?)work with the Ayn Rand Institute"


It seems like you are thinking of that squirrel, who has posted that quote as his signature :)

Thursday, 10 May, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home


View My Stats