Heinlein Readers Discussion Group

Thursday 07-24-2003 9:00 P.M. EDT

Heinlein's Non Fiction

From: "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 7:03 PM

There is a sentiment which I have seen attributed to Larry Niven: We have a term for those who confuse an author's views with his characters', "asshole." Luckily enough, we have many examples of Robert Heinlein talking in his own voice. In _Expanded Universe_ we have forewards to his then-lesser-known short stories, and we have several short peices related to his "world saving" attempts. In _Requiem_ we have his Guest of Honor speeches. _Take Back Your Government_ and _Tramp Royale_ are two whole books of nothing but the master's own voice.

So how well did the world saving hold up? How accurate were the predicitons? Looking back as we can into what has been released about the Soviet Union in the Cold War Days, how accurate was his world-view? How do his travel observations from about fifty years ago compare with what we might find in South America or Oz-land today? Did his political suggestions hold water when they were written? Are they useful now?

So, lets talk about it July 24, and 26 and keep alive our custom of talking about Heinlein's works. David Silver, being as swamped as he is with Heinlein Society tasks, has graciously allowed me to organize a few of the Heinlein Readers Group Chats. Anyone around who hasn't yet joined us for a Chat is welcome to join us, just see http://heinleinsociety.org/Archives/ReadersGrp/index.html#Info

I'd also welcome any input for future chats, including any authors anybody might want to invite (especially if you already know them, to make invitation less complex). Just email me at oscagne at e v one dot net.

So, everybody take another gander at whatever Heinlein non-fiction you might have, and I'll see you Thurday July 24 and Saturday July 26 at 8:00 pm.

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 7:09 PM

"Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:bdiiis$td4sf$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de...
> There is a sentiment which I have seen attributed to Larry Niven:  We have a
> term for those who confuse an author's views with his characters',
> "asshole."  Luckily enough, we have many examples of Robert Heinlein talking
> in his own voice.  In _Expanded Universe_ we have forewards to his
> then-lesser-known short stories, and we have several short peices related to
> his "world saving" attempts.  In _Requiem_ we have his Guest of Honor
> speeches.  _Take Back Your Government_ and _Tramp Royale_ are two whole
> books of nothing but the master's own voice.
>
> So how well did the world saving hold up?  How accurate were the
> predicitons?  Looking back as we can into what has been released about the
> Soviet Union in the Cold War Days, how accurate was his world-view?  How do
> his travel observations from about fifty years ago compare with what we
> might find in South America or Oz-land today?  Did his political suggestions
> hold water when they were written?  Are they useful now?
>
> So, lets talk about it July 24, and 26 and keep alive our custom of talking
> about Heinlein's works.  David Silver, being as swamped as he is with
> Heinlein Society tasks, has graciously allowed me to organize a few of the
> Heinlein Readers Group Chats.  Anyone around who hasn't yet joined us for a
> Chat is welcome to join us, just see
> http://heinleinsociety.org/Archives/ReadersGrp/index.html#Info .
>
> I'd also welcome any input for future chats, including any authors anybody
> might want to invite (especially if you already know them, to make
> invitation less complex).  Just email me at oscagne at e v one dot net.
>
> So, everybody take another gander at whatever Heinlein non-fiction you might
> have, and I'll see you Thurday July 24 and Saturday July 26 at 8:00 pm.

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: "Murky" <murky303@spambitesyahoo.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:34 PM

Oscagne wrote:

> "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote in message
> news:bdiiis$td4sf$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de...
>> There is a sentiment which I have seen attributed to Larry Niven:
>> We have a term for those who confuse an author's views with his
>> characters', "asshole."  Luckily enough, we have many examples of
>> Robert Heinlein talking in his own voice.  In _Expanded Universe_ we
>> have forewards to his then-lesser-known short stories, and we have
>> several short peices related to his "world saving" attempts.  In
>> _Requiem_ we have his Guest of Honor speeches.  _Take Back Your
>> Government_ and _Tramp Royale_ are two whole books of nothing but
>> the master's own voice.
>>

Thanks for the invite!

--
Murky
"Unless we fight for proper treatment of history and counter the
nonsense images of McCarthy, no history can be safe from the liberal
noise machine... Bill Clinton will be revered in history books as the
George Washington of his day, who along with patriots Larry Flynt and
James Carville, "saved the Constitution."  He will be honored with a
memorial larger than the Washington Monument (though probably with the
same general design)." - Ann Coulter, "Treason"

From: "Stephanie" <merfilly27@aol.comspamkill>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:05 PM

>From: "Oscagne" Oscagne@ev1.net 

>I'll see you Thurday July 24 and Saturday July 26 at 8:00 pm.
>

Dear Sir,

Having missed several chats in recent months, I must ask if we no longer hold the Saturday one at a different hour to better accomodate scheduling? I remember when they were at 5:00 pm EST on Saturdays. I just wished to be sure, so I may hopefully make one or the other (both would be greedy).

Stephanie
http://hometown.aol.com/merfilly27/myhomepage/profile.html
http://hometown.aol.com/musiquelle26/myhomepage/profile.html

From: "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:12 PM

"Stephanie" <merfilly27@aol.comspamkill> wrote in message
news:20030627230517.02031.00000404@mb-m10.aol.com...
> >From: "Oscagne" Oscagne@ev1.net
>
> >I'll see you Thurday July 24 and Saturday July 26 at 8:00 pm.
> >
>
> Dear Sir,
>
> Having missed several chats in recent months, I must ask if we no longer hold
> the Saturday one at a different hour to better accomodate scheduling?  I
> remember when they were at 5:00 pm EST on Saturdays.  I just wished to be sure,
> so I may hopefully make one or the other (both would be greedy).

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:49 PM

In article <bdj155$tn8b1$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de>,
 "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:

> That makes me the ass. 

> So, please be assured that whatever the
> previous arrangements were, they are the same.  I guess that means 5 pm EST?

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: "Sean Kennedy" <gaeltach@ozemail.com.au>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Saturday, June 28, 2003 1:19 AM

David M. Silver wrote:

> In article <bdj155$tn8b1$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de>,
>  "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>That makes me the ass. 
>>
> 
> Not at all. You're working on something that can become very fine again. 
> And thank you for your gracious volunteering. I'll try to help where I 
> can. 
> 
> 
>>So, please be assured that whatever the
>>previous arrangements were, they are the same.  I guess that means 5 pm EST?
>>
> 
> That's the time. It gives the land of Oz a chance at the chats. Ready, 
> Sean? ;-)

Sean

(???)

From: "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Saturday, June 28, 2003 1:27 AM

In article <3EFD256C.2070104@ozemail.com.au>,
 Sean Kennedy <gaeltach@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

>  I mention 
> this because there is a little-known non-fiction piece by Heinlein that 
> also refers to the making of Destination Moon (and many other topics) 
> that is not even mentioned in RAH:ARC. I will expand on this before the 
> chats.

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: "BPRAL22169" <bpral22169@aol.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, June 29, 2003 12:24 AM

Might be a good idea to take a look over the back parts of Jim Gifford's ARC -- there are several sections on nonfiction material in different sizes.

Bill

From: "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, June 29, 2003 1:22 AM

"BPRAL22169" <bpral22169@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030629002429.21356.00001967@mb-m05.aol.com...
> Might be a good idea to take a look over the back parts of Jim Gifford's ARC --
> there are several sections on nonfiction material in different sizes.
> Bill
>

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 3:12 AM

In article <bdiiis$td4sf$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de>,
 "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:
> 
> So how well did the world saving hold up?

Was that true? 

   a. Between say, about 1950 and 1980?

   b. How 'bout afterwards? 

How 'bout some defense of those positions, whatever they are?

Does it make a difference to your answer if you looked at the non-fiction he tried to publish, "saving" the world, unsuccessfully; and then looked for his "high-grading" those topics and his positions into his 1950-80 works?

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: Sean Kennedy <gaeltach@ozemail.com.au>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, July 06, 2003 9:07 AM

BPRAL22169 wrote:

> Might be a good idea to take a look over the back parts of Jim Gifford's ARC --
> there are several sections on nonfiction material in different sizes.

The Fall 1949 edition of "The Fanscient" has a lengthy letter from Heinlein starting on page 32 with the title "Author, Author". The editor's intro to the piece ends with:

"Heinlein is now in Hollywood acting as technical director on a new 
science-fiction picture based on his story "Rocket Ship Galileo". As can 
be seen, all this adds up to a really crowded schedule. The following, 
started at his home in Colorado and finished in Hollywood, tells its own 
story and we bring it to you just as it was received from him."

Heinlein mentions having just mailed off the "deathless masterpiece". Any suggestions as to what this may have been? I'm pretty sure I know, but will leave this as a mini-quiz.

Heinlein gives permission to print the letter as is, or edit it into a third-person article. Not surprisingly, the letter is printed "as is".

He once again says he "usually prefers letters to articles - especially letters with checks in them."

In vital statistics - "Married, no children as yet." The words "Married" and "children" are underlined. This hopeful sentiment seems to fit in with the floor plans of his Colorado home including a "nursery", as seen in a slightly later magazine.

Heinlein lists his "Principal Interests" as: democracy, civil liberties, fiscal theory, rocketry and space travel, epistemology, semantics, the organization of knowledge etc.

He lists his "Principal Aversions" as: communists, communism and other forms of fascism; astrology and other ways to be mush-headed; department stores and the large, strong women who apparently live in them; people who express opinins without data; those fans who regard writers as their property; mere galley slaves; censorship; blue laws; people who don't vote, etc.

Heinlein lists an extensive range of hobbies, including both "dogs and cats."

He mentions other authors he has learned from: Will Jenkins, John Campbell, Hank Kuttner, C.L. Moore, L. Ron Hubbard, Doc Smith, A.E. van Vogt, Jack Williamson, Robert Moore Williamson.

He lists his pen names (all except Simon York).

He tells about the Story Contest and "Life Line".

I'm not sure of his health around this time (1949), but he says he has "to buy mink coats for doctor's wives at regular intervals."

He then finishes the letter from Hollywood (15 June). He mentions a number of points about making the movie "Destination Moon", but these were more fully expanded in his article "Shooting 'Destination Moon'"

With regard to fans he writes: "Fandom attracts a raucous minority of twerps - sadly true! - but it also attracts a vast majority of interesting, civilized, gentle people."

The editor provides a bibliography with the interesting (and somewhat erroneous) information:

'Heinlein's entire "future history" series will be published by Shasta Publishers in a set of five uniform volumes under the following titles: "The Man Who Sold the Moon", "The Green Hills of Earth", "If this Goes On", "Methuselah's Children" and "The Endless Frontier".'

"The Endless Frontier"??? Anyone? Other comments?

Sean
(...)

From: Combat Wombat (was Andrew) <haggis_1965@yahoo.despam.com.au>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, July 06, 2003 9:28 AM

"Sean Kennedy" <gaeltach@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:3F081EF9.7090706@ozemail.com.au...
>

 <snipped interesting letter>

> The editor provides a bibliography with the interesting (and somewhat
> erroneous) information:
>
> 'Heinlein's entire "future history" series will be published by Shasta
> Publishers in a set of five uniform volumes under the following titles:
> "The Man Who Sold the Moon", "The Green Hills of Earth", "If this Goes
> On", "Methuselah's Children" and "The Endless Frontier".'
>
> "The Endless Frontier"??? Anyone? Other comments?
>
>

Purely based on the timings, and could have been a typo (or hopeful editor's renaming) of this one.

Looking at the list provided, TEfL would have been a good fit ... but a wee bit too early, unless that editor was prescient!

Combat Wombat

From: Hairy Antelope <o66cdd102@sneakemail.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, July 06, 2003 1:14 PM

 On Sun, 6 Jul 2003 10:30:06 -0500,  you , "Oscagne" <oscagne@ev1.net>, wrote:

>his attitude to dogs?  Did Ginny talk him into it?  Or are  dog-people and
cat-people mutually exclusive?  Complimentary? 

--
]-  "Lack of planning on your part does not
]-     constitute an emergency on my part"    
]-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To reply by e-mail, insert the phrase "I'm a Gnu" in the subject line
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Howard Berkowitz <hcb@gettcomm.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Sunday, July 06, 2003 7:09 PM

In article <be9fap$2ksh5$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de>, "Oscagne" 
<oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:

> 
> This is the only reference (I think) I've ever seen that he had a dog.  
> It
> might be pretty self-evident that Heinlein was a cat-person, but what was
> his attitude to dogs?  Did Ginny talk him into it?  Or are  dog-people 
> and
> cat-people mutually exclusive?  Complimentary?  Does anyone know if Ginny
> was a dog-person?

I'd like a large dog, but it would be difficult for me to care for it adequately. Nevertheless, I do get the morning greeting of a thorough face licking, in which I find the important difference that a dog's tongue is much gentler than a cat's.

From: David M. Silver <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 7:47 PM

In article <be9fap$2ksh5$1@ID-124148.news.dfncis.de>,
 "Oscagne" <oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:

> This is the only reference (I think) I've ever seen that he had a dog.

There is a dog in that story. His name is Nixie. Heinlein's handwritten introduction was contained on the copy that Virginia provided Dr. Kondo. It contained the following:

"       *      *      *      *      *
     "Nixie is (of course) my own dog. But in 1919, when I was 12 and a 
Scout, he had to leave me -- a streetcar hit him.
     "If this universe has any reasonable teleology whatever (a point on 
which I am unsure), then there is _some_ provision for Nixies in it."

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: "Hairy Antelope" <o66cdd102@sneakemail.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Monday, July 07, 2003 7:03 AM

 On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:09:23 -0400,  you , Howard Berkowitz <hcb@gettcomm.com>, wrote:

>I'd like a large dog, but it would be difficult for me to care for it 
>adequately. Nevertheless, I do get the morning greeting of a thorough 

Only reason I ask is that I am in no way capable of walking dogs for exercise, but by throwing balls and other doggy toys I can still exercise them pretty well ....I also throw toys downstairs and let the dogs run up and down after them .... several rounds of that and their tongues hang ... at which point the small dog starts trying to catch the big one's tongue .... someday he's going to succeed, and I figure theres going to be a bit of trouble when that day comes ...

>face licking, in which I find the important difference that a dog's 
>tongue is much gentler than a cat's.

--
]-  "Lack of planning on your part does not
]-     constitute an emergency on my part"    
]-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To reply by e-mail, insert the phrase "I'm a Gnu" in the subject line
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Monday, July 07, 2003 9:53 AM

In article <khkigv42u2eh31vdt1ghqu9jnuqn4406de@4ax.com>, Hairy Antelope 
<o66cdd102@sneakemail.com> wrote:

>  On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:09:23 -0400,  you , Howard Berkowitz 
>  <hcb@gettcomm.com>, wrote:
> 
> >I'd like a large dog, but it would be difficult for me to care for it 
> >adequately. Nevertheless, I do get the morning greeting of a thorough 
> 
> Howard, excuse the question, but are you imobilised in some way ??  I
> don't recall anything like that being mentioned, or have I just missed
> something along the way ...
> 

> Only reason I ask is that I am in no way capable of walking dogs for
> exercise, but by throwing balls and other doggy toys  I  can still
> exercise them pretty well ....I also throw toys downstairs and let the
> dogs run up and down after them .... several rounds of that and their
> tongues hang ...  at which point the small dog starts trying to catch
> the big one's tongue .... someday he's going to succeed, and I figure
> theres going to be a bit of trouble when that day comes ...

> 
> >face licking, in which I find the important difference that a dog's 
> >tongue is much gentler than a cat's.
> 
> Yeah, but there's so much *more* of the average doggy tongue, and it's
> so much wetter !!!
> 

> --
> ]-  "Lack of planning on your part does not
> ]-     constitute an emergency on my part"    
> ]-
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To reply by e-mail, insert the phrase "I'm a Gnu" in the subject line
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Oscagne <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Monday, July 21, 2003 9:09 PM

Just as a reminder: This Thursday and Saturday, 8pm and 5pm (respectively) U.S. Central time.

Suggested reading:

Grumbles From the Grave

Expanded Universe

Tramp Royale

Requiem

Take Back Your Government

any, all, some, parts, whatever. This is not going to be a _very_ structured chat.

Also, David Silver <ping>. Get back to me if you can, I emailed you but don't know if it got through.

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: David M. Silver <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:04 AM

In article <bfi2v9$f947k$1@ID-124148.news.uni-berlin.de>,
 "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:

> Just as a reminder:  This Thursday and Saturday, 8pm and 5pm (respectively)
> U.S. Central time.
> 
> Suggested reading:
> Grumbles From the Grave
> Expanded Universe
> Tramp Royale
> Requiem
> Take Back Your Government
> 
> any, all, some, parts, whatever.  This is not going to be a _very_
> structured chat.
> 
> Also, David Silver <ping>.  Get back to me if you can, I emailed you but
> don't know if it got through.
> 
> --
> Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
> wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
> or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm
> 
> 

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: Oscagne <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 6:25 AM

"David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-2BC4AF.22044421072003@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <bfi2v9$f947k$1@ID-124148.news.uni-berlin.de>,
>  "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:
>
> > Just as a reminder:  This Thursday and Saturday, 8pm and 5pm (respectively)
> > U.S. Central time.
> >
> > Suggested reading:
> > Grumbles From the Grave
> > Expanded Universe
> > Tramp Royale
> > Requiem
> > Take Back Your Government
> >
> > any, all, some, parts, whatever.  This is not going to be a _very_
> > structured chat.
> >
> > Also, David Silver <ping>.  Get back to me if you can, I emailed you but
> > don't know if it got through.
> >
> > --
> > Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
> > wanna read a story?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
> > or see my goofy website?  http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm
> >
> >
>
> Didn't get through. What may I do?

David,

Eric Flint should be available at this email: Librarian@baen.com .]

If you want background for the invite email, you can see his Baen free library intro here http://www.baen.com/library/ .

Or, if you just want to send me a sample or a previous invite I'll invite him and/or track him down.

Thanks,

Joe
(Oscagne)

From: David M. Silver <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 7:56 AM

In article <bfj3hj$fifvn$1@ID-124148.news.uni-berlin.de>,
 "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net> wrote:

> 
> Eric Flint should be available at this email: Librarian@baen.com .]
> 
> If you want background for the invite email, you can see his Baen free
> library intro here http://www.baen.com/library/ .
> 
> Or, if you just want to send me a sample or a previous invite I'll invite
> him and/or track him down.

Meanwhile, since we're coming up on Thursday and I just finished reading it, why don't we talk a little about Expanded Universe?

There's a subtitle in "The Happy Days Ahead," entitled "Gloom, Woe, and Disaster."

Heinlein claimed he saw, in 1979, or whenever, certain "pathological trends" that show our culture headed down the "chute to self-distruction."

He noted one major tread in the decline of education: the degrees are cheapened at all levels, university, junior colleges, and secondary and elementary education. How do you repair a system in which, now, not the two he cited, but three, going on four, generations of pre-college educators are ignorant and uneducated?

Is popular in one quarter to claim that privatization, e.g., vouchers will solve everything, just as privation most certainly solved the savings and loan, railroad, airlines, energy and you-name-it. Did Heinlein suggest that, however?

Well, if you look uncritically at The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, you might say he did. MIaHM does away, for the purposes of argument, with everything, including public education, to establish the ideal libertarian society -- then corrupts that ideal before the end of the book -- forget about what comes in less than a couple generations in Cat. Not even the air is free.

OTOH, I could argue that in 1947 when he wrote Rocket Ship Gallileo, he demonstrated an ideal of public education we never attained -- but what he thought the model might become: the true 'comprehensive' secondary public school -- not the hairbrained thing comprehensive education became in the hands of the undereducated and unqualified academic teaching establishment -- a sandbox for adults to shovel the children around in to satisify their own views of social inadequacies. I could also demonstrate by citing Have Space Suit -- Will Travel, that nothing is insurmountable to an interested, motivated student and parents who do pay attention. Not even hairbrained spinsters who think families are democracies, with children having equal votes.

Some say it's the union's fault. Is it? I could, with equal authority, maintain it's the fault of lawmakers: those idiots that think if they pass a comprehensive set of standards, all will be well in a couple of years. It's the argument made in Friday, by one of the terrorist groups: just tell the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep killing them until they do. No wonder no one with half a brain wants to teach in public education.

What's the real problem? How about the silly notion that everyone must have a degree? What did Heinlein write after EU? Friday? What did the California Confederation do about degrees in Friday? D'oh!

What's the solution? Let's leave that for a second or so.

The next big problem in Gloom, Woe and Disaster he sez is the Decline of Patriotism and in the Quality of Our Armed Forces:

Bear in mind, however, that in 1979 there was a serious morale problem. Much of what he cites as may have been overcome. We'll see, now that we're once again in a guerrilla warfare situation -- the long, hard, haul. You do know we've won a few guerrilla wars, don't you? Maybe if I criticize the leadership I can keep from calling it by 'the shrub' for the purposes of this exercise -- or we can pretend I haven't in the past, and we can stay on topic -- is there something fundamentally wrong today with our military and Patriotism in our youth?

I happen to believe our military knows exactly how and how not to fight a guerrilla war. It knew how in Viet Nam. It just wasn't allowed to; and I'm not talking about Samars, or Sand Creeks, or Wounded Knees, either. God forbid we ever see another My Lai.

Then, the third thing: Inflation! Heinlein had a lot to say about the rise in National Debt. He said our national debt would never be paid. It was just a matter of time before the deluge: Makers, Takers and Fakers.

What, if anything, is the solution to that? Hang the Congress by the nearest lampost? Or is there something else available?

Next, the Age of Unreason! He lists ten items:

   a. I-Ching
   b. Back-to-nature cults
   c. the collapse of basic education (see above)
   d. the respect granted worthless academia intent on naval gazing
   e. "experts" on nuclear power
   f. "experts" on ecology
   g. people who watch television and get their opinions from it
   h. people who simply watch television several hours a day
   i. the return of 'creationism' -- equal time for the great mumbo-jumbo in the sky
   j. the return of witchcraft

So, then, following this litany, there's "Over the Rainbow"

What do you think about the solutions he poses for just a few of these problems?

Anyone think? Anyone think there's a solution or two in "Over the Rainbow," or any of the works that followed Expanded Universe? Short of going back and starting over again with Herbert Hoover in office?

Have we done anything right since Hoovervilles? What do you think Heinlein thought?

There's a lot to talk about in just this one essay, and the one fiction about the lady who played in Star Trek.

Be nice to have some replies before Thursday, when the chat starts ...

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: at work <atwork@ev1.nul>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 9:15 AM

"David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-F96ADD.04565122072003@news.fu-berlin.de...
> Meanwhile, since we're coming up on Thursday and I just finished reading
> it, why don't we talk a little about Expanded Universe?
>
> There's a subtitle in "The Happy Days Ahead," entitled "Gloom, Woe, and
> Disaster."
>
> Heinlein claimed he saw, in 1979, or whenever, certain "pathological
> trends" that show our culture headed down the "chute to
> self-distruction."
>
> He noted one major tread in the decline of education: the degrees are
> cheapened at all levels, university, junior colleges, and secondary and
> elementary education. How do you repair a system in which, now, not the
> two he cited, but three, going on four, generations of pre-college
> educators are ignorant and uneducated?
>
> Is popular in one quarter to claim that privatization, e.g., vouchers
> will solve everything, just as privation most certainly solved the
> savings and loan, railroad, airlines, energy and you-name-it. Did
> Heinlein suggest that, however?
>
> Well, if you look uncritically at The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, you
> might say he did. MIaHM does away, for the purposes of argument, with
> everything, including public education, to establish the ideal
> libertarian society -- then corrupts that ideal before the end of the
> book -- forget about what comes in less than a couple generations in
> Cat. Not even the air is free.

> OTOH, I could argue that in 1947 when he wrote Rocket Ship Gallileo, he
> demonstrated an ideal of public education we never attained -- but what
> he thought the model might become: the true 'comprehensive' secondary
> public school -- not the hairbrained thing comprehensive education
> became in the hands of the undereducated and unqualified academic
> teaching establishment -- a sandbox for adults to shovel the children
> around in to satisify their own views of social inadequacies. I could
> also demonstrate by citing Have Space Suit -- Will Travel, that nothing
> is insurmountable to an interested, motivated student and parents who do
> pay attention. Not even hairbrained spinsters who think families are
> democracies, with children having equal votes.
>
> Some say it's the union's fault. Is it? I could, with equal authority,
> maintain it's the fault of lawmakers: those idiots that think if they
> pass a comprehensive set of standards, all will be well in a couple of
> years. It's the argument made in Friday, by one of the terrorist groups:
> just tell the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep
> killing them until they do. No wonder no one with half a brain wants to
> teach in public education.

> What's the real problem? How about the silly notion that everyone must
> have a degree? What did Heinlein write after EU? Friday? What did the
> California Confederation do about degrees in Friday? D'oh!
>
> What's the solution? Let's leave that for a second or so.
>
> The next big problem in Gloom, Woe and Disaster he sez is the Decline of
> Patriotism and in the Quality of Our Armed Forces:

> Bear in mind, however, that in 1979 there was a serious morale problem.
> Much of what he cites as may have been overcome. We'll see, now that
> we're once again in a guerrilla warfare situation -- the long, hard,
> haul. You do know we've won a few guerrilla wars, don't you? Maybe if I
> criticize the leadership I can keep from calling it by 'the shrub' for
> the purposes of this exercise -- or we can pretend I haven't in the
> past, and we can stay on topic -- is there something fundamentally wrong
> today with our military and Patriotism in our youth?
>
> I happen to believe our military knows exactly how and how not to fight
> a guerrilla war. It knew how in Viet Nam. It just wasn't allowed to; and
> I'm not talking about Samars, or Sand Creeks, or Wounded Knees, either.
> God forbid we ever see another My Lai.

> Then, the third thing: Inflation! Heinlein had a lot to say about the
> rise in National Debt. He said our national debt would never be paid. It
> was just a matter of time before the deluge: Makers, Takers and Fakers.

We could just go back on the gold standard? *grin*

> What, if anything, is the solution to that? Hang the Congress by the
> nearest lampost? Or is there something else available?
>
> Next, the Age of Unreason! He lists ten items:
>    a. I-Ching
>    b. Back-to-nature cults
>    c. the collapse of basic education (see above)
>    d. the respect granted worthless academia intent on naval gazing
>    e. "experts" on nuclear power
>    f. "experts" on ecology
>    g. people who watch television and get their opinions from it
>    h. people who simply watch television several hours a day
>    i. the return of 'creationism' -- equal time for the great mumbo-jumbo in the sky
>    j. the return of witchcraft
>
> Finally, then, there's the cancerous growth in government, coupled of
> course with inflation, and see above.
>
> So, then, following this litany, there's
> "Over the Rainbow
>
> What do you think about the solutions he poses for just a few of these
> problems?

> Anyone think? Anyone think there's a solution or two in "Over the
> Rainbow," or any of the works that followed Expanded Universe? Short of
> going back and starting over again with Herbert Hoover in office?
>
> Have we done anything right since Hoovervilles? What do you think
> Heinlein thought?
>
> There's a lot to talk about in just this one essay, and the one fiction
> about the lady who played in Star Trek.

> Be nice to have some replies before Thursday, when the chat starts ...

--
Oscagne

From: djinn <qinjingyou@yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:04 PM

"at work" <atwork@ev1.nul> wrote in
news:vhqe7p3qp9vd55@corp.supernews.com: 

> 
snip

Check http://www.ericflint.net/reacheric.htm for ways to get ahold of him.

-- 
Better than a thousand hollow words
Is one word which brings peace     Dhammapada, 8.1

From: at work <atwork@ev1.nul>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:26 PM

"djinn" <qinjingyou@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93C0666D64428mmii@68.6.19.6...
> "at work" <atwork@ev1.nul> wrote in
> news:vhqe7p3qp9vd55@corp.supernews.com:
>
> >
> snip
>
> Are you guys inviting Flint to the chat?

> Check
> http://www.ericflint.net/reacheric.htm
> for ways to get ahold of him.

--
Oscagne

From: "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 2:53 AM

In article <vhqe7p3qp9vd55@corp.supernews.com>,
 "at work" <atwork@ev1.nul> wrote:

> "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ag.plusone-F96ADD.04565122072003@news.fu-berlin.de...
> > Meanwhile, since we're coming up on Thursday and I just finished reading
> > it, why don't we talk a little about Expanded Universe?
> >
> > There's a subtitle in "The Happy Days Ahead," entitled "Gloom, Woe, and
> > Disaster."
> >
> > Heinlein claimed he saw, in 1979, or whenever, certain "pathological
> > trends" that show our culture headed down the "chute to
> > self-distruction."
> >
> > He noted one major tread in the decline of education: the degrees are
> > cheapened at all levels, university, junior colleges, and secondary and
> > elementary education. How do you repair a system in which, now, not the
> > two he cited, but three, going on four, generations of pre-college
> > educators are ignorant and uneducated?
> >
> > Is popular in one quarter to claim that privatization, e.g., vouchers
> > will solve everything, just as privation most certainly solved the
> > savings and loan, railroad, airlines, energy and you-name-it. Did
> > Heinlein suggest that, however?
> >
> > Well, if you look uncritically at The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, you
> > might say he did. MIaHM does away, for the purposes of argument, with
> > everything, including public education, to establish the ideal
> > libertarian society -- then corrupts that ideal before the end of the
> > book -- forget about what comes in less than a couple generations in
> > Cat. Not even the air is free.
> 
> It doesn't look to me like Moon repudiates the ideas of libertarianism. 

[snippage]

> I don't think Heinlein was
> making a statement about the system, he was making a statement about people.

> 
[snip myself]
> >
> > Some say it's the union's fault. Is it? I could, with equal authority,
> > maintain it's the fault of lawmakers: those idiots that think if they
> > pass a comprehensive set of standards, all will be well in a couple of
> > years. It's the argument made in Friday, by one of the terrorist groups:
> > just tell the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep
> > killing them until they do. No wonder no one with half a brain wants to
> > teach in public education.
> 
> The argument could be made that if you want some purpose to succeed you have
> to set it up in some way that there is a financial reward that goes along
> with its success.  I don't think we really have this right now.  Teachers
> teach because they want to make the world a better place: altruism, not
> because they get rich doing it. 

> But how many human endevors have succeeded
> without offering that finiancial incentive? 

I'll never forget the portrait drawn in Blackboard Jungle, the novel, made into a movie with Glenn Ford, in the early 1950s, in which a minor character, the 'old teacher,' tells the Ford character that the role of schools was to keep the garbage off the streets, and the role of teachers was to sit on the lid of the garbage cans.

> I'd say that any system that
> relies for its existence on human altruism is doomed to failure.  Take
> Socialism as an example:  I mean good ol' time Marxian Socialism... "from
> each according to ability to each according to need".  That is a great
> altruistic sentiment, but it assumes that nobody with ability will be lazy
> or greedy.  So instead of the Marxian utopia, you get Stalinist Communism.
> This is a concept I learned from Heinlein, though I don't know if it
> originated with him:  when you set things up to obtain the glorious
> impossible, you will instead get the disastrous possible.  Any concept that
> _must_ be successful _must_ take the base, greedy, _evil_ habits of humans
> into account, not just "outlaw" base, greedy, and evil habits.  Cynical?
> Yup.
> 

> > What's the real problem? How about the silly notion that everyone must
> > have a degree? What did Heinlein write after EU? Friday? What did the
> > California Confederation do about degrees in Friday? D'oh!
> >

> > What's the solution? Let's leave that for a second or so.
> >
> > The next big problem in Gloom, Woe and Disaster he sez is the Decline of
> > Patriotism and in the Quality of Our Armed Forces:
> 
> This problem may have been solved or at least aleviated, ironically, by an
> enemy that wants to destroy us.  Much of the patriotism since 9/11 has
> faded, but there is still a core number of patriots who are conspicuously
> visible (at least I see them) on a daily basis.
> 

But I agree, the importance is that somehow patriotism survives and the major importance is it survives despite jingoism and despite cynicism about the 'system.'

> > Bear in mind, however, that in 1979 there was a serious morale problem.
> > Much of what he cites as may have been overcome. We'll see, now that
> > we're once again in a guerrilla warfare situation -- the long, hard,
> > haul. You do know we've won a few guerrilla wars, don't you? Maybe if I
> > criticize the leadership I can keep from calling it by 'the shrub' for
> > the purposes of this exercise -- or we can pretend I haven't in the
> > past, and we can stay on topic -- is there something fundamentally wrong
> > today with our military and Patriotism in our youth?
> >
> > I happen to believe our military knows exactly how and how not to fight
> > a guerrilla war. It knew how in Viet Nam. It just wasn't allowed to; and
> > I'm not talking about Samars, or Sand Creeks, or Wounded Knees, either.
> > God forbid we ever see another My Lai.
> 
> Doesn't the Marine Corps have a manual just for this?  They claim to have
> "won" the guerrilla conflicts in the bananna republics early last century
> (that's where they learned the lessons they put in the manual), but I
> haven't studied those conflicts.  Were the outcomes there positive?
> 

> > Then, the third thing: Inflation! Heinlein had a lot to say about the
> > rise in National Debt. He said our national debt would never be paid. It
> > was just a matter of time before the deluge: Makers, Takers and Fakers.
> 
> Weren't people complaining about Deflation a couple-three years ago?  I know
> there were some concerns, but I dismissed them at the time as more Chicken
> Little wailing -- just like the wailing about Inflation.
> 

> We could just go back on the gold standard?  *grin*

> 
> > What, if anything, is the solution to that? Hang the Congress by the
> > nearest lampost? Or is there something else available?
> >
> > Next, the Age of Unreason! He lists ten items:
> >    a. I-Ching
> >    b. Back-to-nature cults
> >    c. the collapse of basic education (see above)
> >    d. the respect granted worthless academia intent on naval gazing
> >    e. "experts" on nuclear power
> >    f. "experts" on ecology
> >    g. people who watch television and get their opinions from it
> >    h. people who simply watch television several hours a day
> >    i. the return of 'creationism' -- equal time for the great mumbo-jumbo in the sky
> >    j. the return of witchcraft
> >
> > Finally, then, there's the cancerous growth in government, coupled of
> > course with inflation, and see above.
> >
> > So, then, following this litany, there's
> > "Over the Rainbow
> >
> > What do you think about the solutions he poses for just a few of these
> > problems?
> 
> One thing that struck me is the real lack of nuclear power plant incidents
> since that book was published.  The piece assumes that there are numerous
> accidents and incidents at nuke plants, so much so that the new President
> has to address the problem by basically putting the Navy in charge of them.
> Yet, aside from environmentalist complaining, there hasn't really been any
> such rash of nuke plant incidents. 

> I think this is another non-problem that
> people bring up from time to time because they either 1) need some cause to
> rally behind to maintain their power, or 2) need some cause to rally behind
> so that they can see themselves as a vital part of humanity and not just
> another nameless cog.

So, since we haven't a nuclear power crisis that the military institution could be adapted to solve in our "Over the Rainbow" IRL, today, can you think of somewhere else the military could be very effective to restore what we once might have had? Three guesses -- the first two don't count. Read supra.

Appropo of nothing whatever, I understand that the base school system ran by the Department of Defense is considered a model of excellent education -- so much so that my local county head of the board of education (the Los Angeles Unified School District -- known as the "Board that Swallowed Up Education") has, with quite a bit of publicity, pointed to that system as a guide for improvements. ;-)

Anyone? Oscagne? Two days to go until the first meeting; and don't forget, posts provoke fruitful chat.

> 
> > Anyone think? Anyone think there's a solution or two in "Over the
> > Rainbow," or any of the works that followed Expanded Universe? Short of
> > going back and starting over again with Herbert Hoover in office?
> >
> > Have we done anything right since Hoovervilles? What do you think
> > Heinlein thought?
> >
> > There's a lot to talk about in just this one essay, and the one fiction
> > about the lady who played in Star Trek.
> 
> You might keep in mind that the new (successful and laudable?) president
> basically uses the approach that is later ridiculed in Friday:  "just tell
> the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep. . . " firing ". .
> . them until they do."
> 

> > Be nice to have some replies before Thursday, when the chat starts ...
> 
> The general lack of interest has me sweating.  Probably my fault for not
> being coming up with a thought-provoking post such as your, David.
> 

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: "LV Poker Player" <lvpokerplayer@aol.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 3:17 AM

>From: "David M. Silver" 

>I agree we've made it harder than it should be. Some say they teach 
>because of altruism. Some who say that speak truth. Some who keep their 
>mouths shut and soldier also do so because of altruism. I'm downright 
>cynical about the numbers, however. 

I seem to remember that from somewhere. :)

-- 
Ferengi rule of acquisition #192:  Never cheat a Klingon...unless you're sure
you can get away with it.

From: "at work" <atwork@ev1.nul>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 8:07 AM

"David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-A4B6F1.23531522072003@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <vhqe7p3qp9vd55@corp.supernews.com>,
> > I don't think Heinlein was
> > making a statement about the system, he was making a statement about people.
>
> Makers, takers, fakers, forever more.

> >
> [snip myself]
> > >
> > > Some say it's the union's fault. Is it? I could, with equal authority,
> > > maintain it's the fault of lawmakers: those idiots that think if they
> > > pass a comprehensive set of standards, all will be well in a couple of
> > > years. It's the argument made in Friday, by one of the terrorist groups:
> > > just tell the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep
> > > killing them until they do. No wonder no one with half a brain wants to
> > > teach in public education.
> >
> > The argument could be made that if you want some purpose to succeed you have
> > to set it up in some way that there is a financial reward that goes along
> > with its success.  I don't think we really have this right now. Teachers
> > teach because they want to make the world a better place: altruism, not
> > because they get rich doing it.
>
> I agree we've made it harder than it should be. Some say they teach
> because of altruism. Some who say that speak truth. Some who keep their
> mouths shut and soldier also do so because of altruism. I'm downright
> cynical about the numbers, however.
>

> > But how many human endevors have succeeded
> > without offering that finiancial incentive?
>
> You'll have to ask the Jesuits about that: they'd probably have a
> well-informed opinion: me, I can't think of many. For myself, in my own
> profession, I know only a few who've survived a full career acting on
> Thurgood Marshall's expressed motivation; and damned few who've lasted
> long without a great deal of luck and success. It seems to me there's
> not a great deal of success, year-after-year, in teaching for a great
> many. We celebrate the Thurgood Marshalls, few that they are, and forget
> about ones like Tom Hunt, frex, a fine civil-rights attorney, who did
> wonderful things for about twenty years, always living hand to mouth,
> always seeking to strive and not to yield, but finally succumbed to
> frustration, poverty, and was disbarred in disgrace. I suspect teachers
> have as many stories as I about as many burnt out Mr. Chipses.

*snip*

> So it's rewards to the teachers? Is there anything besides money that
> you give them?

> > > What's the real problem? How about the silly notion that everyone must
> > > have a degree? What did Heinlein write after EU? Friday? What did the
> > > California Confederation do about degrees in Friday? D'oh!
> > >
>
> What about that point? Why do most of us need college degrees? Did it
> matter whether or not I had a college degree when I entered my
> profession? For that matter, why even a high school degree? What do they
> signify? What need do they serve today? Is there something better that
> might do? What makes the glorified babysitting service we maintain (in
> many cases today until the baby is nearly thirty, or more) necessary?
> It's plainly not education that most obtain in it.

As far as lawyering goes... I suspect that if I had some kind of advisor who knew how to do the legal research and whatnot, who knew the precedents that I don't have in my head, I could argue a case. But correct me if I'm wrong, there's very little actual court-room time involved in lawyering; the majority of the work is the research and whatnot, right? And again, there is the lodge initiation aspect of it. "Person X spent his/her time being wrung out in law school and survived it, and is therefore capable of the stresses of working at this firm." You tell me how necesary that wringing-out is.

*snip*

> I've never seen the Marines' manual

> -- I suppose they do; but I've got a
> pretty good idea who initially developed the dogma in it; and the first
> guerrilla conflict he fought wasn't in the banana republics -- it was on
> Samar, in the Philippines where the 'old Army of Indian fighters' tried
> to turn him into a scapegoat for their atrocities. He survived,
> acquitted by the courts martial for 18 counts of murder they put him
> through; and the Marines put in charge of training and, later, set him
> to command some of the banana war efforts. His name was Littleton Waller
> Tazewell Waller, late Major General, USMC, "Stand, gentlemen. He served
> on Samar!" Look him up. Try under "the Butcher of Samar," and watch out
> for the slovenly trash they deem acceptable historical research these
> days in academia. Some day I'm going to finish my novel about him. A
> farily good account, generally, of the supression of the Philippines,
> the first "little brown brother," as Oscar Gordon calls them, with
> intent aforethought, circa 1899-1902 (heh! it went on a while longer,
> but Teddy's sense of PR declared what followed mere supression of Moro
> "bandits") is a book titled Schoolbooks and Krags : The United States
> Army in the Philippines, 1898-1902 by John M. Gates Greenwood Publishing
> Group; (April 1973) ISBN: 0837158184. It's out of print, but you can
> find it on albris, etc. It's well worth reading. I've an ulterior motive
> in dragging out that title. See infra.

> > > Then, the third thing: Inflation! Heinlein had a lot to say about the
> > > rise in National Debt. He said our national debt would never be paid.It
> > > was just a matter of time before the deluge: Makers, Takers and Fakers.
> >
> > Weren't people complaining about Deflation a couple-three years ago?  I know
> > there were some concerns, but I dismissed them at the time as more Chicken
> > Little wailing -- just like the wailing about Inflation.
> >
>
> Yeah, but what about what Heinlein writes in "Gloom, Woe, and Disaster."
> I'll help you out, pp. 541-44, the Trade Edition of EU, and see also,
> especially, the charts and following commentary on 553 ff.

> > We could just go back on the gold standard?  *grin*
>
> I suppose, so long as something better wasn't available or possible.
> Appropo of nothing whatsoever, did you ever read the so-called "social
> credit" theory?

*snip*

> So, since we haven't a nuclear power crisis that the military
> institution could be adapted to solve in our "Over the Rainbow" IRL,
> today, can you think of somewhere else the military could be very
> effective to restore what we once might have had? Three guesses -- the
> first two don't count. Read supra.

> Appropo of nothing whatever, I understand that the base school system
> ran by the Department of Defense is considered a model of excellent
> education -- so much so that my local county head of the board of
> education (the Los Angeles Unified School District -- known as the
> "Board that Swallowed Up Education") has, with quite a bit of publicity,
> pointed to that system as a guide for improvements. ;-)

So how about doing completely away with compulsory education? Then the only way you'd get educated is if you wanted to, and we could spend the tax dollars on the kids who would benifit from getting them. AAMOF, run it like the military was run in ST. You'd have a whole _bunch_ of uneducation kids for a while, but what do you want to bet that would be a self-correcting problem in the long run. And the teachers could _teach_ instead of providing day-care.

> > You might keep in mind that the new (successful and laudable?) president
> > basically uses the approach that is later ridiculed in Friday:  "just tell
> > the PTB that they're not meeting the standards, and keep. . . " firing
". .
> > . them until they do."
> >
>
> The salient difference I think you'll find when you compare them is
> this: in Friday, no standard was ever announced. Not even an
> incoherently stated one. I think it's pretty plain that Nichelle Nichols
> made her standards clear. Some were even self-evident.

> > > Be nice to have some replies before Thursday, when the chat starts ...
> >
> > The general lack of interest has me sweating.  Probably my fault for not
> > being coming up with a thought-provoking post such as your, David.
> >
> It's simply a matter of prattling on . . . sometimes it makes sense, no
> matter how hard I try, sometimes it doesn't but the readers twist it
> into decent shape trying to figure out sense from what I've said. One
> thing though: Talking about it works.

--
Oscagne - waiting for the echo

From: "TreetopAngel" <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net> Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction" Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 12:50 PM

"at work" wrote:

> So how about doing completely away with compulsory education?  Then the only
> way you'd get educated is if you wanted to, and we could spend the tax
> dollars on the kids who would benifit from getting them.  AAMOF, run it like
> the military was run in ST.  You'd have a whole _bunch_ of uneducation kids
> for a while, but what do you want to bet that would be a self-correcting
> problem in the long run.  And the teachers could _teach_ instead of
> providing day-care.
>

At least then my tax dollars would be going to help in other areas, not spent on kids who couldn't care less about an education.

E!

From: "Ed Reppert" <ereppert@rochester.rr.invalid.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 2:30 PM

In article <bfmebn$gg9i7$1@ID-193438.news.uni-berlin.de>, TreetopAngel
<treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net> wrote:

> I don't see a problem with this solution.
> 
> At least then my tax dollars would be going to help in other areas, not
> spent on kids who couldn't care less about an education.

From: "David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 3:01 PM

In article <_6ATa.4$tn.714884@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>,
 "cmaj7dmin7" <reilloc@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> "at work" <atwork@ev1.nul> wrote in message
> news:vhsukio2scarb2@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >
> > As far as lawyering goes...  I suspect that if I had some kind of advisor
> > who knew how to do the legal research and whatnot, who knew the precedents
> > that I don't have in my head, I could argue a case.  But correct me if I'm
> > wrong, there's very little actual court-room time involved in lawyering;
> > the majority of the work is the research and whatnot, right?  And again,
> > there is the lodge initiation aspect of it.  "Person X spent his/her time
> > being wrung out in law school and survived it, and is therefore capable of
> > the stresses of working at this firm."  You tell me how necesary that
> > wringing-out is.
> 
> As far as doctoring goes...  I suspect that if I had some kind of pop-up
> anatomy book that showed which one's the gall bladder and whatnot, who knew
> the insurance billing codes that I don't have in my head, I could do heart
> transplants.  But correct me if I'm
> wrong, there's very little actual operating-room time involved in doctoring;
> the majority of the work is the golf and whatnot, right?  And again,
> there is the lodge initiation aspect of it.  "Person X spent his/her time
> being wrung out in med school and survived it, and is therefore capable of
> the stresses of working at this hospital."  You tell me how necessary that
> wringing-out is.
> 
> In the meantime, I'm buying the whatnots on eBay and hoping for the best.
> 
> LNC
> 
> 

"Counsel, in this courtroom it isn't Burger King. You don't get it done your way. You do it my way. I want two things, and only two things, out of your mouth when you object, _and_ you rise and move to the podium to object in _my_ courtroom _always_! I never want to see you speak from behind your seat again, and you will rue the day you fail to rise before speaking. I want one word: 'Objection!' and I then want the exact Federal Rules of Evidence Rule and section and subsections, and nothing else unless I specifically ask you. If you don't do it that way, I'll overrule you every time; and if you persistently don't do it that way, you better have your toothbrush in your pocket, because you'll spend the night!"

And Chief U.S. District Court Judge Manuel Réal, of the Central U.S. District of California, wasn't kidding one bit, especially about the toothbrush.

It's very often not at all like smiling Judge Ito on Court TV.

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: "Oscagne" <Oscagne@ev1.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 3:36 PM

"David M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-B98FFB.12012423072003@news.fu-berlin.de...
> I think LN's point is correct, Oscagne; for a professional school's
> curriculum, Law, Medicine, Architecture, others, is very much like the
> technical school courses -- stuff you absolutely much have, to even have
> hopes of beginning to practice.

> You may spend a lot of time on the golf
> course, or in negotiating, or writing letter, or meetings; but if you
> cannot take it into the courtroom, or make a credible appearance of
> being able to do that, you won't get far along before someone suggests
> perhaps you ought find an alternative occupation. Those three or four
> years you spend (night schoolers do it in four) are crammed full of what
> we call procedure and practice courses, rules you must have at the tip
> of your tongue, ready to deliver instantly in a place that isn't even
> remotely like the TV shows.
>
> "Counsel, in this courtroom it isn't Burger King. You don't get it done
> your way. You do it my way. I want two things, and only two things, out
> of your mouth when you object, _and_ you rise and move to the podium to
> object in _my_ courtroom _always_! I never want to see you speak from
> behind your seat again, and you will rue the day you fail to rise before
> speaking. I want one word: 'Objection!' and I then want the exact
> Federal Rules of Evidence Rule and section and subsections, and nothing
> else unless I specifically ask you. If you don't do it that way, I'll
> overrule you every time; and if you persistently don't do it that way,
> you better have your toothbrush in your pocket, because you'll spend the
> night!"
>
> And Chief U.S. District Court Judge Manuel Réal, of the Central U.S.
> District of California, wasn't kidding one bit, especially about the
> toothbrush.
>
> It's very often not at all like smiling Judge Ito on Court TV.

--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
wanna read a story? 
http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website? 
http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm

From: "James F. Cornwall" <JCornwall_must_remove_this_part@cox.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 4:29 PM

cmaj7dmin7 wrote:
> 
> "at work" <atwork@ev1.nul> wrote in message
> news:vhsukio2scarb2@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >
> > As far as lawyering goes...  I suspect that if I had some kind of advisor
> > who knew how to do the legal research and whatnot, who knew the precedents
> > that I don't have in my head, I could argue a case.  But correct me if I'm
> > wrong, there's very little actual court-room time involved in lawyering;
> > the majority of the work is the research and whatnot, right?  And again,
> > there is the lodge initiation aspect of it.  "Person X spent his/her time
> > being wrung out in law school and survived it, and is therefore capable of
> > the stresses of working at this firm."  You tell me how necesary that
> > wringing-out is.
> 
> As far as doctoring goes...  I suspect that if I had some kind of pop-up
> anatomy book that showed which one's the gall bladder and whatnot, who knew
> the insurance billing codes that I don't have in my head, I could do heart
> transplants.  But correct me if I'm
> wrong, there's very little actual operating-room time involved in doctoring;
> the majority of the work is the golf and whatnot, right?  And again,
> there is the lodge initiation aspect of it.  "Person X spent his/her time
> being wrung out in med school and survived it, and is therefore capable of
> the stresses of working at this hospital."  You tell me how necessary that
> wringing-out is.
> 
> In the meantime, I'm buying the whatnots on eBay and hoping for the best.
> 
> LNC

Jim!
--

****************************************************
** Facilior veniam posterius quam prius capere!   **
****************************************************
** James F. Cornwall, sole owner of all opinions  **
**  expressed in this message...                  **
****************************************************

From: "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 4:56 PM

In article <ag.plusone-B98FFB.12012423072003@news.fu-berlin.de>, "David 
M. Silver" <ag.plusone@verizon.net> wrote:

> I think LN's point is correct, Oscagne; for a professional school's 
> curriculum, Law, Medicine, Architecture, others, is very much like the 
> technical school courses -- stuff you absolutely much have, to even have 
> hopes of beginning to practice. 

>You may spend a lot of time on the golf 
> course, or in negotiating, or writing letter, or meetings; but if you 
> cannot take it into the courtroom, or make a credible appearance of 
> being able to do that, you won't get far along before someone suggests 
> perhaps you ought find an alternative occupation. Those three or four 
> years you spend (night schoolers do it in four) are crammed full of what 
> we call procedure and practice courses, rules you must have at the tip 
> of your tongue, ready to deliver instantly in a place that isn't even 
> remotely like the TV shows. 

There's been a flurry of scandal recently regarding Federal employees that had degrees from non-accredited universities. I certainly can see the degree requirement for entry level, but when someone can point to 20-30 years of demonstrable expert performance in a field, peer-reviewed publications, etc., I begin to wonder why the degree is the issue. Yes, I know the argument that it shows one can stick to something, but does it show that as much as real-world project completion?

> 
> "Counsel, in this courtroom it isn't Burger King. You don't get it done 
> your way. You do it my way. I want two things, and only two things, out 
> of your mouth when you object, _and_ you rise and move to the podium to 
> object in _my_ courtroom _always_! I never want to see you speak from 
> behind your seat again, and you will rue the day you fail to rise before 
> speaking. I want one word: 'Objection!' and I then want the exact 
> Federal Rules of Evidence Rule and section and subsections, and nothing 
> else unless I specifically ask you. If you don't do it that way, I'll 
> overrule you every time; and if you persistently don't do it that way, 
> you better have your toothbrush in your pocket, because you'll spend the 
> night!"

From: TreetopAngel <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 8:22 PM

"Ed Reppert" wrote:

> In article <bfmebn$gg9i7$1@ID-193438.news.uni-berlin.de>, TreetopAngel
> <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net> wrote:
>
> > I don't see a problem with this solution.
> >
> > At least then my tax dollars would be going to help in other areas, not
> > spent on kids who couldn't care less about an education.
>
> Hm. Rome fell when the barbarians came through the gates. If we do not
> give "kids who couldn't care less about an education" *something* on
> which to base a reasonable livelihood, are we not creating our own
> barbarians *within* our gates?

Many of them have no sense of responsibility, no respect for anyone (least of all themselves and each other) and seem to think society (you and I) owe them a living. If this isn't the break down of society as we know it, I don't know what is...

E!

From: Pete LaGrange <oldman1961@hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 8:44 PM

On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 18:22:23 -0600, TreetopAngel wrote:

> 
> "Ed Reppert" wrote:
> 
>> In article <bfmebn$gg9i7$1@ID-193438.news.uni-berlin.de>, TreetopAngel
>> <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I don't see a problem with this solution.
>> >
>> > At least then my tax dollars would be going to help in other areas, not
>> > spent on kids who couldn't care less about an education.
>>
>> Hm. Rome fell when the barbarians came through the gates. If we do not
>> give "kids who couldn't care less about an education" *something* on
>> which to base a reasonable livelihood, are we not creating our own
>> barbarians *within* our gates?
> 
> Hmmm.  Been inside a Junior (Middle) or Senior High school lately?

> Looked at attendance records, check out the kids in the mall lately?

> The "barbarians" are here and my tax dollars are being spent trying to
> make them stay in school...which they don't seem to want.  If it is this
> bad in Missoula, Montana, I can't even imagine the problem it is in a
> bigger city.
> 
> Many of them have no sense of responsibility, no respect for anyone
> (least of all themselves and each other) and seem to think society (you
> and I) owe them a living.

>  If this isn't the break down of society as we
> know it, I don't know what is...

-- 
Pete LaGrange

From: TreetopAngel <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 9:10 PM

"Pete LaGrange" wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 18:22:23 -0600, TreetopAngel wrote:
>
> >
> > "Ed Reppert" wrote:
> >
> >> In article <bfmebn$gg9i7$1@ID-193438.news.uni-berlin.de>,TreetopAngel
> >> <treetopangelstinks@micro-mania.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I don't see a problem with this solution.
> >> >
> >> > At least then my tax dollars would be going to help in other areas, not
> >> > spent on kids who couldn't care less about an education.
> >>
> >> Hm. Rome fell when the barbarians came through the gates. If we do not
> >> give "kids who couldn't care less about an education" *something* on
> >> which to base a reasonable livelihood, are we not creating our own
> >> barbarians *within* our gates?
> >
> > Hmmm.  Been inside a Junior (Middle) or Senior High school lately?
>
> Yes, I have, as a matter of fact. Most recently I saw polite well groomed
> kids who were excited to show their displayed artwork to their parents.
> Other occasasions were similar.

>
> > Looked at attendance records, check out the kids in the mall lately?
>
> Yes and yes. As to attendance, anything more than twenty absences results
> in failure of all classes. When I was in HS I struggled to avoid missing
> twenty days in a /quarter/. The Mall is where they go to impress each
> other, the clothes, the hair and the piercings are all alien to me but my
> old man hated the black leather I wore at that age.

>
> > The "barbarians" are here and my tax dollars are being spent trying to
> > make them stay in school...which they don't seem to want.  If it is this
> > bad in Missoula, Montana, I can't even imagine the problem it is in a
> > bigger city.
> >
> > Many of them have no sense of responsibility, no respect for anyone
> > (least of all themselves and each other) and seem to think society (you
> > and I) owe them a living.
>
> I'm sure many do fit that description, but was it really any different
> twenty years ago?

>
> >  If this isn't the break down of society as we
> > know it, I don't know what is...
>
> It's just normal teenage rebellion, IMO. The smart ones will learn soon
> enough that it only works as long as mom and dad keep feeding you.

E!
>
> --
> Pete LaGrange
>

From: Pete LaGrange <oldman1961@hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 9:36 PM

On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:10:12 -0600, TreetopAngel wrote:

<snip>
> 
> Was this during the day or at a special time?  The hallways in the
> schools around here, during the day are home to all those who don't want
> to attend classes, they hang out in groups.  Even in our free periods,
> when I was in school we still had to vacate the hallways.

<snip>
 
> Nice school!  I wish more would have those types of rules and stick to
> them if they did.  There was a couple of kids in my class who when and
> if they showed up they were either drunk or selling drugs.

 
<snip>

> I think the numbers of them are getting larger.

<snip>

>> It's just normal teenage rebellion, IMO. The smart ones will learn soon
>> enough that it only works as long as mom and dad keep feeding you.
> 
> True, however, I've seen parents back their kids no matter what their
> behavior is.  They expect the teachers to teach them how to play nice,
> be courteous and respectful...something the parents should have
> addressed before the kids reached school age.  I recognize teen
> rebellion, but there sure are a lot of kids out there who are stepping
> beyond those boundaries.

-- 
Pete LaGrange

From: David M. Silver <ag.plusone@verizon.net>

Subject: Re: REMINDER: RAH-AIM Readers Group chat meeting--"Heinlein's Non-Fiction"

Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 11:33 PM

In article <pan.2003.07.24.01.36.53.462127@hotmail.com>,
 Pete LaGrange <oldman1961@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:10:12 -0600, TreetopAngel wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> > 
> > Was this during the day or at a special time?  The hallways in the
> > schools around here, during the day are home to all those who don't want
> > to attend classes, they hang out in groups.  Even in our free periods,
> > when I was in school we still had to vacate the hallways.
> 
> It's been that way every time I've visited (maybe 6-12 times a year).
> 
> <snip>
>  
> > Nice school!  I wish more would have those types of rules and stick to
> > them if they did.  There was a couple of kids in my class who when and
> > if they showed up they were either drunk or selling drugs.
> 
> That was MY school in the seventies.
>  
> <snip>
> 

Corporal punishment was permitted, in all schools. It wasn't common, but it occurred in mine. Administration of it required approval of the head of the department; and usually they sent the problem to the principal, who decided upon it. Who administered it? Usually, for boys, the football coach. Girls got whatever they got from Miss Rados, the head girls' gym coach. I wouldn't know what they got. You were male you generally stayed as far from that place as you could get. Ms. Rados had a demerit pad, you see, and a very good relationship with the football coach, who looked on her as if she were his favored daughter. Swats with a paddle, up to three. Three twice during a semester, you got suspended two weeks, and while suspended, they decided whether you'd get transfered to, guess what: Jackson, Riis, Carson, or El Rancho (or Betsy Ross, but usually the Ross girls quietly disappeared into it for reasons that had very little to do with swats for offenses committed at school or during school hours.)

Other punishments, not corporal, were administered. You picked up trash, after school, if ordered to do so as an alternative to swats. You could do other janitorial work, administered as an alterative or to make up for demerits for lesser offenses, by your own teacher whose class you might have distrupted -- I corrected a lot homework for a history teacher once, and trued more than a few T-squares and boards for a drafting teacher. Some guys who took woodshop got to make new paddles for the football coaches . . . heh, and more than a few got to taste the effects thereof. "Hey, Coach Winfield, I made that one for you." "Good job, now bend over."

No one wandered the halls, without a pass. No one got out of class without a pass. No one was late to a class without demerits. You started with a hundred merits each semester. Three demerits for being late. Three demerits for each class you cut. Drop below seventy-five merits, and you didn't advance to the next grade, didn't graduate, didn't retain eligibility for any sport, club, or other school-sponsored organization or option (Student Newspaper, Work-Study, or you name it). Seven classes a day. Cut it: twenty-one demerits. Figure it out. Get caught twice and you were ineligible to graduate. Happened to me. You worked one hour for a teacher after or before class to get rid of those demerits. Remember my correcting homework and truing all those squares and boards? And it was discretionary on the part of the teacher whether he or she would allow you to work for him or her. If you cut class you kept going and didn't hang around anywhere near the school. They'd come get you, you'd get demerits, swats, and suspended. Very rarely was it even necessary to call the juvenile LAPD division. Drop outs and graduates didn't hang out around the school during school hours. Drop outs rarely showed up around the school ever. Guards? We had no guards. We had the Letterman's Club. They ushered events. We had other service organizations. They ushered events as well, four-eyed nerds, backed up if needed by the not exactly always smiling guy who played right tackle and made All League last year, but it wasn't really necessary. There were always certain teachers around. They taught something, maybe a little math or history, but they also filled out their teaching by coaching a little, acting as gopher for the principal, working in the attendance office, teaching drivers' training, health, monitoring study halls, or acting as counselers, or whatever. They had a certain characteristic. They moved in at the slightest hint of a problem. They smiled and joked and the problem went away, or else.

We had a dress code. We adhered to it, or got demerits. No leather jackets. No motorcycle boots, no dog chains dangling from our levis, no plain tee-shirts, rolled up our arms so the cigarette pack would stay put or not. If you wore levis, they were clean, and they didn't hang low on your hips -- long. You wore a shirt with a collar. No gang jackets. No club jackets during school hours. No car club plaques in the parking lot, or adjacent to the school. Park it with one, not only did they have your car towed -- and you got to deal with the LAPD to get it out, but you got suspended, demerits, put on probation, and while you were suspended they decided whether you got sent elsewhere (you got it: Riis, Jackson, Carson or El Rancho or Betsy Ross). [Girls wore slips, dresses, office type apparel, buttoned up, and not too much makeup. Shorts, aside from gym class, were verbotten; and girls did not wear slacks to class -- after school was fine.]

We had a student government. If you disputed a demerit, you got a trial, a student judge (It was an elected student government position, a senior, and the only one I remember was a she, and she was one very well put together young lady, respected all around -- Diane Asimov -- and I always wondered about the relationship, if any), a jury from the student council of your class, and their decisions were final. They imposed the penalty in disputed cases. They occasionally reversed a teacher. We had one wacko who was going around the bend, kept imposing demerits for "talking back." They reversed her a lot of times, and she was 'retired' a little earlier than she thought she should have been.

> > I think the numbers of them are getting larger.
> 
> I'd agree if I hadn't listened to my Dad kvetch about how the world 
> was going to hell for most of my adolesence.
> 

We were very proud to go to that school. We didn't win many sports championships. We had more than our share of National Merit Scholars, however; but we weren't the top rated academic school, either. We didn't send a lot of kids to four year colleges right out of high school, either. Not a lot of money for college in most of those families. We didn't have the newest buildings, or books, or the best equipped shops, or the fanciest dances, or the richer students -- we had a few well-off from Los Feliz, a little rich enclove to the north next to Griffith Park, but also more than fifty percent of the student body were non-white [hispanic, oriental, black, 'armenian,' lots of tough "right tackles" named Cholakian, Rodriquez, Kubo, or whatever -- and a few of them were student body officers, one named Nasitir, one named Kosei, some others I'd probably recall if I looked through the year books; but it really wasn't an important thing to many of us; and most of their parents worked for an hourly wage]. Along the walls of the main corridor were the photos of the boys and men who'd died in World War II, with the year of their class or the year their class would have been in the case of a few (x'45, x'46). And a brass plaque with their names. There were sixty-eight of them. Not a huge number. But our graduating classes rarely exceeded 300 or so. One time I was working off demerits I got to brasso the plaque, and the brass frames on the photos. Took me about five days, a hour each day, after school. They all shinned when I got done with them. The principal for whom I was working wouldn't have allowed it to have been done any other way. I forget what he'd nailed me for -- something juvenile, no doubt of it.

I really figured out what was going on with education during the mid 1970s when a lot of community money was raised to renovate the old brick buildings of that school instead of tearing them down and replacing them with the standard prefab junk we see today. I went back to see how well the renovation had been done. The old principal of course had retired.The new restored and repainted interior walls were bare. All the photos and plaques of the boys from World War II were gone. No one seemed to know where. If I ever find out who ordered them removed . . . . and were they went . . . .

Just about the same time I heard they'd shut down Jackson, Riis, Kit Carson, Betsy Ross, and El Rancho.

[snip]

Legislators may have passed those laws, and everyone knows that most legislators are lawyers, but the 'experts' asked for them.

" . . . first thing, let's kill all the child psychologists and social 
workers." <veg> Then free beer all around.

-- 
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88

From: Pete LaGrange <oldman1961@hotmail.com>

Subj