Time Enough For Love #1

Having completed our survey of the official "Future History" stories from "Life-Line" through "Common Sense," a popular request is we continue with the story of the Howard families, particularly those blatant lies that comprise the "Lives" of the Senior Member of the Families (t/n Woodrow Wilson Smith, and various alias). So there you have it. Jane and David will share hosting duties and begin their leadoff posts for this excursion.

Please remember to help them out by your thoughts in posts before the meetings. As always, there is more than just the 'story' to talk about this one of Heinlein's works.

For information on how to participate in the chats, download software from http://www.aol.com/aim/home.html/ and read the directions on David Wright's website: http://www.alltel.net/~dwrighsr/heinlein.html/

On an incidental note: we've been beneficiary of some wonderful efforts by Mrs. Heinlein and others to influence some other authors so that we may resume, schedule permitting, visits discussing their own works and the influences of Robert Heinlein on their writings. To arrange for such visits, I'm going to be starting another thread discussing what we may need from persons regularly posting on AFH to make their visits more enjoyable for all.

"Good eating!" was my last closing salutation. How 'bout "Good loving!" for this one.

David M. Silver

AGplusone@aol.com

"I expect your names to shine!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/03/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

TEFL is....a long book. Now I've got that pun out of the way, I'll be serious :-) Actually, it could help to look at it as a kind of extended Green Hills of Earth; different stories about different people ( and Lazarus certainly does change a lot as the book progresses) linked by a common framework; no longer the FH but Lazarus's latest regeneration and rediscovery of his will to live. The Notebooks are yet another theme and one that has probably had more juice per word squeezed out of it than the rest of the book put together. This all adds up to a daunting task if we are to discuss these themes in the space of six hours.....

This is our second meeting with LL, following the much earlier MC. Why Heinlein chose to write again about LL when sequels weren't common amongst his work at that time and why there is such a gap between the two books is an interesting area of speculation in itself. The character of LL was not always in the spotlight during MC; it wove the stories of several memorable characters together but there's no denying that LL, as ever, did tend to be a bit of a scene stealer. However he was rather strait laced at times; preferred a kilt to nudity, turned down the offers of several ladies who wanted to er, grow closer and in general seemed a little old fashioned now and then. Perhaps, as he did with SIASL, Heinlein mulled over the idea of continuing LL's story but wanted to wait until society had changed enough for him to be able to include sex as part of the mixture and still be assured of publication. The three stories are an interesting jumble; the first isn't even about LL; it's about a man who's too lazy to fail, a David Lamb.....who seems to share quite a few experiences and skills of the author himself. Why is this story here? What point was Heinlein ( or Lazarus) trying to make? The next is the twins who weren't; a fairly extensive chunk of the book that seems to be a typical LL adventure but otherwise unremarkable except for some ( rather tedious IMO) biological shenanigans. As a typical Lazarus adventure I suppose i's instructive. Then comes one of the best loved parts of the book, if not Heinlein's whole work; The Tale of the Adopted Daughter and one of the few times that LL not only meets someone more stubborn than he is but falls so deeply in love that centuries later the memory is still poignant and raw.

Mingled in with these three stories are Lazarus's search, with Minerva, for "something new", the gradual creation of a family for Lazarus to rule; Hamadryad, Ira, Galahad and Ishtar, followed of course by the birth of Lazarus's twin sisters/clones. The scene shifts to Tertius, Justin, Tamara and a human Minerva join the throng and Lazarus sets off on his final adventure, back to his childhood. this last adventure of course is also covered, from a slightly different POV, in TSBTS, which fills in some gaps, not perhaps altogether for the best. YMMV. The POV swaps around in a very confusing fashion; sometimes it's first person ( Ira or Lazarus, Justin usually) sometimes it's third person, including Lazarus's final adventure in the past. It seems as if Heinlein was using a lot of different techniques here; does it work? How would the book have been if it had been a straight line chronology? Less interesting? More comprehensible? OK, I haven't really said much concrete here, just waffling....I'm off to read it again but if anyone has ideas about a particular element of the book that they'd like to focus on ( maybe NOT the perennial "should Lazarus have slept with his mother/clones?" <bg>) then speak up! :-)

Jane

-----------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/03/2000

Author: dwrighsr <dwrighsr@alltel.net>

In article <39D9F87E.F66BE76B@netcom.ca>, ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>wrote:

(snip)

Thanks for getting this show on the road. I've been mulling over the last few days just what I could say about TEFL and you covered most of what I had to say and even more.

What I have come up with are, basically, questions about what I see as a number of themes.

a) What is the real significance of the title?

b) What is life? (or self-awareness)?

c) What is the purpose of long life? Does age bring wisdom?

d) What is the purpose of life? Does it have one?

e) What is the purpose of government? Does it have one? This is a fairly minor theme, but it is interesting to see how it is handled in the various disparate sections of the book, it seems to me.

That's it for now. I expect to be adding to these as I continue to re-read the book. Any and all discussions on these points or other are appreciated.

David

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/03/2000

Author: Will <willreich_77@my-deja.com>

In article <8rd2b4$nn$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, dwrighsr@alltel.net wrote:

>In article <39D9F87E.F66BE76B@netcom.ca>,

> ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca> wrote:

>(snip)

>Thanks for getting this show on the road. I've been mulling over the

>last few days just what I could say about TEFL and you covered most of

>what I had to say and even more.

>What I have come up with are, basically, questions about what I see as a

>number of themes.

>That's it for now. I expect to be adding to these as I continue to

>re-read the book. Any and all discussions on these points or other are appreciated.

>David

Another topic occured to me just now and I wonder what the group might think of it. Why is this book so loudly disparaged in a large subset of the SF community? People who don't like RAH often cite it as an example of things wrong with his works. OK, that isn't all that interesting because those people just don't like Heinlein. How about the people who really LOVE him who don't like this book at all. On the old Fido SF echoes, it was often called _Time Enough for Nookie_ and that is a clue that some of these people were just prudish. However, many of these critics also liked SiaSL, so it couln't be ONLY prudishness, could it? Also, the believers in the 'Heinlein WAS a great writer but deteriorated and HERE are the boox in evidence' creed also cite TefL as one of there examples. Sometimes when the debate gets hot one forgets how well this boof SOLD. Anyway, back to trying to figure out what hands to play before the flop.

Will

Dum Vivamus, Vivimus

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

>Why is this book so loudly disparaged in a large subset of

>the SF community?

Is it? I wasn't aware of that -- IWFNE is certainly disparaged for much better reason. The New York Public Library's website lists only Stranger and TEFL as Heinlein's best. (it's necessarily a rather abbreviated list).

IMHO TEFL is Heinlein's most ambitious (and successful) single work. HOWEVER, it's also very definitely not a novel, and Heinlein doesn't care two squats about the PC opinions about what he should be doing as literature. It seems to come closest to a chivalric romance.

What I have seen people object to is the sometimes "precious" portrayals of the society on Secundus and then Boondock. Frankly, I don't see how it would be possible to portray a "polymorphous perverse" society otherwise without becoming lewd about it. I don't see it as "precious" so much as an attempt to be frank without being provocative. I have to give RAH points for the attempt, even when it's not 100% satisfying.

To make sense of the title, you have to remember that "love" emphatically does not necessarily mean sexual friction of mucous membranes. That may be the biggest handicap for the people who object to it. There is cosmic love in there as well as love of self and for self (what makes LL adopt the twins who weren't) and philios, and the divine love of thou-art-god for the totality of the universe. Heinlein trots out Twain's definition of love from "What is Man?" in the middle of all this richness to imply an individualist orientation to even the cosmic divine love for which a long life provides time. Incidentally, although this is a minor theme of Shaw's _Back to Methuselah_ (1930), RAH says it wasn't in mind when he wrote TEFL, though he had read the play once.

A book that clearly was in mind at the time was Vincent McHugh's Caleb Catlum's America (1936) -- a hugely popular satire now all but forgotten. There are some passages in the Archivist's remarks that are almost taken verbatim from the author's introduction to CCA -- a redheaded (and polymorphous perverse as taught by his grandfather, does any of this ring bells) immortal who had led his families in a flight from persecution.

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: Ogden Johnson III <ojiii@home.com>

bpral22169@aol.com(BPRAL22169) wrote:

>>Why is this book so loudly disparaged in a large subset of

>>the SF community?

>Is it? I wasn't aware of that -- IWFNE is certainly disparaged for much better

>reason. The New York Public Library's website lists only Stranger and TEFL as

>Heinlein's best. (it's necessarily a rather abbreviated list).

>IMHO TEFL is Heinlein's most ambitious (and successful) single work. HOWEVER,

>it's also very definitely not a novel, and Heinlein doesn't care two squats

>about the PC opinions about what he should be doing as literature. It seems to

>come closest to a chivalric romance.

[Snip learned - and appreciated - discourse]

When I first picked up TEFL [in paperback, I was still USMC and never bought HB, they were too cumbersome], my first thought after finishing it was "This is the novel he has been working towards for the last 25 years".

He certainly took it from there, and played with it some, even took a side trip with Friday to pick up some thoughts that couldn't have room in TEFL, but for me, it filled the "Da Capo" of the FH chart.

I am not conversant with "the SF community", so I don't have any idea of how large the "large subset" that "loudly disparaged" the book is, but I suspect it is quite a bit smaller than the original poster would have us think.

OJ III

[ObCaveat: YMMV, IMHO, just my $0.02, etc.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: Will <willreich_77@my-deja.com>

In article <or3otskmbiq5kr6cmlb7iqdn47uf7fk1ui@4ax.com>, Ogden Johnson III <ojiii@home.com>wrote:

>bpral22169@aol.com (BPRAL22169) wrote:

>>>Why is this book so loudly disparaged in a large subset of

>>>the SF community?

>>Is it? I wasn't aware of that -- IWFNE is certainly disparaged for much better

>>reason. The New York Public Library's website lists only Stranger and TEFL as

>>Heinlein's best. (it's necessarily a rather abbreviated list).

>>IMHO TEFL is Heinlein's most ambitious (and successful) single work. HOWEVER,

>>it's also very definitely not a novel, and Heinlein doesn't care two squats

>>about the PC opinions about what he should be doing as literature. It seems to

>>come closest to a chivalric romance.

>[Snip learned - and appreciated - discourse]

>When I first picked up TEFL [in paperback, I was still USMC and never

>bought HB, they were too cumbersome], my first thought after

>finishing it was "This is the novel he has been working towards for

>the last 25 years".

>He certainly took it from there, and played with it some, even took a

>side trip with Friday to pick up some thoughts that couldn't have room

>in TEFL, but for me, it filled the "Da Capo" of the FH chart.

>I am not conversant with "the SF community", so I don't have any idea

>of how large the "large subset" that "loudly disparaged" the book is,

>but I suspect it is quite a bit smaller than the original poster would

>have us think.

>OJ III

>[ObCaveat: YMMV, IMHO, just my $0.02, etc.]

Well, I am the appareently annonymouse original poster and I would not "have you think" anything.

If you were on the old SF.Lit echo on Fidonet or the current SF.Written NewsGroup, you would know that the book is rather commonly brought up as evidence of Heinlein's A: Deterioration or B: Perversity or C: General Unworthiness.

However, I would not "have you think" anything, so just go back to sleep. I was asking people who had seen this phenomonon to comment on it; that it happens is not debatable. How widespread this phenomenon is depends, I guess, on your definition of widespread. If you have not seen it, you don't have to believe me.

Will

Dum Vivamus, Vivimus

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: Ogden Johnson III <ojiii@home.com>

Will <willreich_77@my-deja.com>wrote:

>Well, I am the appareently annonymouse original poster and I would

>not "have you think" anything.

Easy, Will. Bill Patterson did not include a cite, and your original post hadn't hit my server at the time I posted. Am I supposed to be a psychic?

>If you were on the old SF.Lit echo on Fidonet or the current SF.Written

>NewsGroup, you would know that the book is rather commonly brought up

>as evidence of Heinlein's A: Deterioration or B: Perversity or C:

>General Unworthiness.

Can't speak to Fidonet, none of the BBS's I frequented in my pre-Usenet days carried Fidonet. As for r.a.s.w, I found that most posters in that group seem to feel that the substance of one's thoughts are determined by their volume [both by loudness and count of posts].

>However, I would not "have you think" anything, so just go back to

>sleep. I was asking people who had seen this phenomonon to comment on

>it; that it happens is not debatable. How widespread this phenomenon is

>depends, I guess, on your definition of widespread. If you have not

>seen it, you don't have to believe me.

OK. <sleep>

OJ III-------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: AGplusone <agplusone@aol.com>

OJ, Will Reich, and Bill Patterson have commented on a position taken by some regarding TEFL as demonstrating what Will has described the posters on the old SF Lit echo on Fidonet or the current SF Written NewsGroup of citing:

>>as evidence of Heinlein's A: Deterioration or B: Perversity or C:

>>General Unworthiness.

Probably this is more common than we here experience. I've noted very like comments by some on internal AOL boards in what we used to call "Realm" and "TheBookReport" forums.

The type of argument usually posted begins with something like this: "I loved all of Heinlein's earlier works, the juveniles, etc. ... " BUT ... and then comes the 'deterioration' and 'perversity' and whathaveyou critical comments. I'm always tempted to equate the posters' minds with Alice Dalgliesh's; but that is certain to produce flame wars with them.

I think it rankles those who looked to that 'nice Naval Academy graduate who wrote all those great juveniles' and therefore considered him "safe" to entrust juveniles for education in orthodoxy to find that there was a provocative, trouble-making mind behind the stories in those great juveniles, just waiting to leap out and pounce on the now grown-up audience and challenge them with satires and other habiliments of adult literature.

What surprises me, often, is they don't go back and find all hints in the juveniles ... and discover they've been all wet in their 'love' of the juveniles as well. We see the little hints today ... because we have read both types of "The Two Heinleins." Come to think of it, maybe we could call one Dr. Jeckyl and the other Mr. Hyde, with Hyde hiding in there under that nice Naval Academy graduate all the time.

David M. Silver

AGplusone@aol.com

"I expect your names to shine!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/06/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

>all hints in the juveniles ..

Oh, yes, indeedy. Heinlein was such an effective educatory in those juveniles because he was _such_ a subversive. If he had been teaching the "same old s**t," the kids would have turned off and that would have been the end of it.

Heinlein was trying to teach kids how to be human beings, how to be thinking, self-actualizing beings. That is the uttermost subversion, beyond which there can be no more radical. And didn't Socrates get killed for doing exactly that?

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/06/2000

Author: Richard A. Randall <rrandall@iname.com>

"BPRAL22169" <bpral22169@aol.com>wrote in message news:20001006105438.28238.00000571@ng-fe1.aol.com...

>>all hints in the juveniles ..

>Oh, yes, indeedy. Heinlein was such an effective educatory in those juveniles

>because he was _such_ a subversive. If he had been teaching the "same old

>s**t," the kids would have turned off and that would have been the end of it.

>Heinlein was trying to teach kids how to be human beings, how to be thinking,

>self-actualizing beings. That is the uttermost subversion, beyond which there

>can be no more radical. And didn't Socrates get killed for doing exactly that?

_Have_Space_Suit,_Will_Travel_, my first "grown-up" book taught me that greatly respected authority _must_ sometimes be opposed, even by children. (It was also my first really good example of honor -- when Kip demands to be sent home first if the Earth is to be destroyed.)

_Starship_Troopers_ introduced me to a utopic society which was utterly at odds with the prejudices being inculcated in me by many authority figures, and provided enough meat so that I could go to the source material and look for myself.

_Rocket_Ship_Galileo_, read a few Heinleins later, (as also pointed out by Spider Robinson) told me to question what I've been told and go _look_ for myself.

_. . . If_This_Goes_On_ showed me (at its conclusion) a utopic society that could never do wrong, while _Methuselah's_Children_ showed how the same society could prepare for a sanctioned pogrom. (This also pointed my nose in the direction of the Holocaust.)

Naw. . . RAH wasn't a scandalous (check the _Catechism_of_the_Catholic_Church_ for definition -- I'm using that meaning) old subversive radical in his juveniles and shorts (which were easy enough for juveniles to read). Not a bit.

That wouldn't be why my libertarian (I suspect), got-mad-when-I-blindly-agreed-with-anyone-including-him father left RAH lying around on the breakfast table (which he never went near, much less used). Or why he chose RAH as my first "grown-up book". (NOTB was my second "grown-up" book. . . ) </sarcasm>

Richard A. Randall

Purveyor of fine piranhakeets.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/07/2000

Author: Tawn Johnson <tawn3@aol.com>

>And didn't Socrates get killed for doing exactly that?

>Bill

Socrates got killed for refusing to compromise his principles. He was afforded opportunity to escape (and to retract IIRC). He choose to take the hemlock. Me myself, I woulda run fer them thar hills.

Tawn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/07/2000

Author: Will <willreich_77@my-deja.com>

In article <20001007052435.24082.00000736@ng-fk1.aol.com>, tawn3@aol.com (Tawn Johnson) wrote:

>>And didn't Socrates get killed for doing exactly that?

>>Bill

>Socrates got killed for refusing to compromise his principles. He was

>afforded opportunity to escape (and to retract IIRC). He choose to take the

>hemlock. Me myself, I woulda run fer them thar hills.

>Tawn

"Give me three steps, give me three steps, mister. Give me three steps toward the door." Marshall Tucker (or Charlie Daniels, I forget)

Will

Dum Vivamus, Vivimus

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/07/2000

Author: Mike Keith <michael@e1pcplace.com>

"Will" <willreich_77@my-deja.com>wrote in message news:8rndcg$8qq$1@nnrp1.deja.com...

>In article <20001007052435.24082.00000736@ng-fk1.aol.com>,

>tawn3@aol.com (Tawn Johnson) wrote:

>>>And didn't Socrates get killed for doing exactly that?

>>>Bill

>>>

>>Socrates got killed for refusing to compromise his principles. He was

>>afforded opportunity to escape (and to retract IIRC). He choose to take the

>>hemlock. Me myself, I woulda run fer them thar hills.

>>Tawn

>"Give me three steps, give me three steps, mister. Give me three steps

>toward the door." Marshall Tucker (or Charlie Daniels, I forget)

Lenoard Skynard ca 1975

MIke

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/06/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

>even took a side trip with Friday to pick up some thoughts that couldn't have room

>in TEFL

That's very interesting -- I've been trying to find connections of _Friday_ with the World as Myth books without much success. How do you see _Friday_ as related to TEFL (which is simultaneously the end of the Future History and the beginning of the World as Myth books)?

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/07/2000

Author: Ogden Johnson III <ojiii@home.com>

bpral22169@aol.com (BPRAL22169) wrote:

>>even took a

>>side trip with Friday to pick up some thoughts that couldn't have room

>>in TEFL

>That's very interesting -- I've been trying to find connections of _Friday_

>with the World as Myth books without much success. How do you see _Friday_ as

>related to TEFL (which is simultaneously the end of the Future History and the

>beginning of the World as Myth books)?

OK, recapturing the context:

>"This is the novel he has been working towards for the last 25 years".

>He certainly took it from there, and played with it some,

In other words, having finished off, as you noted, the Future History [and not incidentally, become financially secure] he could now go on and write wherever the spirit took him - into the World as Myth as it turned out. But, from this:

>even took a side trip with Friday to pick up some thoughts that couldn't have room

>in TEFL

By which I meant that for me, Friday's society represented the ultimate outgrowth of "The Crazy Years" idea that he had played with earlier on in stories. For me, a lot of the "state nations" depicted represented ultimate outgrowths of one or another idea touched on briefly in an earlier story. We had practically everything but Scudder and the Fosterites during Friday's hegira. And *they* had been covered at length elsewhere.

In other words, some stuff there wasn't room to finish off, tidy up, clear some more notes, whatever, in TEFL as "Da Capo". So, take a pause in the World as Myth, a side trip back to the Future History, and clear up some odds and ends. Make a few bucks, inspire a PB cover that harks back to the '40s/'50s pulp SF covers while you're cleaning out the attic. ;-> Sorry, nothing more profound than that in my take on Friday. That and the fact that it is solidly in my top ten, probably the top five, of all RAH stories/novels.

OJ III

[No - no way am I actually going to do anything silly like actually listing my top five or ten.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/03/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

dwrighsr@alltel.net wrote:

These questions are certainly thought provoking David! Not quite like a triv quiz with a one word answer but off the top of my head, here are my first reactions.

>a) What is the real significance of the title?

That only in an advanced, leisured society is there such time; that maybe we are racing along concentrating on the wrong things and missing out on the vital element that makes life worth while; love ( _not_ necessarily sexual...though this book does tend to give that aspect a lot of airtime).

>b) What is life? (or self-awareness)?

I think you've answered that; life IS self awareness. It's possible to be alive and not know it ( amoebas and such) but for humans the knowledge of our own existence and its inevitable end is the spark that either fuels us or consumes us. That Lazarus seemed to be outside this experience ( and how long did it take him to realise that he wasn't going to die? Did he ever? Does that make him less human?) is the most fascinating part of his story and one that doesn't get examined enough I think. Both in the book and on this group.

>c) What is the purpose of long life? Does age bring wisdom?

I'm not sure that long life is all that different from short life in some ways...like bookshelves, the more you have, the more books appear, never any more space :-). I think that for Ira and the rest of their family ( barring LL) their lives probably seemed much the same as ours do. As to the wisdom, well, that's a point I've often wondered about. Ira says they need LL for his wisdom....but I seriously doubt that.....I think there were more devious political implications...I wish we could see the Arabelle take over in more detail.

>d) What is the purpose of life? Does it have one?

Hmm...purpose..does it need one? If there isn't a reason for it all, we may as well give up and die. I think we make our own contributions to the world, some positive, some negative. Whether this goes towards a grander design is moot; we live for our own reasons.

>e) What is the purpose of government? Does it have one? This is a fairly

>minor theme, but it is interesting to see how it is handled in the

>various disparate sections of the book, it seems to me.

Do you mean the discussions about pure democracy and the way that Ira handles things? This is one I'll have to leave until I've finished reading it again....be interesting to look at the set up in each section of the book.

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/09/2000

Author: CAS6039 <cas6039@aol.com>

>>e) What is the purpose of government? Does it have one? This is a fairly

>>minor theme, but it is interesting to see how it is handled in the

>>various disparate sections of the book, it seems to me.

>Do you mean the discussions about pure democracy and the way that Ira

>handles things? This is one I'll have to leave until I've finished reading

>it again....be interesting to look at the set up in each section of the

>book.

>Jane

Even though the "Notebooks" section(s) have many references to what Heinlein thought of government, I think the way Ira and LL set up the colony on Tellus Tertius (Boondock) shows what the purpose of government should be: as little as possible. The only government they set up was Ira as mayor, and LL as colony leader. They evenly specifically state that there were NO laws set up over marriage.

Unlike US federales, who can't figure out if Vermont should stay a state simply because they allow same sex marriages *sigh* Give us a break! Ain't there something else they could be concerned with?

CAS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/09/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

CAS6039 wrote:

>Even though the "Notebooks" section(s) have many references to what Heinlein

>thought of government, I think the way Ira and LL set up the colony on Tellus

>Tertius (Boondock) shows what the purpose of government should be: as little as

>possible. The only government they set up was Ira as mayor, and LL as colony

>leader. They evenly specifically state that there were NO laws set up over

>marriage.

But look how it turned out by the time of CWWTW; queue jumpers being summarily murdered and the murderer being exonerated in minutes. It's a YMMV situation but it seems to me that too few rules are not that much better than too many and the colony on Tertius could have used a little more structuring. Were LL and Ira being true to their political beliefs or just irresponsible?

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/09/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

>too few rules are not that much better than too many and the

Jane, Jane, Jane, Jane Jane.

I don't believe you two are talking about the same planet, possibly not even the same millennium.

And there is a big BIG difference between rules (ie., conventions of behavior) and laws. Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/09/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

BPRAL22169 wrote:

>>too few rules are not that much better than too many and the

>Jane, Jane, Jane, Jane Jane.

>I don't believe you two are talking about the same planet, possibly not even

>the same millennium.

>And there is a big BIG difference between rules (ie., conventions of behavior)

>and laws.

>Bill

Huh? Are you saying that Colin and Gwen didn't end up on Tertius? That's where the queue jumper episode happened. I'm not sure how much time had passed between TEFL and CWWTW without a look at the books but not that long I think. Century at most. Why do you think Cas and I are talking about different places?

As to the other point, I meant the restrictions that government lay down; laws may be more accurate; consider my post retroactively amended if that makes you happy :-) Though I think my teachers may have felt that the school rules were just as important as any government laws.......

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

I thought the queue jumper incident happened on one of the habitats as they were trying to get out -- can't look it up right now.

Every social transaction you undertake is governed by conventions; only a tiny fraction of your life is governed by "restrictions that government lay down," and most of those "restrictions" have only come about in the last 70-100 years. Some laws reinforce conventions - like traffic laws -- so don't get heavy enforcement. The 20th century has had a bizarre love affair with the state, but that particular fever is starting to pass off.

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: Richard Bensam <rabensam@earthlink.net>

On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 0:51:56 -0400, BPRAL22169 wrote (in message <20001010005156.23839.00000908@ng-cp1.aol.com>):

>I thought the queue jumper incident happened on one of the habitats as they

>were trying to get out -- can't look it up right now.

The queue jumper incident took place on Tertius, approximately 4400 AD (date given by Richard Ames), which would be (even more approximately) 114 years after the founding of Boondock colony (based on considerable evidence in TEFL which I once worked out painstakingly but have since forgotten).

Richard A (not Ames) Bensam

http://home.earthlink.net/~rabensam/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

>The queue jumper incident took place on Tertius, approximately 4400 AD

I stand corrected and offer an apology to Jane Davitt.

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

BPRAL22169 wrote:

>>The queue jumper incident took place on Tertius, approximately 4400 AD

>I stand corrected and offer an apology to Jane Davitt.

>Bill

No need Bill; those latter books are so complex it's hard to keep them straight in one's mind sometimes. That incident got discussed here quite recently which is why it was still fresh in my memory.

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>

I've been thinking more about the queue jumping incident. It occurs to me that the convention versus law discussion taking place on this thread may be related. In a society that depends on the rule of social conventions, flouting those conventions is a much more serious threat to the social fabric than would be ordinary scofflawry in our own. Perhaps the linestanders' reaction was not over the top, but a responsible and measured reaction -- a kind of preventative social surgery, conducted by responsible and far-seeing adults. Those are so few and far between we may not be able instantly to recognize them in action.

Bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>

BPRAL22169 wrote:

>I've been thinking more about the queue jumping incident. It occurs to me that

>the convention versus law discussion taking place on this thread may be

>related. In a society that depends on the rule of social conventions, flouting

>those conventions is a much more serious threat to the social fabric than would

>be ordinary scofflawry in our own. Perhaps the linestanders' reaction was not

>over the top, but a responsible and measured reaction -- a kind of preventative

>social surgery, conducted by responsible and far-seeing adults. Those are so

>few and far between we may not be able instantly to recognize them in action.

>Bill

Well, as the dead man was a tourist, I can't see that removing him improved the society on Tertius much; he would have been a temporary annoyance at worst. No one found out why he wanted to get to the head of the queue, no one gave him a chance to apologise or instructed him on approved behaviour....if, in a society less well organised than an anarchy, there was such a standard in the first place.

My basic reaction to this incident though was shock that someone would take away a life out of pique that they had been delayed in a queue for a few moments...and the subsequent trial would have been far more of a delay, making it even less of a logical action. In fact, I'm surprised there was a trial at all. It's a scary society and I wouldn't like it. YMMV.

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/05/2000

Author: Roger Glover <rglover@talarian.com>

dwrighsr@alltel.net wrote:

>In article <39D9F87E.F66BE76B@netcom.ca>,

>ddavitt <ddavitt@netcom.ca>wrote:

------->: snip

>What I have come up with are, basically, questions about what I see as a

>number of themes.

>a)What is the real significance of the title?

>b)What is life? (or self-awareness)?

>c)What is the purpose of long life? Does age bring wisdom?

>d)What is the purpose of life? Does it have one?

>e)What is the purpose of government? Does it have one? This is a fairly

>minor theme, but it is interesting to see how it is handled in the

>various disparate sections of the book, it seems to me.

There is one more important theme which, it seems to me, is really only introduced *directly* at the very end, although I think the Senior's many stories along the way set it up obliquely. That theme is explores the relationship between creation and creator.

f)What is the nature of creation? To what extent are creations actively formed from the outside? To what extent do creations actively form themselves? To what extent does creation "just happen"?

and in the mirror:

g)What is the nature of a creator? To what extent does a creator create from within? To what extent does a creator react to his/her/its own environment? To what extent does a creator "channel" creation from no identifiable source?

and together, this is where the end of the book becomes most interesting to me:

h)What is the relationship between creation and creator? What are the connections between them? What are the barriers between them?

Certainly other, later works take a shot at this idea "head on". TNOTB, TSBTS, TCWWTW, and J:ACOJ spring to mind; there may be others but I can't recall any. Hoever, his first tentative probes into the idea here in TEFL are somehow more pure than his direct assaults on the topic in later works. There is "near-death scene" near the end in which, to all appearances, Heinlein has a dialog directly with Long. It reminds me of similar author-character dialogs in Douglas Hofstadter's Pulitzer-winning book _Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid_.

-- Roger Glover

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: Nollaig MacKenzie

On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:02:30 -0400, the estimable ddavitt wrote:

>BPRAL22169 wrote:

>>I've been thinking more about the queue jumping incident. It occurs to me that

>>the convention versus law discussion taking place on this thread may be

>>related. In a society that depends on the rule of social conventions, flouting

>>those conventions is a much more serious threat to the social fabric....

>... as the dead man was a tourist, I can't see that removing him improved the

>society on Tertius much; he would have been a temporary annoyance at worst.

Seems to me Manny's attitude toward the Stilyagi who proposed dumping Stu Lajoie out an airlock is about right for these cases: The tourist violated an important local custom, so he should be given some lumps; but he *is* a tourist, so spacing him is way out of line. tMiaHM gets a lot of moral stuff just about right....

Cheers, N.

Nollaig MacKenzie :: rahfan@amhuinnsuidhe.cx ::

http://www.amhuinnsuidhe.cx/rahfan/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/10/2000

Author: ddavitt

Nollaig MacKenzie wrote:

>Seems to me Manny's attitude toward the Stilyagi

>who proposed dumping Stu Lajoie out an airlock is

>about right for these cases: The tourist violated

>an important local custom, so he should be given

>some lumps; but he *is* a tourist, so spacing him

>is way out of line. tMiaHM gets a lot of moral

>stuff just about right....

>Cheers, N.

I could go along with that .....seems fair.

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/11/2000

Author: AGplusone

Early this morning, I reviewed the nearly seventy posts already made pertaining to Time Enough For Love in this tread and in the other one. To sum up thus far, our chat co-hosts each have devoted careful initial time to specifying overall themes they see present in the volume, and given significant details on issues that appear to them; but much of what our response to them, perhaps the fault of one of my posts, has been an inquiry concerning the first 'story' that I consciously directed as to where the author intended us to see the volume "going."

I'm beginning to think perhaps our hosts might consider extending our chat meeting over another set of two meetings, depending on developments in the chat this Thursday and Saturday. Think on that, please ... David and Jane.

Meanwhile let me return to the point I've been struggling with for years. My inquiry was on what, exactly, the author intended us to understand about David Lamb, the subject of "The Man Who Was Too Lazy To Fail." Perhaps a consensus is developing that David may have been somewhat less worthy than what was created on a first impression or reading: David is presented by our author as a "affable," very pleasant person who succeeds personally over adversities. Then he retires to do exactly what he has always wished time enough to do -- nothing.

As also do Max Jones and Andrew Libby, David rises from and far above an economically depressed background, using his gifts, mainly mental, to achieve certain goals; but the difference seems to be to me that he never develops in character. For start to end, David is just another portrayal of the pastor in To Sail Beyond The Sunset, the one who seduces Maureen and leaves her locked in a closet, who became a man of religion because looking at the south end of a north bound mule was work too hard and perhaps too honest to suit him.

Just as occurs in Divinity School or a Seminary, David was subjected to education by a system designed to instill a moral code. It didn't take. What the Navy got in return for that education it could have gotten cheaper by hiring a civilian scientist or aeronautics engineer or experienced commercial pilot, as Heinlein earlier had suggested military might do in Starship Troopers. David was a time-server, who avoided dangerous service to the greatest extent he could arrange during a World War. He gladly flew a desk in Buair, at a time when others his age and class took off in pitifully inadequate Buffalo fighters to defend Wake and Midway, and nearly all died, at a time when others his age took off from jeep carriers in still inadequate Wildcats to land on Henderson Field to rise up each day to fight through that Zero screen to defend against Washing Machine Charlie, and many died, at a time when others 'ran silent, ran deep' in pigboats to launch their torpedos, even knowing most of their torpedoes wouldn't explode, or others attacked battleships aboard thinclad "little boys" zig-zaging in the smoke in the Suriago Straits to do the same, and just many of those died as well. Perhaps David wasn't a physical coward--we really cannot know--but civilians given 90 days of training and a reserve commission showed far more than he. David was what my Marine uncle called a "feather merchant." Viewed this way, David is initially merely a disappointment. Why? And why 'initially merely'?

'Merely' mainly because he refused to accept responsibility to his society, or for that matter, to anyone or thing other than his own self. In an essay, Heinlein once divided humanity into three classes: makers, takers, and fakers. David is both a taker and a faker. Sadly, with his skills and abilities he could have been a maker. He also could have been a taker on a somewhat grander scale than he was. Thank God he wasn't because David's sort is truly dangerous.

I see Lamb's character as something far worse than a mere pragmatist, somewhat of a kindly characterization I think for what he was shown capable of being. On first reading David, as the surname choosen for him by the author suggests, seems a 'beloved' character, seems a simple pure sort, seems in ways that I ascribe to the author's skill an emblem of innocence, both characteristics suggested by his cognomen; but in fact he is in a phrase, a terrifying wolf in lamb's clothing just as David the King, his and my namesake as selected by this author, was.

Don't take my word for it: ask Goliath about that defenseless shepard boy, ask Saul and David's beloved best friend Jonathan whose reign and line he ended, ask the tribes he conquered, the male prisoners he executed, their women and children he enslaved, ask Uriah the Hittite who loyally served him, whose wife he enjoyed after he arranged that murder, ask his most skillful lieutenant who fell from his favor and for whom he invaded a holy sanctuary to kill even in his retirement, ask his son Absolom ... ooops, sorry, you cannot, can you, they're all dead by his hand or by his order ... aren't they? No, Beloved King David, the highly skilled creator, singer of psalms, and dancer before the Tabernacle, and truly a taker of Imperial magnitude, was found unfit to build the Temple, wasn't he? Instead the last significant thing we hear of him was his having young girls brought in to "warm" his bed. Let's leave him "lying" there in that hammock under the shade trees, shall we?

Do I think a personality such as David Lamb incapable of the highest evil? Isn't Lamb too lazy? Yes, and maybe not. FWIW, I think that among the David Lambs are the most dangerous people to the world. If I cannot trust their word, their oath, their Honor, then ultimately, they are irresponsibile; and I cannot trust them in anything. I mean, really, a David Lamb would steal and carry off the gravestone of a mule's grave if he thought it might enable him to avoid some honest work, sometime ... somewhere.

I think David Lamb was a fiendishly delightful creation by this author (a "Lamb of the Devil" so to speak), and by his standard we are intended to judge what comes next throughout Time Enough For Love.

David M. Silver

AGplusone@aol.com

"I expect your names to shine!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/11/2000

Author: ddavitt

AGplusone wrote:

>I'm beginning to think perhaps our hosts might consider extending our chat

>meeting over another set of two meetings, depending on developments in the chat

>this Thursday and Saturday. Think on that, please ... David and Jane.

Well, we did discuss splitting TEFL up into one session on Thursday and one on Saturday; if this has to extend over three, maybe four sessions instead, I can't see a problem. I think the volume of posts generated on one story shows that there is plenty of material to go at. How about leaving the themes for the moment and moving on to the next story Lazarus tells; one that gets a little overlooked, "The Tale of the Twins Who Weren't." Not an awful lot happens in this story but it contains some significant bits nonetheless.

Again, we get a reiteration of the Lamb theme; " Respect for laws is a pragmatic matter. Women know this instinctively; that's why they are all smugglers. Men often believe - or pretend - that the "Law" is something sacred, or at least a science - an unfounded assumption very convenient to governments."

I have a sneaky feeling that Ticky's actions as chronicled in Tramp Royale may have been at the back of Heinlein's mind when he wrote this...

Lazarus then meets the twins and cuts back to the present to ask Minerva how she thinks they were created. Oh boy......this bit is soooo boring! "There must be intervention in gametogenesis in each parent just before meiotic division-reduction of chromosome number - that is, one would start with primary spermatocytes and primary oocytes, unreduced diploids." No kidding.....I really don't know why Heinlein wrote this and the subsequent pages where LL muses on the possibility of the baby being a "monster", inevitably leading to another lecture years later to stop possibly dangerous incest between Joe and Lita's children. If they were just a breeding pair he may not have stopped to look at them but the genetics bit is really superfluous to the story and worse, it's dull. IMO. FWIW.

There is an interesting bit sandwiched in amongst the musings though, when LL relates how he got the name "Doctor Genocide" by wanting to refuse treatment to defectives who wouldn't allow themselves to be sterilised; defectives also covering social inadequates, incapable of being self reliant. Hmm....was it Jubal who said something about letting haemophiliacs bleed to death? He calls this a period of "temporary mental aberration"; not because he comes to think his views are wrong but because he's made the mistake of voicing them and being conspicuous.

There are also hints about the next story; " a pair-bond stronger than most marriages, in Sheffield's long experience. More than any of his own - ( Except one, except one!)"

And this story actually includes the title of the book; "Sheffield had decided, centuries back, that the saddest thing about emphemerals was that their little lives rarely held time enough for love." Dora will of course teach him otherwise.....

Another point is the way the story switches from first to third person; an interesting way of telling it that is easy to overlook.

Jane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/12/2000

Author: Mac

Nollaig MacKenzie wrote in message ...

On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:02:30 -0400, the estimable

ddavitt wrote:

>BPRAL22169 wrote:

>>I've been thinking more about the queue jumping incident. It occurs to me that

>>the convention versus law discussion taking place on this thread may be

>>related. In a society that depends on the rule of social conventions, flouting

>>those conventions is a much more serious threat to the social fabric....

>... as the dead man was a tourist, I can't see that removing him improved the

>society on Tertius much; he would have been a temporary annoyance at worst.

Cheers, N.

************************

Yes, but didn't Manny also strongly suggest that Stu, being a tourist and visiting somewhere, had an "obligation" to read up on, to study, to learn some of the customs and rules of the society, of the culture he would be visiting ? If one fails to do so and then strongly shatters some local taboo, then surely one should expect some "lesson" ---but I am very glad that Manny had the sense to temper the judgment and that the kids also had the insight to accept the limits.

As for the line-jumper. . .

Although at times one is tempted I do believe that killing, without making any effort to ascertain if there was a reason for such actions, might be extreme and an indication that there may be problems with the local society.

Mac

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/11/2000

Author: Tian Harter <tnharter@aol.com147DISH>

Jane quoted from TEFL:

>" Respect for laws is a pragmatic matter. Women know

>this instinctively; that's why they are all smugglers. Men

>often believe - or pretend - that the "Law" is something

>sacred, or at least a science - an unfounded assumption

>very convenient to governments."

Two days ago I was talking to a guy that said "If you want to have a lasting impact, work on the culture, not the law."

Tian Harter

http://members.aol.com/tnharter

According to page 41 of the current

issue of Adbusters, the CEO of tobacco

company Philip Morris is Geoffrey Bible.

I ride a Nader/LaDuke brand bicycle.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/12/2000

Author: Mac <nur99-NoGreenEggs-and-SpamPlease@teleport.com>

AGplusone wrote in message +ADw-20001011060727.27047.00003090+AEA-ng-cg1.aol.com+AD4-...

>Early this morning, I reviewed the nearly seventy posts already made pertaining

>to Time Enough For Love in this tread and in the other one.

>To sum up thus far, our chat co-hosts each have devoted careful initial time to

>specifying overall themes they see present in the volume, and given significant

details on issues that appear to them,- but much of what our response to them,

>perhaps the fault of one of my posts, has been an inquiry concerning the first

>'story' that I consciously directed as to where the author intended us to

>see the volume "-going."-

>I'm beginning to think perhaps our hosts might consider extending our chat

>meeting over another set of two meetings, depending on developments in the chat

>this Thursday and Saturday. Think on that, please ... David and Jane.

>Meanwhile let me return to the point I've been struggling with for years. My

>nquiry was on what, exactly, the author intended us to understand about David

>Lamb, the subject of "-The Man Who Was Too Lazy To Fail."- Perhaps a consensus is

>developing that David may have been somewhat less worthy than what was created

>on a first impression or reading: David is presented by our author as a

>"-affable,"- very pleasant person who succeeds personally over adversities. Then

>he retires to do exactly what he has always wished time enough to do -- nothing.

>As also do Max Jones and Andrew Libby, David rises from and far above an

>economically depressed background, using his gifts, mainly mental, to achieve

>certain goals but the difference seems to be to me that he never develops in character.

>SNIP SNIP

Just as occurs in Divinity School or a Seminary, David was subjected to

>education by a system designed to instill a moral code. It didn't take. What

>the Navy got in return for that education it could have gotten cheaper by

>hiring a civilian scientist or aeronautics engineer or experienced commercial

>pilot, as Heinlein earlier had suggested military might do in Starship

>Troopers. David was a time-server, who avoided dangerous service to the

>greatest extent he could arrange during a World War. He gladly flew a desk in

>Buair, at a time when others his age and class took off in pitifully inadequate

>Buffalo fighters to defend Wake and Midway, and nearly all died, at a time when

>others his age took off from jeep carriers in still inadequate Wildcats to land

>on Henderson Field to rise up each day to fight through that Zero screen to

>defend against Washing Machine Charlie, and many died, at a time when others

>'ran silent, ran deep' in pigboats to launch their torpedos, even knowing most

>of their torpedoes wouldn't explode, or others attacked battleships aboard

>thinclad "-little boys"- zig-zaging in the smoke in the Suriago Straits to do the

>same, and just many of those died as well. Perhaps David wasn't a physical

>coward--we really cannot know--but civilians given 90 days of training and a

>reserve commission showed far more than he. David was what my Marine uncle

>called a "-feather merchant."- Viewed this way, David is initially merely a

>disappointment. Why? And why 'initially merely'?

SNIP

Thank you for your comments.

and yet. . . ?

Was David really avoiding actions and events out of total self-interest and need that be so terrible? He had skills and knew what those skills were and placed himself in places where he might use those skills to the greatest effect --- in the case of the war, perhaps that did more help than his sacrificing himself immediately in combat years earlier ?

How can one judge this?

Here is a person who does not just drift along: he knows what he wants, he looks out upon the world and finds the best path to achieve the greatest ease for himself which places him using his talents, his skills in the best fashion.

And yet, would this be an antithesis of Starship Troopers where one must show some action above sole self-interest ?

---Mac

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/12/2000

Author: Ward Griffiths <wdg3rd@home.com>

On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Mac wrote:

>As for the line-jumper. . .

>Although at times one is tempted I do believe that killing,

>without making any effort to ascertain if there was a reason

>for such actions, might be extreme and an indication that

>there may be problems with the local society.

A queue-jumper should at least have a visible excuse (a 10-month pregnant wife, a child with an arrow through its head) or have started shouting "excuse me!" several seconds before cutting into the line. It's his responsibility to those he is inconveniencing or maybe to his heirs and assigns. Otherwise he deserves to demonstrate evolution.

Ward Griffiths wdg3rd@home.com http://members.home.net/wdg3rd/

When the man said alcohol, tobacco and firearms, I just naturally assumed he was making a delivery. (.sig stolen from a guy in rec.nude)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RAH-AIM Mtng Notice, 10/12 & 14/00 --TEFL

Date: 10/12/2000

Author: FREEMAN <adamcfreeman@hotmail.com>

BPRAL22169 <bpral22169@aol.com>wrote in message news:20001010100524.04093.00001129@ng-bg1.aol.com...