@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
11/04/05 -- Vol. 24, No. 19, Whole Number 1307
Table of Contents
Your Horoscope (comments by Mark R. Leeper):
(Due to economy concerns we cannot provide complete horoscopes. Your cooperation is appreciated.)
Everyone: I am reliably informed that some of you have not gone back to your original birth signs. Not many, but there are some. Enough. The stars are very angry with you and me and all of us. It is always just a few of us who have to spoil it for the rest of us. The stars will continue to talk to us, but from this point on they are just going to tell us lies. Don't believe anything you read in a horoscope, the stars will be just trying to trick us. It is a pity just a few of us had to bring this on all of us. [-mrl]
Targeted Ads (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper):
Yahoo! attempts to match ads to the various groups they have. The ads I recently saw on the home page for the group included:
"Air Pillow for Void fill and Packaging - Inflatable air pillows
by LPack Packaging Systems provides the void fill or impact
protection you need in packaging. No obligation trial and give
you the option to lease or own.
www.airpillow.net"
"Filling Voids under Concrete Surfaces - Learn how to fill voids
under concrete to raise or stabilize the surface. Find a local
contractor that can perform the work.
www.saberleveling.com"
"Void Fill - Compare & Save At Nextag - Find low prices on name
brand home and garden products from online stores.
www.nextag.com"
I don't think they quite understand the group. :-) [-ecl]
Everything You Will Ever Need To Know About Zorro (comments by Mark R. Leeper):
One of our friends mentioned that she was reading Isabel Allende's novel ZORRO. The book is supposedly a biography of Zorro and it implies that Zorro was a real historical figure. Our friend believed that Zorro was every bit as real as characters like Jack the Ripper. I am sure that Allende was using the claim as a literary device, much as C. Northcote Parkinson (famous for humorous writings on business, especially about Parkinson's law) wrote a serious biography of the fictional British naval hero Horatio Hornblower. It is interesting that the stories of Zorro are so prevalent in our culture that some people accept them as being based on truth. Zorro has actually been around for a long time and he is, I believe, the longest lasting masked hero. I suppose I cannot call him a masked "superhero" but he is in the same class as the Lone Ranger (born 1933) and Batman (born 1939), a larger-than-life masked hero who is a mere mortal.
El Zorro was born in the pulp magazine "All-Story Weekly" in 1919. He very probably was intended to be a sort of American version of the Scarlet Pimpernel (who first appeared in 1905). Like the Pimpernel, Zorro appears to be a high-society fop, but in reality he is a daring swordsman and champion of the oppressed.
Zorro's first bow was in pulp writer Johnston McCulley's THE CURSE OF CAPISTRANO, a short novel intended to be all that was ever written about the hero. But then the character caught the eye of Hollywood's swashbuckling star Douglas Fairbanks. Fairbanks was looking for exciting athletic roles to play and this looked like a promising possibility. He adapted the story, co-writing the script under a penname, but in his version he revealed early in the script that the true identity of Zorro was Don Diego Vega. In the novel the identity of the masked man is not revealed until near the end of the story though I cannot imagine the revelation surprised any but the dullest readers.
The Zorro character--an outlaw fighting for justice like Robin Hood--has a trademark. He carves a "Z" into objects, particularly clothing, with just the tip of his sword so he leaves his mark and at the same time proves he has perfect control over his sword.
This adventure was the very first film released by the new United Artists, the company that Fairbanks founded together with Mary Pickford, Charlie Chaplin, and D. W. Griffith.
In the written story the identity is not confirmed for the reader until it is revealed to everyone that the effete Don Diego Vega was really Zorro. The whole idea of a masked hero does not work if everybody in the fictional world of the story knows who it is behind the mask. When Zorro reveals himself to everybody that by rights ends the story right there. But when the film became popular--in fact Zorro is perhaps Fairbanks's best known role--the concept of doing a sequel reared its ugly head. Now supposedly all assembled know the identity of Zorro. He no longer needs the mask. If they remove the mask and the secret identity they no longer have an interesting character. What they have to do is say that Don Diego was just the first Zorro. The films added the concept that he passes the identity to a new Zorro after he outs himself. In 1925 came the sequel in which Fairbanks played a double role as the original Zorro and as the title character in DON Q, SON OF ZORRO. This film is surprisingly good, almost as good as the original, and sadly has been nearly forgotten.
The masked character would show up again frequently in pulp magazines and in adventure films from the B-picture studio Republic. The name Zorro is Spanish for "fox" and in 1940 it was Fox Studios who decided to make an A-picture with the hero. The film was a remake of and variation on the original THE MARK OF ZORRO starring their current dashing lead Tyrone Power. The villain was Basil Rathbone, himself one of the finest swordsmen that the screen ever knew.
There continued to be Zorro-related serials from the serial studio, Republic. Republic was never known for the quality of their feature films, but they went in in a big way for making serials for Saturday afternoon matinees and they became the kings of this niche. They made six serials that either featured the character or falsely implied that the hero was somehow associated with Zorro. For example there is little reference to the original character in ZORRO'S BLACK WHIP. Their last Zorro serial was 1949's THE GHOST OF ZORRO starring a venerable serial actor who just did not seem to have the good looks to be much more than a character actor. Clayton Moore, playing Don Diego's grandson, found he could play the lead and be dashing behind a mask. That year he played for the first time another masked hero, the Lone Ranger, he role he would be associated with for the rest of his life.
Over the years there have been many Zorro films. And in 1957 Walt Disney produced a popular television series ZORRO with the character now played by Guy Williams, later of LOST IN SPACE. The series lasted for about two years. For a large part of the public--myself included--this was the first contact they had with the character. It inspired five more television series of which three of them were animated.
Most of the American fans are unaware that while the character was popular here, he was also very popular all over the world. Actually, the vast majority of Zorro films were shot in foreign languages. These films often have a somewhat anti-American tone, turning the villains from the Spanish rulers of California to the later United States rulers. There are at least 37 foreign-language Zorro films, of which all but two come from the years between 1961 to 1975. Most of these are Italian, Spanish, or Mexican productions.
In 1974 there was a made-for-television remake of THE MARK OF ZORRO, using a script almost identical to Tyrone Power's 1940 version, but with Frank Langella in the role. George Hamilton had made a successful film sending up Dracula and tried the same thing with Zorro in 1980 with ZORRO, THE GAY BLADE but the film was tepid.
This brings us to the current series (if two films can be called a series) with Antonio Banderas inheriting the mantle of Zorro from Anthony Hopkins (in a bizarre piece of casting). THE MASK OF ZORRO (1998) was good fun. It had some logic flaws, but it is still remembered fondly. The new Zorro film, THE LEGEND OF ZORRO, was released this past weekend. I cannot yet report on whether it is any good, but initial reviews say it leaves a great deal to be desired. Even if it is a bad film I will want to see what they are doing with the Zorro character. He has become like an old friend. [-mrl]
[Evelyn reviewed Allende's ZORRO in the 08/19/05 issue of the MT VOID.]
Horoscopes (comment by dsr):
"dsr" writes:
As it is clear that economic considerations require a cutback in your budget for astrological natal horology, I have taken the liberty of sending in not just my sign, but my horoscope as well.
Aries: Everything you wanted will happen. Today is a good day for thanking people for their contributions to your welfare. Consider other's needs before you do what's right.
All other signs: donating your time, energy and money to an Aries will make him happy. Take joy in the happiness of others. [-dsr]
Foreigners Redux (letter of comment by David Shallcross):
David Shallcross writes:
This is just a comment on George MacLachlan's LOC in #1306 [the
10/28/05 issue]. "Sassenach", deriving from "Saxon", refers more
specifically to the English, rather than outsider in general. On
the other hand, "Gall" is used for stranger more generally, I
believe. There is an on-line Scottish Gaelic dictionary (based on
a 1911 edition) at
Gall: a Lowlander, stranger, Irish Gall, a stranger, Englishman,
Early Irish gall, foreigner; from Gallus, a Gaul, the Gauls being
the first strangers to visit or be visited by the Irish in Pre-
Roman and Roman times (Zimmer). for derivation See gal, valour.
Stokes takes a different view; he gives as basis for gall,
stranger, *gallo-s, Welsh gal, enemy, foe: *ghaslo-? root ghas,
Latin hos-tis, English guest. Hence he derives Gallus, a Gaul,
so named from some Celtic dialect.
[-ds]
Intelligent Design (letter of comment by Paul S. R. Chisholm):
Paul S. R. Chisholm writes:
To Gerald S. Williams's final comment [in the 10/28/05 issue of
the MT VOID], "any time it mentions the possibility of an
intelligent designer, qualify it as in the following example:
'This strongly suggests the presence of an intelligent designer,
such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster'":
Anyone with any interest in the Book of Genesis, in any way--as
parable, as science textbook, even as literature--would not
consider it an improvement to be re-write it as, "In the
beginning the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the heavens and
the earth."
Rather than attack one side of the debate or defend the other,
let me mention a third alternative.
In the spring of 1973, my biology teacher (in a public high
school in northern New Jersey) started one class with something
very much like these words: "Now we're going to start talking
about evolution. This is one explanation of where all the
species of living beings came from. It's not the only one.
Another one, one that I believe in [said my high school biology
teacher], is the one in the Bible." I don't remember as vividly
what he said next, but I think it was something to this effect:
Evolution is considered, by most scientists, to be the best
accepted explanation of how life on Earth came to be what it is.
You're not going to be asked to "believe" it. You are, though,
going to be expected to become familiar with it.
It's said an effective compromise equally offends all extremists.
I think this qualifies.
Hope this helps. [-psrc]
Intelligent Design (letter of comment):
In response to Mark's comments on intelligent design in the
10/21/05 issue of the MT VOID, a long-time reader wrote:
"Some day when extraterrestrial archeologists dig up our
landfills they'll discover, among other things, the remains of
lots of vacuum cleaners. Carbon dating the stomach contents of
those odd plastic-and-metal-exoskeleton creatures will reveal how
rapidly they evolved.
Mark's commentary on "'intelligent design' in an earlier issue of
MT VOID encourages me to send in a comment on a subject I'm not
qualified to address: evolution.
How do evolutionists explain human blood types? That is, how did
it come about that some humans are 'universal donors' while
others are 'universal acceptors?' How could evolution have
foreseen that humans would be donating blood to each other? It
seems the only way natural selection of blood types could have
occurred is if our earliest ancestors were vampires."
[Note: These comments arrived on October 31--probably not a
coincidence.]
Mark responds, "On your first comment I am not sure that the
contents of vacuum cleaner stomachs have changed that much over
time."
"As for blood types presumably at one point types of blood were
more interchangeable even if there was nobody interchanging them.
Presumably through mutation some people became more finicky about
blood type. You know, when I worked at Bell Labs we would share
Microsoft Word documents across locations. We had problems with
different people having different generations of Word. The
person with the oldest version of Word could write documents that
every other user could read. But they had problems reading
documents from people who composed them on later generations of
Word. They were 'universal donors' of documents. The person
with the most recent Word could read everybody else's Word
documents. They were 'universal acceptors' but their documents
could not be read by everybody else.
Independently Evelyn found the site
http://www.lisashea.com/lisabase/biology/art14442.html which
has much the same explanation, but with more detail." [-mrl]
THE BOOKSELLER OF KABUL (letter of comment by Per Chr. Jorgensen):
Regarding Evelyn's review of THE BOOKSELLER OF KABUL in the
10/28/05 issue of the MT VOID, Per Chr. Jorgensen of Norway
writes:
I haven't read the book by Asne Seierstad myself, but after
publication there has been some media controversy, which I have
to some extent followed (I believe that Salon and the Guardian
has written something about this in the English-speaking world).
Partly this has been a general debate about what a travel writer,
visiting social anthropologist etc. may use of material gathered
in such circumstances as having been invited into somebody's
home, but there has also been complaints and even a threat of a
lawsuit from the bookseller himself. He especially disliked the
book being translated into English and now even into Farsi, one
of the languages of Afghanistan. I haven't completely understood
what that nature of his complaint is. From the first newspaper
reports it seemed that he disliked that Ms. Seierstad had earned
a lot of money from describing his family life. I've also
gathered later that he has been reckoned as somewhat as a
dangerous liberal in Afghanistan in being interested in selling
books (note the plural), and does not want more exposure.
Recently he went to Pakistan, claiming that he was under threat
of a blood feud. There were no particulars, but I guess this
could mean extended family or in-laws.
Otherwise, thanks for a very interesting weekly fanzine indeed.
[-pcj]
[An article in English from the "Guardian" covering this can be
found at http://tinyurl.com/829mw. -ecl]
Too Smart by Half (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper):
Sometimes attempts to be clever can backfire.
Consider "Law in a Flash: Torts" ('95-'96 Edition). This is a
set of flashcards designed to help students study law by using
cute examples (sort of like the sentences in THE TRANSITIVE
VAMPIRE were used to teach grammar). Card 88 says, "Jack T.
Ripper jumps into H. G. Wells' time machine, mistakenly believing
it's his. He takes it on a whirl through time, realizes his
mistake, and returns it. Has Ripper committed a trespass to
chattels?" The answer given is yes, and one of the explanatory
statements is "loss of possession itself, regardless of the
length of time involved, is sufficient to satisfy the damage
requirement of a trespass to chattels claim."
But if Ripper returns the time machine to the instant that he
took it, then there *is* no length of time. In the normal course
of events, of course, the question would be about a car or some
such, but once the author has brought in the idea of a time
machine, a whole new set of issues comes into play. [-ecl]
ALIEN PLANET (television review by Mark R. Leeper):
[I should point out at the very beginning where it won't get lost
that Discovery Channel will air this Thursday, November 10 and it
is of science fiction interest. -mrl]
The Discovery Channel's special "Alien Planet" blurs the
distinction between science and science fiction, but for good
purpose. "Alien Planet", based on Wayne Barlowe's book EXPEDITON
is a dramatization of a plausible visit by mechanical probe Van
Braun to the earthlike planet Darwin IV. Darwin IV has life
forms that may have evolved in the planet's earth-like
environment. Two sub-probes descend to the surface of the planet
and explore. The probes are given the names Leo for Leonardo Da
Vinci and Ike for Isaac Asimov. As the story proceeds it several
scientists comment on what is happening in the story. The
scientists include string theorist and science popularizer Michio
Kaku, paleontologist Jack Horner, and Stephen Hawking.
Supplementing the scientists are science fiction film maker
George Lucas and artist Wayne Barlowe, whose specialty is
scientifically and artistically representing alien life forms.
The probe Leo floats like a dirigible and has a birdlike head on
the end of a long neck, much like an ostrich. Leo crawls on the
surface.
Darwin IV is in what the scientists call the Goldilocks Zone. It
is so called because small environmental changes manifest
themselves in giant changes in the life that could develop on
these planets. Things have got to be "just right." The program
considers only very earthlike planets. "Alien Planet" seems to
presuppose that life will be what "Star Trek" would call "life as
we know it." It may in fact be true that we will consider life
will have to be very earth-like to be recognizable as life.
There might well be some sort of plasma-based intelligent
lifeform living at the center of the sun. Could we recognize it
if there was? Would we have anything to say to such a different
lifeform?
The program shows very strongly that it is a product of Wayne
Barlowe and is illustrated with a menagerie of different sorts of
alien beasties. Fourteen different creatures are described with
varying degrees of scale up to huge by earthly standards. At
each step in the process we have inserts with the scientists
commenting on the animals and how they function. One assumes
that Barlowe updated the animals in his 1990 book with feedback
from the scientists and they are all reasonably credible, but
that does not prevent it from being amusing. It is all a lot of
fun and is even more so because it is presented absolutely
deadpan. We see some creatures that look like futuristic life
forms and a thing that looks like a mesa that walks on
elephantine legs. The CGI effects are not as photo-realistic as
those are in programs like "Walking with Dinosaurs," but we get
the point of what we are seeing.
The program has been run before, but will be repeated on
Thursday, November 10, at 8 PM EST and then again four hours
later at midnight.
There is a web site that goes along with the program and
illustrates it. However, I would recommend that it should not be
visited until after seeing the program since it is full of
spoilers.
The site is
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/alienplanet/splash.html.
The program is also available on DVD, which would be more
enjoyable than watching it on Discovery where the commercial
breaks come a little too frequently.
This is a program that should be of a fair degree of interest by
just about any science fiction readers. [-mrl]
KISS KISS BANG BANG (film review by Mark R. Leeper):
CAPSULE: Shane Black, who wrote the three "Lethal Weapon" films,
writes and directs this send-up of the film-noir thriller with
Robert Downey, Jr., and Val Kilmer. The 1980s were the heyday of
this sort of romantic comedy crime film, but with a little more
sex this is a welcome and frequently quite funny return. The
film is based in part on Brett Halliday's novel BODIES ARE WHERE
YOU FIND THEM. The comedy is more satisfying than the mystery.
Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4) or 6/10
Robert Downey, Jr., plays Harry Lockhart, a less-than-successful
small-time crook who is about to be caught by the police and who
hides from the police in a film casting audition. Before he
realizes it he has been cast as a private eye. (Is this an
homage to THE STUNT MAN? It would not surprise me; there are
film allusions and references throughout KISS KISS BANG BANG.)
The first step for the new actor is move from New York to Los
Angeles and the second is to learn about the business of private
eyeing from expert an expert, Gay Perry (played by Val Kilmer),
whose name is Perry and who happens to be gay. The detective
lessons are of some interest but uneventful until dead bodies
start to turn up in bathtubs and car trunks and the two of them--
along with a friend Harmony Faith Lane (Michelle Monaghan)--are
involved in murder.
This setup, in fact the whole mystery in the film, could be the
basis for a bland B-picture that does not really work, or it was
the basis of something a little better. It is not the mystery
but the comedy that makes the film work. Since KISS KISS BANG
BANG is really more comedy than mystery it will float or founder
depending on whether the humor works. And for much of the film
this is a laugh-out-loud sort of comedy. Taking cheap shots at
how weird life in Hollywood has become is nothing new and a
little too easy, but the body in the bathtub scene is priceless.
I will not detract from the film by giving away any of the jokes.
I will, however, say that the best of the film is in interplay
between Harry and Perry, two people dependent on each other but
each thinking deep down he had been stuck with to an idiot.
However, some viewers should be warned the film also has a dark
side including a disturbing scene of torture. The characters
seem to recover quickly so the audience does also. The film is
also a tribute to film noir mysteries. The story is broken into
chapters whose titles are borrowed from Raymond Chandler Philip
Marlowe novels, just to add a little bit of class. Michael
Barrett's photography of Los Angeles is sharp and colorful.
The formula is old but this film is genuinely funny. I rate it
high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or 6/10. Fans of 007 will
recognize the title, KISS KISS BANG BANG, as an allusion to the
Italian nickname for James Bond. [-mrl]
This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper):
In last week's column, I said that INTO AFRICA was by Martin
Douglas--that should have been Martin Dugard.
I saw a poster for MATH CURSE by Jon Scieszka, illustrated by
Lane Smith (ISBN 0-670-86194-4) in a room at the Monmouth County
Library. I decided I had to read it, if only to see if it was
yet another attack on mathematics, a la Barbie's "Math class is
hard." It's not; the "curse" is that the narrator suddenly sees
everything as a math problem. For example, one page says that
even physical education has math: In 1919, Babe Ruth hit 29 home
runs, batted .322, and made $40,000. In 1991, the average major
league baseball player hit 15 home runs, batted .275, and made
$840,000. Then it asks whether Babe Ruth is <, >, or = the
average modern baseball player. It even includes a variation of
Russell's Paradox. Described on the cover flap as "For ages > 6
and < 99", it is probably aimed more at the lower end of that
range, although not the very lowest. It doesn't strike me as a
book a child would read over and over, so at $16.99, it seems
more like a book one would check out of the library rather than
purchase for a child, but it is a painless way to introduce math
concepts.
[I would add that while the coverage of these mathematics problems
is not very deep, it introduces some fairly young children to some
nice concepts of mathematics that they would not learn about in
school until high school. It also suggests that all these
concepts are fun. They are, but most people don't learn that
EVER. So I am probably more positive on the book than Evelyn is.
Kudos to Mr. Scieszka -mrl]
And while I was looked for MATH CURSE, I ran across the "Time
Warp Trio" books by the same duo. Most of them have the trio
traveling into the past or future, but IT'S ALL GREEK TO ME by
Jon Scieszka, illustrated by Lane Smith (ISBN 0-670-88596-7,
eighth in the series) has them ending up in Greek mythology.
(They do realize it's not history, at least.) SAM SAMURAI (ISBN
0-670-89915-1, tenth in the series) goes back to the Japanese
Shogunate. All this is accomplished with "The Book", which is
somewhat explained in SAM SAMURAI, but not very much in IT'S ALL
GREEK TO ME. I assume it was explained in the first book
(KNIGHTS OF THE KITCHEN TABLE, I think), so start with that one.
While the "Auto-Translator" solves the language problems, the
trio also has the good luck not to get killed by any of their
faux pas. I was surprised at the amount of time spent explaining
and giving examples of Japanese poetry, which means these books
are not just lightweight adventures a la "Time Tunnel". A lot of
time is spent on riddles and puzzles. but these are still a way
to give children some knowledge of history and mythology.
H. R. Keating wrote a series of Inspector Ghote mysteries,
starting with THE PERFECT MURDER (ISBN 0-897-33078-1). These
take place in India, although Keating is English and did not even
visit India until after he had written several of the books.
Therefore, it isn't surprising that some of the details seem a
bit off, but in general the unusual setting gives an otherwise
basic mystery some interest. In particular, Ashok K. Banker
talks about the "tweaked" almost-Indian names, and I found the
Indian English language not completely convincing. The
duplication (e.g., "Gate hate. Locking knocking.") "is*
accurate, even though at first it seems like a Yiddish invasion.
(The classic work of Indian English is called "Hobson Jobson" for
a reason. And thanks to Fred Lerner for telling me that the
technical name for this was "reduplication".)
NORTHANGER ABBEY by Jane Austen (ISBN 0-375-75917-4) is a
wonderful send-up of both Gothic novels and some of Jane Austen's
own works. She knows all the cliches, and nails them. For
example, she begins, "No one who had ever seen Catherine Morland
in her infancy would have supposed her born to be an heroine.
Her situation in life, the character of her father and mother,
her own person and disposition, were all equally against her.
Her father was a clergyman, without being neglected, or poor, and
a very respectable man, though his name was Richard--and he had
never been handsome. He had a considerable independence besides
two good livings--and he was not in the least addicted to locking
up his daughters. Her mother was a woman of useful plain sense,
with a good temper, and, what is more remarkable, with a good
constitution. She had three sons before Catherine was born; and
instead of dying in bringing the latter into the world, as
anybody might expect, she still lived on--lived to have six
children more--to see them growing up around her, and to enjoy
excellent health herself."
And Catherine Moreland has been reading all those novels, and she
has expectations that life will be like that. When she is
invited to be a guest at Northanger Abbey, here is her reaction:
"She was to be their chosen visitor, she was to be for weeks
under the same roof with the person whose society she mostly
prized--and, in addition to all the rest, this roof was to be the
roof of an abbey! Her passion for ancient edifices was next in
degree to her passion for Henry Tilney--and castles and abbeys
made usually the charm of those reveries which his image did not
fill. To see and explore either the ramparts and keep of the
one, or the cloisters of the other, had been for many weeks a
darling wish, though to be more than the visitor of an hour had
seemed too nearly impossible for desire. And yet, this was to
happen. With all the chances against her of house, hall, place,
park, court, and cottage, Northanger turned up an abbey, and she
was to be its inhabitant. Its long, damp passages, its narrow
cells and ruined chapel, were to be within her daily reach, and
she could not entirely subdue the hope of some traditional
legends, some awful memorials of an injured and ill-fated nun."
And Austen is cognizant of some of the cliches and stereotypes
she had written when she writes, "Where people wish to attach,
they should always be ignorant. To come with a well-informed
mind is to come with an inability of administering to the vanity
of others, which a sensible person would always wish to avoid. A
woman especially, if she have the misfortune of knowing anything,
should conceal it as well as she can. The advantages of natural
folly in a beautiful girl have been already set forth by the
capital pen of a sister author; and to her treatment of the
subject I will only add, in justice to men, that though to the
larger and more trifling part of the sex, imbecility in females
is a great enhancement of their personal charms, there is a
portion of them too reasonable and too well informed themselves
to desire anything more in woman than ignorance. But Catherine
did not know her own advantages--did not know that a good-looking
girl, with an affectionate heart and a very ignorant mind, cannot
fail of attracting a clever young man, unless circumstances are
particularly untoward."
What more needs to be said? This is definitely my favorite
Austen novel, and I don't know why they don't made a film of this
instead of re-doing PRIDE AND PREJUDICE again. [-ecl]
Go to my home page
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Quote of the Week:
After the last of 16 mounting screws has been
removed from an access cover, it will be discovered
that the wrong access cover has been removed.
-- De La Lastra's Law