Date: 2011-10-16 01:09 am (UTC)
redbird: full bookshelves and table in a library (books)
From: [personal profile] redbird
The Le Guin story is a reprint from a few years ago; it's in her book Changing Planes. (I followed the link hoping for something new, by which I mean new to me.)

That doesn't mean she isn't still writing short stories, of course.

Date: 2011-10-15 08:30 am (UTC)
drplokta: (Default)
From: [personal profile] drplokta
That Le Guin story does not constitute evidence that she's still producing short stories, because it's a reprint from 1998.

Date: 2011-10-15 09:35 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com
In re the LeGuin story: I suspect that the tremendous number of "you really wouldn't like not dying stories" are actually a matter of sour grapes.

For a rare exception, see Rebecca Ore's _Centuries Ago, and Very Fast_. The main character is gay, innately able to time travel, and unaging. I don't remember whether he has unusual powers of regeneration. In any case, what's unusual about him is that he likes living, and puts together a good if somewhat weird extended life for himself.

Date: 2011-10-15 10:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com
I've hit a limit with some of LeGuin-- I think it was the first story in _Changing Planes_ which was just too preachy for me. Sweet prose and vivid images (the ancient people turning into diamonds was pretty good) just aren't enough.

I did like _Annals of the Western Shore_ trilogy, though.

Date: 2011-10-15 02:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ashfae.livejournal.com
One of my favorite stories of how much it would suck to be immortal is actually from an old Superman comic from the 70s or so. The immortal in question was made so through a fluke, and was on the planet Krypton. When it exploded. Leaving him in outer space. That thing gave me nightmares for a week.

Oh, LeGuin. You are one of my favorite writers for good reason.

Date: 2011-10-15 06:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andlosers.livejournal.com
Re: the food thing - that does make some sense, really. But also, people need to actually have meaningful education about nutrition, which doesn't seem to be happening, and there needs to be some institutional honesty about the effects of some of the ingredients that go into processed food, a genuine look at the cost of raw ingredients, and more of a push to teach people to cook for themselves.

The effect is worse over here, by the way, where it's an order of magnitude cheaper to eat out than cook.

Date: 2011-10-17 01:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] naath.livejournal.com
I find it hard to get good information about *to what extent* any given processed food is/is not bad. And I consider myself to be rather better educated than most Brits (at least on paper).

And frankly, whilst I think it's probably the case that preparing everything from scratch would be somewhat healthier that is not going to happen on a daily basis. So what I want is reliable information about the things that are actually reasonably within my tolerances of effort/money.

I think it is entirely unreasonable to expect busy people to put in huge amounts of effort to prepare food, or even to research food. And better labelling would definately be an enormous improvement.

Date: 2011-10-17 01:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] naath.livejournal.com
The traffic light thing really helps - so long as the standard it is using for comparison is actually useful. Much better than just a raw number.

Date: 2011-10-15 08:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] undeadbydawn.livejournal.com
53% guy...

I worked a 60-70 hour week for a while. couple of years, maybe. I also didn't have a proper holiday for some 8 years.

it wasn't until i lost that job i realised how ill i was - like, beyond physically exhausted and mentally barely even there.


funny, I was fiercely proud of my work ethic at the time. Now, theres no way in Hell i'd work more than 50 hours, and I'd need a bloody good reason to do that much

religion "vs" science

Date: 2011-10-15 08:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] apostle-of-eris.livejournal.com
I have a personal hypothesis about a lot of "religious" monologue and conversation which has simplified things for me tremendously:
Just because people are using the same words, or even sentences, doesn't mean they mean the same thing. (Yes, it applies to a lot more than religion.)
St. Francis "loved God" and preached to the birds and the bunnies.
St. Dominic "loved God" and founded the Inquisition.
If they didn't mean the same thing, despite using the same statements, the bizarre contradictions melt away.

In the case at hand, it's merely one of many variations of mistaking emotionalism for religion. If "religion" satisfies someone's emotional need for simple certainty, then science is a genuine threat. Furthermore, secular education is a real threat too. If their children learn rationality, they will be lost to them.
If you want to discuss whether using the word "religion" for a variety of emotional configurations, that's a different conversation . . .

This razor also dissolves the problems of perceiving/modeling people who confuse personal issues with sexuality with religion (or politics).

re: 53%

Date: 2011-10-17 09:48 am (UTC)

May 2026

S M T W T F S
      1 2
3 45 6 7 8 9
10 11 1213 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 2627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 27th, 2026 05:48 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios