jonesthecurl, share your views

[jonesthecurl]

I've not read much OSC - I tried his stuff and wasn't much impressed.

I forgot to mention Murray Leinster's Sideways in TIme - the description of the world slowly changing around them as they get further and further away from thier baseline is intruiging.

[jonesthecurl]

...and as for my plans for world domination, I woulda got away with it if it weren't for that interfering Snorri and his pals.

[Snorri1234]

Incidentally, and reinforcing an earlier point of mine, you will note that almost all your references were to film/TV, almost all mine to books.

I was just gonna say that.

Your third example is basically the one in "Back to the Future" and the next example is sort of that in the first 2 terminator-movies (haven't seen the third so I don't know about that) or Blackadder Back and Forth.

The first one I can't really place in a movie/tv as those I know involve going back to the future or at least confirming that the future is taking place in the exact same fashion because of the time travel. I think I understand why it's underrepresented as it's less interresting than the other versions. (At least I think it is.)

[jonesthecurl]

Well, there have been film versions of both Yankee (with Bob hope I think) - from which the great song Busy Doing nothing came - and of Time Machine two at least, though I've only seen the classci George Pal one.

And of course we all know that HG Wells got the idea for Time Machine from a trip in the Tardis - and, of course, that the Doctor is actually Merlin, or vice versa.

[Snorri1234]

Well, there have been film versions of both Yankee (with Bob hope I think) - from which the great song Busy Doing nothing came - and of Time Machine two at least, though I've only seen the classci George Pal one.

Ah, I'll look into that.

[jonesthecurl]

Yankee is one of those plots (like Christmas Carol) that has been endlessly re-used.
Disney did at least three versions - ONe with one of the annoying cute little girls from the Cosby Show, one More recent (A Kid in King Arthur's COurt), and also The Spaceman and King Arthur.There was a Bugs Bunny version too. Now my mind's gone blank, just as I was going to give you more examples.
Did you turn the Memory Adjuster on, or one of those other TIme Patrol gadgets?

[Snorri1234]

Did you turn the Memory Adjuster on, or one of those other TIme Patrol gadgets?

I'm not at liberty to tell you, otherwise the agency would revoke my rights to live in this century and the next/previous.

[jonesthecurl]

Segueing from the Snorri tell us your views thread, where I shouldn't purvey MY views, I would recommend for the Dr Who that you try the modern ones first, the very originals, and the Tom Baker years. If that's not enough carry on, but it will get worse after that. BTW Douglas Adams was involved with the program for part of the Tom Baker period.

[Snorri1234]

Segueing from the Snorri tell us your views thread, where I shouldn't purvey MY views, I would recommend for the Dr Who that you try the modern ones first, the very originals, and the Tom Baker years. If that's not enough carry on, but it will get worse after that. BTW Douglas Adams was involved with the program for part of the Tom Baker period.

The modern one is the one that started in 2005, right?

[Juan_Bottom]

You forgot about the time-travel method in A CONNETICUT YANKEE IN KING ARTHURS COURT.
Being knocked unconscious in a street fight by being smashed in the head with a piece of rebar.
But I'm sure the the Cobra Commander has experimented with that form of time travel, many, many times on his subjects.

Who would win in a fight, Hulk Hogan WWF style, Rosie the Riveter, Blanka from Street Fighter, Big Bird from Seseme Street, Pimpdave, Eddie Van Halen, Chuck Norris, Robin from the Batman series, or Christopher Walkin?



BTW this thread has become totally awesome. AOOGA!

[jonesthecurl]

I had forgotten the actual method used in Yankee, it's some years since I read it. I remember he comes to after being knocked out, but had forgotten how he was felled.

Naturally, were one actually to be the Cobra Commander, one would have experimented with and many other methods (setting off a nuclear explosion on top of the victim, I mean volunteer, as in the Man's Farnham's Freehold, flyingat warp speed close to the sun as in Trek, etc). One might have found that the common denominator for such methods working is that the captive, I mean employee, I mean scientist, not know what was coming. If one were the Cobra Commander.

Were one such a one, one might know the results of the fight you propose, having conducted it under controlled conditions using clones from skin samples, paper pulp, or in one case a pixel. And then one would know: first one has the edge, then another. But if things get too bad for Robin, provided he's not the Jason Todd version, Batman will step in and win the day.
Now Batman has gone toe-to-toe with Predator, Alien, Tarzan, Dracula, Judge Dredd, and Superman.

Hulk Hogan? it is to laugh.
IN fact I will. BWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH.

Oh, sorry I meant Ho-ho-ho.

[Juan_Bottom]

Were one such a one, one might know

Oh, sorry I meant Ho-ho-ho.

OMG!!!! THE COBRA COMMANDER IS SANTA CLAUS???? WTF???? OMG!!!!
Or a pimp?


Burger King, or McDonalds?

Electricity can be used to control magnetism, how do I use magnetism to control/create electricity?

[jonesthecurl]

[

Oh, sorry I meant Ho-ho-ho.

OMG!!!! THE COBRA COMMANDER IS SANTA CLAUS???? WTF???? OMG!!!!
Or a pimp?

Well, I DO know if you've been bad or good. So be bad fro badness sake [turns to minion] "did I get that right? I always have trouble with that one"[turns back], no, I mean the other thing. Be good and that.

Burger King, or McDonalds?

No. Simply no.

Electricity can be used to control magnetism, how do I use magnetism to control/create electricity?

Actually, most electricty is generated by causing a magnet to revolve at speed, I forget the details (I did used to lecture now and then to the public on this one occasionally) - but the reason that you get single-phase or three-phase power supplies is because the power is taken at three equally spaced points around the generator. Three power lines go down the normal street, each calling at every third property. For higher usage (usually industrial or commercial) a three-phase supply wil be used.
The difference in producing electricty, with a few exceptions, is in how you make the magnet rotate.

[Juan_Bottom]

Actually, most electricty is generated by causing a magnet to revolve at speed, I forget the details (I did used to lecture now and then to the public on this one occasionally) - but the reason that you get single-phase or three-phase power supplies is because the power is taken at three equally spaced points around the generator. Three power lines go down the normal street, each calling at every third property. For higher usage (usually industrial or commercial) a three-phase supply wil be used.
The difference in producing electricty, with a few exceptions, is in how you make the magnet rotate.

Ok.. so how do I get the electricity to go where I want it by using magnets, and no power lines? To control it like shooting a dart of electric power or something?
Maybe this is the wrong question for you... I think though that if one were one, then one might know?

[jonesthecurl]

Well, I (sorry, one) wouldn't use magnets if one were attempting to broadcast power to a remote location - one would use microwaves.
If you're trying to sort of shoot electricty like controlled lightning, then the trick is in targettting the differnce in electrical potential.
An evil supervillain might be able to that in a very precise and controlled manner, but you'd have to be a part of the organisation to discover how.

Microwaves have seriously been proposed as the most practical method for transferring power to the ground from solar power satellites, which I am gald to say are finally being looked at as a real possibility in this age of high energy prices.

[Nikolai]

Ask me something about King Arthur and you might find some actual expertise displayed.

Very well.

In your opinion, given the Romances of Chretien de Troyes and their influence on Arthurian legend, who was the superior knight: Sir Lancelot, Sir Gawain, or Sir Galahad?

[jonesthecurl]

OK well you're coming into the scene faily late with Chretien, certainly past the point at which we can talk of the "Legend" -this is not now a writing down of legends commonly known and at least halfway believed in, but more like modern fiction - Lancelot is a purely literary invention.

That said, it depends what you look for in a knight.

Galahad is from a religious point of view (that is if you don't hold that chasing the grail and a personal version of Salvation without intermediaries to be heresy) the perfect knight. He actually does very little of the fighting, jousting etc that we think of when we think of a knight, before he gives up hurting people and devoted himself to the Quest for the Grail. IN most versions he is the one who achieves it, making him by defininition the best knight.

Gawaine and Lancelot both have major flaws. (The name Lancelot incidentally is "Lanzarote" in Spanish, and the island of Lanzarote in the Canaries is named after an explorere of that name. Another interesting thing about Lancelot is that of course his birth-name was Galahad).

Lancelot achieves a number of adventures which can only be achieved by "the best knight in the world", but the point at which his passion for Guinivere becomes physical (as opposed to being the perfect example of Courtly Love) is the point at which he begins to decline. Arguably this is the point at which the failure of the Round Table becomes inescapable, though others would put this further back, right when Arthur fathers Mordered on Morgause.

Ultimately of course Lancelot kills Gawaine, so I guess he's the better of the two in one very real sense.

Gawaine is the greatest knight before Lancelot arrives at Camelot, and many hold that he is afterwards too. I imagaine the "Lancelot is best" and "Gawaine is best" camps to be in a sort of usually-friendly rivalry like the supporters of two sports teams. Gawaine would be Manchester United/ the Yankees, Lancelot would be Arsenal/the Mets.

Gawaine fails in several ways - fails in love, chivalry and loyalty at various times. His love of family is so great that his pursuit of Lancelot towards the end of the story is what gives Mordred (his half-brother after all) the opportunity to seize the crown and set the scene for the final battle and the end of the cycle. (Then again Lancelot had killed his brother Gareth, and unecesarily so. Had he also killed Agravaine? I'd need to go and check). Earlier, Gawaine and his brothers commit a quite unjustified murder in a spirit of pure family loyalty and revenge.

Others have at various times been held to be the greatest knight - Bedivere, Balin, Peredur/Percival, and possibly Fergus of Galloway amongst them (I forget quite how much the author of the last pumped the reputation of his character).

Of course, if you go back to the Mabinogion and the tale of Kilwch, none of the above are named (with the possible exception of Bedwyr). An interesting bunch of characters are put forward however. But that's way beyond the question asked.

Incidentally, my personal favourite of all the knights has always been Gareth Beaumains.

[muy_thaiguy]

Which movie version of it do you prefer?

[jonesthecurl]

Which movie version of it do you prefer?

Actually, I do have a favourite.
For me, the best movie of all time (so far, that I've seen) is Excalibur.
It is the only decent treatment of the Arthurian cycle on film. I love the depiction of Merlin.
The film is incredibly subtle. I particularly enjoy the way that they don't include Tristram and Isolde, but give various elements of their plot (and their theme music from Wagner) to Lancelot and Guinivere.

Incidentally, the only decent Tarzan movie is Greystoke Legend of Tarzan, for a similar reason: it treats the subject seriously.

[jonesthecurl]

Incidentally, I have now given my thoughts on the Star Wars election thing, and you'll find them some distance away in a forum some while ago (or words to that effect). Just borrow a time machine to view.

[Nikolai]

Well answered... although I usually consider Chretien to be fairly early in the development of Arthurian legend, since he established the romantic attitude towards that court that tales of such have usually taken since. I always found it amusing that Gawain was considered the foremost of the court in arms and Galahad in purity, while Lancelot usually ranked as the third best knight (barring those few specific circumstances where he is suddenly somehow the best knight in the world, for a specific task)... and now people are lucky if they've heard of Gawain from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Lancelot's story just makes better movies, I suppose... although I think you made a good pick on Excalibur. (Greystoke Legend, too.) Which raises an interesting prospect: might it be that Lancelot is the superior knight as an abstract literary character?

I do have to ask... since you might actually know... what is the name of the tale in which Lancelot kills Gawain? Somebody asked me last month and I couldn't remember.

Incidentally, my personal favourite of all the knights has always been Gareth Beaumains.

Good choice... high on my list as well.

[Juan_Bottom]

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Come on? That story is retarded. He goes on a ride and every ten feet he meets a diffent knight to challenge? Each of them has a different colored armor, and each has more servants than the last?

Story is dumb. I only read it thrice.

[jonesthecurl]

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Come on? That story is retarded. He goes on a ride and every ten feet he meets a diffent knight to challenge? Each of them has a different colored armor, and each has more servants than the last?

Story is dumb. I only read it thrice.

no, yer getting Gareth and Gawain mixed up.

[jonesthecurl]

Well answered... although I usually consider Chretien to be fairly early in the development of Arthurian legend, since he established the romantic attitude towards that court that tales of such have usually taken since. I always found it amusing that Gawain was considered the foremost of the court in arms and Galahad in purity, while Lancelot usually ranked as the third best knight (barring those few specific circumstances where he is suddenly somehow the best knight in the world, for a specific task)... and now people are lucky if they've heard of Gawain from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Lancelot's story just makes better movies, I suppose... although I think you made a good pick on Excalibur. (Greystoke Legend, too.) Which raises an interesting prospect: might it be that Lancelot is the superior knight as an abstract literary character?

I do have to ask... since you might actually know... what is the name of the tale in which Lancelot kills Gawain? Somebody asked me last month and I couldn't remember.

Incidentally, my personal favourite of all the knights has always been Gareth Beaumains.

Good choice... high on my list as well.

Well, at the end of Malory's Mort D'Arthur, Gawaine persuades Arthur to go to France to wage war on Lancelot. Lance fights as little as he possibly can, and knocks Gawain down but refuses to finish him. Eventually one of teh wounds proves fatal, and Gawain as he is dying realises what a wally he's been, that he has probably caused to defeat of Arthur by taking away his army to a war he didn't want, and with his dying breath begs Arthur to forgive Lancelot, call him back, and help fight the villainous Mordred.

[Juan_Bottom]

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Come on? That story is retarded. He goes on a ride and every ten feet he meets a diffent knight to challenge? Each of them has a different colored armor, and each has more servants than the last?

Story is dumb. I only read it thrice.

no, yer getting Gareth and Gawain mixed up.

Big hands is Gareth? My bad...