Who would you bump off?

[KhanadaRhodes]

The class is called Honors 100....it's basically about exploring the purposes of a liberal education. It's hardt o explain... there are a lot of activities and discussions.

Honors 100 Course Description

I honestly didn't think my school would get torn apart here... I'm surprised people even READ this thread.

I'm not a communist or anything....

sorry about all the misunderstandings...I should have been keeping tabs on this thread

Yes...I'm in college now. Sorry that's hard to believe.

awesome! i didn't know you were going there.

i wanted to go there, but since i didn't live in state i didn't wanna pay thousands more a year.

 

[MonaVox]

to Khanada


dooods lay off my school
I phrased it wrong, not them. The issue is NOT and has NEVER been about teachers. It's about whose contributions to society you personally believe to be more important in comparison with those of others.

It's led by 2 Juniors anyway

holy crap

 

[joyfulgirl]

picasso must live!

 

[deep]

Les Demoiselles d'Avignon

Mona, Thank you for the clarification


Joyfulgirl,

I like Picasso, too. But back to the question, Of the eight listed, which threes contributions would you choose to do without? It is a difficult exercise.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Re: Les Demoiselles d'Avignon

Joyfulgirl,

I like Picasso, too. But back to the question, Of the eight listed, which threes contributions would you choose to do without? It is a difficult exercise.

I was stalling for time by posting pretty pictures...

It is indeed a difficult exercise. I'm still contemplating it. But right now I'm going for:

1. Shakespeare. Mark Twain wrote a very compelling essay about Shakespeare's identity. He was not convinced that Francis Bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare, as many are, but he was absolutely convinced that William Shakespeare did not write them. I was pretty convinced by the end of the essay myself, so I could lose Shakespeare but only because I think somebody else wrote his plays. Or maybe that's cheating, in which case I'll have to think about this some more.

2. Babe Ruth. Sports just aren't important to me.

3. Einstein. I'm with Mona's class.

I work in the arts, so the Picassos of the world are very important to me, both personally and professionally.

 

[oliveu2cm]

off topic

1. Shakespeare. Mark Twain wrote a very compelling essay about Shakespeare's identity. He was not convinced that Francis Bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare, as many are, but he was absolutely convinced that William Shakespeare did not write them. I was pretty convinced by the end of the essay myself, so I could lose Shakespeare but only because I think somebody else wrote his plays. Or maybe that's cheating, in which case I'll have to think about this some more.

Twain has his own issues


Shakespeare

 

[U2Bama]

Honestly, Khanada, I usually ONLY quote excerpts of threads which I am specifically addressing. But this time, I will quote your entire post:

yeesh. as i said before, it seems some are reading too much into it. AS IT HAS BEEN SAID, it's not a matter of killing these people. it's mainly to think of, well, i'll relate this to to U2.

think of the song "a day without me." what's it about? bono ponders what the world would be like without him, if people would miss him, stuff like that. this is the same or a very similar thing. it's not the person themselves we're saying to do without, but their talent. pablo picasso would've been alive, but he wouldn't have been a painter. babe ruth would've never been picked for a baseball league. abraham lincoln didn't run for president.

you can call what i said finger pointing if you wish, but it's true. to name a bunch of evil dictators is a cop out. of course i'm sure we all wish bin laden dead. but that's not even the point of this discussion question. it's to pick good people (as in they contributed positively to society. mlk helped pave the way for civil rights, whereas hitler massacred millions.) and think, "what if they didn't exist?" or more specifically, "what if they didn't stand up and decide to do what lead them to the path to become the great person they became?"

it's humourous and sad that so many people are finding this discussion almost disgusting. it seems that no matter how many times we explain it's being read wrong, it's just a misunderstanding or misconception, the posts seem to be completely ignored and the tirade as to how we're soooo evil for thinking of death continues. for example, bama quoted the first part of my previous post and commented, but COMPLETELY ignored the rest. i guess all there is to say is this: to put it harshly, if you don't want to contribute to the discussion, butt out, or at least read the entire post people make and don't pick and choose sentences that cater to your angle.

The "day without me" concept is a bit less negative, but I still don't think the students should be required to choose 3 to do without; a more positive approach would probably be "which 3 contributed the most?"

For what it's worth (since I "COMPLETELY ignored" the rest of your post), I will say that the study you mentioned (disabled veteran, HIV+ woman, etc.) seemed like a good project and a better way to "make students think."

It is "funny" to me how a project such as the one in this thread (knock off 3 of 8 influential people) is designed "to make students think," yet several of us are accused of "reading too much into it." It is even "funnier" that such a thread is posted in FREE YOUR MIND, yet we are told (as I quoted you fully above):

to put it harshly, if you don't want to contribute to the discussion, butt out, or at least read the entire post people make and don't pick and choose sentences that cater to your angle.

~U2Alabama

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

to Khanada

maybe if i go to grad school (if they have my major available that is) i'll go there.

 

[pax]

I have to say I kind of agree with Bama here...even though I think that the point of the exercise was probably just to promote some unusual thinking rather than serious academic inquiry. And some mental "play" like this can be just as healthy and helpful as such serious inquiry. But, since this thread (through no one's fault) turned into something much more serious, it has raised some serious issues, which are now evident.

As a mod I only politely request, as usual, that everyone stay respectful to where everyone else is coming from. For the most part, this thread has gone well. It's amazing to me to see how many directions this thread has taken. While I don't agree with some of the points made about teachers and education (and I thought this was a cool exercise, though incredibly difficult), I do agree that FYM is, after all, supposed to be a place for discussion *and* dissent. Carry on, I say, and just be nice.

 

[us3]

Very interesting Forum. I suspect one could take the question further and consider the void left by the "bumped" luminaries

i.e. no Shakesphere, Kenneth Branaugh doesn't have much of an acting career...no Babe, no Bambino curse...

BOSox win a series?!

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

ironically, we talked all about shakespeare at our literary heritage class last night. i was surprised no one mentioned about the theory that shakespeare plagarized. i didn't want to mention it since: A. i'm not sure if i agree with it myself, and B. i don't know any facts to back it up.

 

[joyfulgirl]

apologies to the person who said this is off-topic

It's not that people think he plagiarized, as I understand it, but that they think that the person who was William Shakespeare did not actually write the plays and that he somehow agreed to have the real author use his name. Actually, there are many theories and perhaps one of them is about plagiarism. Many scholars believe that Francis Bacon was the real author of the plays attributed to Shakespeare. Could be hogwash, but I've always been fascinated by the theory.

Mark Twain was no fool and his essay is very compelling. Here is an excerpt from it, for anyone who is interested, as well as a link to the entire essay:

http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Mark_Twain/Is_Shakespeare_Dead/

Isn't it odd, when you think of it: that you may list all the celebrated Englishmen, Irishmen, and Scotchmen of modern times, clear back to the first Tudors--a list containing five hundred names, shall we say?--and you can go to the histories, biographies and cyclopedias and learn the particulars of the lives of every one of them. Every one of them except one--the most famous, the most renowned--by far the most illustrious of them all--Shakespeare! You can get the details of the lives of all the celebrated ecclesiastics in the list; all the celebrated tragedians, comedians, singers, dancers, orators, judges, lawyers, poets, dramatists, historians, biographers, editors, inventors, reformers, statesmen, generals, admirals, discoverers, prize-fighters, murderers, pirates, conspirators, horse-jockeys, bunco-steerers, misers, swindlers, explorers, adventurers by land and sea, bankers, financiers, astronomers, naturalists, Claimants, impostors, chemists, biologists, geologists, philologists, college presidents and professors, architects, engineers, painters, sculptors, politicians, agitators, rebels, revolutionists, patriots, demagogues, clowns, cooks, freaks, philosophers, burglars, highwaymen, journalists, physicians, surgeons--you can get the life-histories of all of them but ONE. Just one--the most extraordinary and the most celebrated of them all--Shakespeare!

You may add to the list the thousand celebrated persons furnished by the rest of Christendom in the past four centuries, and you can find out the life-histories of all those people, too. You will then have listed 1500 celebrities, and you can trace the authentic life-histories of the whole of them. Save one--far and away the most colossal prodigy of the entire accumulation--Shakespeare! About him you can find out NOTHING. Nothing of even the slightest importance. Nothing worth the trouble of stowing away in your memory. Nothing that even remotely indicates that he was ever anything more than a distinctly common-place person--a manager, an actor of inferior grade, a small trader in a small village that did not regard him as a person of any consequence, and had forgotten all about him before he was fairly cold in his grave. We can go to the records and find out the life-history of every renowned RACE-HORSE of modern times--but not Shakespeare's! There are many reasons why, and they have been furnished in cartloads (of guess and conjecture) by those troglodytes; but there is one that is worth all the rest of the reasons put together, and is abundantly sufficient all by itself--HE HADN'T ANY HISTORY TO RECORD. There is no way of getting around that deadly fact. And no sane way has yet been discovered of getting around its formidable significance.

Its quite plain significance--to any but those thugs (I do not use the term unkindly) is, that Shakespeare had no prominence while he lived, and none until he had been dead two or three generations. The Plays enjoyed high fame from the beginning; and if he wrote them it seems a pity the world did not find it out. He ought to have explained that he was the author, and not merely a nom de plume for another man to hide behind. If he had been less intemperately solicitous about his bones, and more solicitous about his Works, it would have been better for his good name, and a kindness to us. The bones were not important. They will moulder away, they will turn to dust, but the Works will endure until the last sun goes down.

MARK TWAIN.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Re: apologies to the person who said this is off-topic

Many scholars believe that Francis Bacon was the real author of the plays attributed to Shakespeare.

it's really ironic. i wonder if my teachers are watching my movements on FYM or something. in history class today, we talked about ignatius donnelly, who wrote (or believed, i didn't write specifics down in my notes) that he thought sir francis bacon was the author of shakespeare's plays. this was sometime around the 1890's i think.

 

[joyfulgirl]

First English class and now History...Big Brother is watching you!

The theory is that Bacon was the only person alive in England at the time with the talent, the depth and breadth of knowledge, and the sheer brilliance that was exhibited in Shakespeare's plays, and that William Shakespeare was a simple, dull man who could not have possibly written the plays.

But I have to calm down. I am a hopeless sucker for a good conspiracy theory.

 

[elevation2u]

picasso must stay, so does MLK and gandhi so i'll pick
babe ruth
einstein
and shakepeare to bump off bye