Blog powered by Typepad

« Oblong Scone | Main | "Rubbing the poor itch of your opinion" »

Sunday, 02 March 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Three notes.
1) what is "po-faced"?
2) Can you give more detailed description of modern buildings in Mudeford so I can picture how "clean lines set at angles" make the "slab look" disappear? (full disclosure: I'm in the architecture/design trade) Another disclosure: I rather like 1930's style and I think it's a shame the builders aren't allowed to construct higher than 3-story. [so bite me]
3)Shylock IS anti-semitic. So is 3/4 of the best world's literature. It has to be studied, though, if only to know thy enemy! *says me. And I can say that, being a Jew[ess])

That's all.

Ha, just on time! Went on my usual blog-reading route after your place, and came across this post;">http://miriamsideas.blogspot.com/2008/03/expensive-house.html">post; what a great illustration!

That New Forest area and coast is lovely in August, David. Most visitors to the Forest stay within 100 yards of their cars so you can walk for miles with little fuss, save for the occasional ponies for company and a view of deer in the half distance. The only time beasties might give you a frisson of fear is if you come across pigs at pannage. Big fellas.

Tatyana (God, that's a beautiful name!, your questions answered in turn:

1) "Humourless or disapproving" expression on a face.
2) I, too, studied architecture for a while in my youth so you would expect me to be able to describe buildings more accurately than I did above. Sorry. I think that to understand my point you need a knowledge of 1930s, '40s and 50s *English* architecture particularly, in this context, the English seaside bungalow. Sometime, I will try, with the help of my IT Manager (a.k.a. Son of Duff) to illustrate my point with photos, and you will then see the little horrors in all their glory - perhaps you already have but unfortunately your link doesn't work, so perhaps you could just send the URL address for me to look at what you are looking at. Anyway, take it from me that great swathes of the English south coast have been ruined by the strip development of thousands upon thousands of these utterly boring, nondescript boxes whose ulginess is only partially mitigated by some stunning gardens - gardening being probably the biggest hobby in England. In the '50s, '60s and '70s a huge number of housing projects were developed, usually under local goverment authority, which made Stalin's 'slab cities' look really rather attractive! What I meant about the little contemporary developments in Mudeford was that they used attractive materials, that they were well proportioned not only in themselves but also against the Victoriana that surrounded them and that by breaking up the frontage into echeleon deployment they avoided the monolithic slab appearance of so many other appartment developments. Please don't misunderstand me, Mudeford is never going to win any prizes in an architectural competition, all I'm saying is that there has been a pleasant meld between old and new. As to your final injuction for me to bite you - with a name like yours, don't tempt me - just tell me whether you would prefer me to do it with teeth in or out!

3)Shylock is NOT anti-semitic. Because of the Christian restrictions of the time against lending money with interest, the Jews were the Bank Managers of their day - and no-one likes their Bank Manager! The Jewish near-monopoly of the money-lending industry throughout Europe brought down on their heads all the opprobrium that attaches to that unpopular trade which, re-inforced by their 'foreign' ethnicity and religion, only increased the antogonism. It is worth remembering that the occasional pogroms that took place were a very useful means by which the Christians could clear their debts without cost to themselves. Shylock is a bad man, a theatrical villain, who happens to be Jewish because of the plot line of the play. To suggest that Shakespeare was anti-semitic is like arguing that he was anti-Venetian (Iago), or anti-Yorkist (Richard III), anti-Greekist (Troilus & Cressida), anti-Scots (Mr and Mrs Mcbeth), and so on. Shakespeare is positively the most elusive of writers. It is almost impossible to discern anything but the vaguest outline of his *own* opinion concerning anything. However, he needed villains because they are the essence of drama.

'DM', thanks for "pannage"! I love new words and I had never heard that one before. Yes, we did spend an afternoon wandering in the New Forest and saw a small herd of deer with *three* white harts with full sets of antlers. What a sight! If you and yours are ever in the vicinity of the Dorset coast let me know and perhaps we can meet up for a beer or three.

The comments to this entry are closed.