--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > Ahhh, there we must disagree again, I did read all the Lord of the Rings > books, beginning when I was 12 years old, and over the years I must have read > them and the Hobbit 25 or 30 times. I despised the movies for many reasons.
I thought the Hobbit was a great book actually, but couldn't get into LotR. But I refused to go see the Hobbit movie because they stretched it out into 3 - 3 hour movies when it wasn't a very long book to start with. Blatant profiteering. I thought the 3rd LotR movie was pitiful which was a shame after the brilliance of the second one. I couldn't believe they went through all that just to get rescued by giant eagles that no one mentioned earlier, cheap escape. And it turned out that the dullest one of the good guys was the king all along. And that battle scene seemed to go on for most of my life! And the ending was appallingly done. And we didn't even see the baddie, apparently they saved that for the DVD - more blatant profiteering. Much to dislike but Legoland remained cool throughout, they should have made him king... ______________________ > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 3:01 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > I liked the books quite a bit, having never had any problem with wizards > > myself, I like her style of writing too. > > I don't like the insto-get-out clause that magic gives you. > I saw the Lord of the Rings movies and almost really enjoyed > them - part 2 was sublime actually - Trouble was the magic, in > the first episode the main hobbit gets a spear the size of a > telegraph pole right through his chest pinning him to a concrete pillar! > > I thought that must be the end and got up to leave but no! He > was wearing a magic waistcoat. How it might work I don't know, > maybe some sort of quantum superposition? I guess you're supposed > to suspend your disbelief at that point but I can't, I have to have > a consistent metaphysics or I think the writer is just being lazy. > > Iain Banks does it in some of his sci-fi, one of his characters > will be in an impossible situation with no possible escape and > suddenly we find out that he's a shape shifter, which never got mentioned > before, and he slides out of an air vent or something. > Lazy, lazy... > > I think if you are going to have spells then they have to be > consistently used, if Harry Potter could kill the bad guy with > a wave of his wand, why doesn't he do it from a safe distance > rather than waiting till he's hanging upside down in a cellar? > > Sorry. It's a pet peeve. > > > ________________________________ > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 1:07 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > > à> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > > > Oh my lord! That means you can't abide that English woman, Jo Rowling!!!!! > > > > Deary me no, Harry Potter and the Gob of Shite. Admittedly I > > haven't read any of the books and why my (female) friends used > > to recommend them to me I don't know, but I sat through one of the movies > > and wanted to gnaw my legs off after 5 minutes. > > > > I think I'm a bit too old for Voldemort being past puberty as I > > am... > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:41 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Awww, Come on Sal, why you don't like Deepak? > > > > > > I don't like any of these guru types who make a fortune out > > > of seekers, even if it is their own choice. I don't like the > > > reliance on quantum physics as a prop for woolly thinking > > > and undeliverable promises or pushing untested folk medicine. > > > I don't like the whole "veda is truth" thing. Basically my > > > same reasons for disliking the TMO. > > > > > > I am interested in his split from the TMO though, in our old > > > tape cupboard at the academy we had a huge box of videos > > > featuring Deepak with a "not to be played" sign on them. I > > > gather he went from quite the darling to public enemy number one > > > very swiftly but I never managed to get a straight answer about > > > why from anybody. > > > > > > Usually it was that he changed Marshy's teaching (I thought it > > > was him teaching Marshy about AV) or that he made some personal > > > money out of it which TM bigwigs saw as some sort of ultimate > > > crime. Bizarrely, as they still sell no end of courses in vedic #wisdom > > > promising a fruitful career. Maybe they were annoyed as > > > he was the only one who ever did make a buck out of the TMO. > > > I know precious few who ever got any "nature" support from that direction. > > > > > > > > > > > I know I have enjoyed his writing - especially his first fiction novel, > > > > Return of Merlin which he supposedly wrote the bulk of during the year > > > > when he was looking after the Big M subsequent to his being poisoned. I > > > > loved that novel. > > > > > > Didn't know he wrote fiction though, but I never liked fantasy > > > novels anyway, if I even get a sniff of a wizard I'm off - It's > > > sci-fi for me if I'm feeling speculative. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:22 AM > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita" <s3raphita@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > If you're interested in the debate with materialists, you > > > > > could do a lot better than Chopra. He's not what I would > > > > > call a rigorous thinker. > > > > > > > > He's an asshole. > > > > > > > > > You might try Thomas Nagel's "Mind and Cosmos: Why the > > > > > Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost > > > > > Certainly False." > > > > > > > > > > Nagel got in a lot of trouble with the big-time materialists; > > > > > the book really upset them, so he must have hit close to the > > > > > bone. > > > > > > > > LOL. > > > > > > > > > >
