3.686 scope of Humanist; pax vobiscum si... (57)
Willard McCarty (MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca)
Thu, 2 Nov 89 22:13:32 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 686. Thursday, 2 Nov 1989.
(1) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 89 22:12:15 CST (20 lines)
From: "Kevin L. Cope" <ENCOPE@LSUVM>
Subject: The Techno-Grammo Eclecticism of HUMANIST
(2) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 89 11:03:00 EST (16 lines)
From: <HALPORNJ@IUBACS>
Subject: PAX HOMINIBUS BONAE VOLUNTATIS
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 89 22:12:15 CST
From: "Kevin L. Cope" <ENCOPE@LSUVM>
Subject: The Techno-Grammo Eclecticism of HUMANIST
Why should HUMANIST include items about both computing and the humanities
as a subject (and the many subjects in the humanities)? Because this way it
will remain the best of the lists. I'll raise a controversial point:
HUMANIST is good because it is elite. In order to understand, read, and like
this list, one must rush ahead of the leading edge of technology and must
also understand the eternalities of the humanities. Very few people can
do both. The HUMANIST company, consequently, is self-selective. Compare
HUMANIST, with its hard-edged multidisciplinarity, to other lists. I, for
one, have had to sign off from LITERARY and WORDS because these lists offered
nothing but very amateurish, unevaluated, unedited, and, I suspect,
while I'm talking about "uns," undergraduate musings. One grammo to LITERARY
even asked "are there any profs out there"; another offered vague musings
about the restroom. Moreover, we HUMANISTS have an editor who organizes the
debate (and does a good job of it) so that we don't get hit with a lot of
scattered remarks from the hoi polloi. So let's keep HUMANIST as it is--
diverse, avant-garde, and full of hard initiation rites!
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------23----
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 89 11:03:00 EST
From: <HALPORNJ@IUBACS>
Subject: PAX HOMINIBUS BONAE VOLUNTATIS
Dear Readers,
Is it the season that is causing so much grouchiness on e-
mail these days. There is Willard, a paragon of patience (and
with whom I sympathize) being testy about text wider than 65
columns and about angular brackets in column 1. And yesterday,
someone who confuses spleen with satire sounding like the
curmudgeon who returns your "Good Morning" with "What's so good
about it?"
James W. Halporn [no address, no institutional affiliation, and a
promise that in his posted letters he will cut off the top 1/4 of
the stationery so that no one can complain about the fancy
printing and the dratted university seal].