Fashion Board 11-2-03 - 12-09-03

[leagleaze]

How do people pick the amount of money they sue for in these cases? This is something I have always wondered.

In what world is being slammed down worth 21 million?

Someone who has the wrong leg amputated is lucky to get a couple million. This guy is probably a bit roughed up and he wants 21 million. Clearly the amount requested is controlled by what the defendant is worth, but it's just so random.

Why do people even ask for this much? For the press? What?

[Skeks in the city]

Originally posted by dtb

I loved Portrait of the Artist -- really loved it, which led me to read the short story collection, the name of which is escaping me now -- something about Dublin Stories?

The Dubliners is good. Portrait of the Artist is OK. Ulysses and Finnegans Wake seemed horrible after 50 pages, and that's all the chances they get.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by leagleaze
Yeah the whole concept that any time someone sacrifices himself for the greater good he has to be a Christ figure is a bit tiresome. People were sacrificing themselves long before Christ, and the reason profs find Christ figures where the authors didn't intend them is that they read it from a Christian perspective. It's rather irritating actually.

All but one of my English profs were subtext-thumping atheists, so I don't think Christ figuration is due to some latent Christian-obsessivism in universities. I think it's due to the fact that the novel is a relatively young art form (since the 1730s or so), and the narrative depiction of European middle-class values and individuals required that stories be told that resonated with those values, i.e., Christianity. For the first 200 years of the art form, all novels remained a short putt from their aesthetic forebears (morality plays, confessions and moral tracts) and drew upon deep wells of their readers' narrative expectations: ordinary life laced with foreboding of pain, then profound suffering, then resolution or redemption. That's why it's easier to find Christ figures in 18th and 19th century novels than in Elizabethan plays, which had different audiences and could draw on classical and pre-Christian themes and stories.

Besides, the readers expected prose narrative to be Gospelesque. If you grow up on sitcoms, you expect jokes every fifteen seconds. If you grow up on NPR, you expect a minor narrative resolution every forty-five seconds. If you grow up on the Gospel stories, you expect a central figure to be symbolically crucified and then redeemed in the third reel.

Late 20th century novelists are trying to break away from these roots like each generation of philosophers declares independence from Plato, but they're building on literary traditions that in turn are built on the Gospel mythos. The introduction of non-Western literature is helping to diversify the field, but there's nothing shameful about retelling the prevailing mythos in new and compelling ways, such that even people uninterested in the religion like --- and often fail to recognize --- the basic story structure.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by leagleaze
How do people pick the amount of money they sue for in these cases? This is something I have always wondered.

In California, you're not allowed to put any damages figure in a complaint for personal injury or wrongful death. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.10(b). Additionally, no complaint seeking punitive damages may allege an amount of punitive damages sought, on pain of a special motion to strike. Cal. Civ. Code § 3295(e). I guess someone in the Legislature figured out that complaints were starting to read too much like press releases.

In every high-profile filing that has drawn press interest, I've always been asked, "How much are you suing for?" Even by smart courthouse veterans who've been around the block and know it don't mean shit. A high demand figure is the only way they can pitch newsworthiness to their editors. I tend to be coy in answering the question, but the reporter wants you to make some shit up so he hasn't wasted his time talking to you. Something that ends in "millions."

The answer to your question, Leagl, is "Whatever makes only half of the people in the conference room laugh." The rest is up to voir dire.

[leagleaze]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
The answer to your question, Leagl, is "Whatever makes only half of the people in the conference room laugh." The rest is up to voir dire.

Now that is a good answer.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by leagleaze
Yes, I'm terribly scathed. But more, I think you just don't understand what people mean when they say someone is a Christ figure. Hence the whole admission I was being a timmy.

Sometimes people find Christ figures where they don't exist, like my ET example. Though the character shares some of the ideas I think it is a stretch to call him a Christ figure. English profs definitely push some shit so they have something to talk about.

A Christ figure though is just meant to be a retelling, retooling or representation of Christ. That's exactly what Neo is. A retooling and representation. In the last temptation of Christ, Christ is Christ. It is the "history" of his life, with some poetic license.

It is the same with any figure. If someone does a movie about JFK, the character who is meant to be JFK is JFK. On the other hand, if someone does a movie about a JFK like person, that is not meant to be JFK, but it might well be representative of him.

You mean Maria yes? This is a different issue. Maria is derivative of Juliet, she is not Juliet. Juliet is not a dancing, singing, Puerto Rican. The thread of the story is Romeo and Juliet and Maria represents the Juliet character. She's meant to be a version of her, a retelling of her. Is Neo a retelling of Christ? Sure, why not. And of Moses and of Alice in Wonderland too. But that doesn't make him Christ. He's a fictional character, so by definition, he cannot be Christ. He can only represent him.


Edited to add:

Yeah the whole concept that any time someone sacrifices himself for the greater good he has to be a Christ figure is a bit tiresome. People were sacrificing themselves long before Christ, and the reason profs find Christ figures where the authors didn't intend them is that they read it from a Christian perspective. It's rather irritating actually.

I was just bitching about a certain type prof at Enormous State U. who probably isn't competant to teach Lit. analysis. I'm sure lots of you went to good Liberal Arts colleges where the profs were better. These are two different experiences. Think how K profs were influenced up by Kingsfield, but weren't able to actually be Kingsfield. C'mon. lots of you had a guy like that. (Hi, Pock!)

As to Anita/ Maria.... that mistake actually speaks volumes to my credentials to be in this argument.

[leagleaze]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I was just bitching about a certain type prof at Enormous State U. who probably isn't competant to teach Lit. analysis. ... C'mon. lots of you had a guy like that. (Hi, Pock!)

As to Anita/ Maria.... that mistake actually speaks volumes to my credentials to be in this argument.

I understand. I'm sorry, I shouldn't have taken you to task, it wasn't fair of me. But I'm stuck in a hotel room and bored, so you got to be the victim.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
All but one of my English profs were subtext-thumping atheists, so I don't think Christ figuration is due to some latent Christian-obsessivism in universities. I think it's due to the fact that the novel is a relatively young art form (since the 1730s or so), and the narrative depiction of European middle-class values and individuals required that stories be told that resonated with those values, i.e., Christianity. For the first 200 years of the art form, all novels remained a short putt from their aesthetic forebears (morality plays, confessions and moral tracts) and drew upon deep wells of their readers' narrative expectations: ordinary life laced with foreboding of pain, then profound suffering, then resolution or redemption. That's why it's easier to find Christ figures in 18th and 19th century novels than in Elizabethan plays, which had different audiences and could draw on classical and pre-Christian themes and stories.

Besides, the readers expected prose narrative to be Gospelesque. If you grow up on sitcoms, you expect jokes every fifteen seconds. If you grow up on NPR, you expect a minor narrative resolution every forty-five seconds. If you grow up on the Gospel stories, you expect a central figure to be symbolically crucified and then redeemed in the third reel.

Late 20th century novelists are trying to break away from these roots like each generation of philosophers declares independence from Plato, but they're building on literary traditions that in turn are built on the Gospel mythos. The introduction of non-Western literature is helping to diversify the field, but there's nothing shameful about retelling the prevailing mythos in new and compelling ways, such that even people uninterested in the religion like --- and often fail to recognize --- the basic story structure.

Yeah, but just because there weren't any novels doesn't mean there weren't stories. When few people read books, and all of those people were pretty scholarly, books tended to be scholarly items. Then printing became cheaper and easier, and more and more people became literate, and instead of a bard going around telling stories (or people gathering in the pub or what have you) you started having stories written down for popular consumption.

Christ is but one example of a self-sacrificing etc. etc. figure. It seems like it's already clear that in order to have what many of y'all are calling a Christ figure, you don't have to have resurrection, you don't have to have a gospel-y style, you don't have to have any number of biblical stylistic elements. But when you take all that away, it sounds much more like a general self-sacrificing etc. etc. figure.

I just think that having "Christ-like" as the standard and parallels being drawn only to the Bible is a limited viewpoint; there's more construct than there needs to be and that ideal didn't originate with Christ so there's no reason to have his stuff be the checklist.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Yeah, but just because there weren't any novels doesn't mean there weren't stories. When few people read books, and all of those people were pretty scholarly, books tended to be scholarly items. Then printing became cheaper and easier, and more and more people became literate, and instead of a bard going around telling stories (or people gathering in the pub or what have you) you started having stories written down for popular consumption.

Christ is but one example of a self-sacrificing etc. etc. figure. It seems like it's already clear that in order to have what many of y'all are calling a Christ figure, you don't have to have resurrection, you don't have to have a gospel-y style, you don't have to have any number of biblical stylistic elements. But when you take all that away, it sounds much more like a general self-sacrificing etc. etc. figure.

I just think that having "Christ-like" as the standard and parallels being drawn only to the Bible is a limited viewpoint; there's more construct than there needs to be and that ideal didn't originate with Christ so there's no reason to have his stuff be the checklist.

Its ironic. I blunder into this Christ figure debate and get crucified by leagleaze. I didn't sacrifice myself for anyone else though.....

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by leagleaze


In what world is being slammed down worth 21 million?

What Atticus said. But my recollection of NY law, from one complaint I drafted, is that you cannot collect damages greater than the amount alleged. So you'd better make sure your claims is greater than any possible amount you could actually prove.

Struck me as a pretty stupid rule, but, in went the claim for $500m in a contract case.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by tmdiva
PS Anyone have a good rec for a cheap DVD player? I don't feel like watching movies on the computer, and I don't want to make a big investment in a player while I'm waiting for the price to come down on the DVD recorders.

Any brand you recognize that has a optical digital audio out (assuming you have a receiver that is compatible) and both a composite video and s-video out. You won't use both at the same time, but it gives you flexibility. It should also come with DTS. If you have or are planning to get an HDTV, get progressive scan, but with a regular tv it shouldn't matter. You should be able to pick something up in with these features for less than $150 easily, and probably for a fair bit less than $100. Unless you've got a high-end tv and/or stereo, you're not going to be able to tell the difference between this and a machine costing $1500. Other features to look for that will impact cost and value: multi-disc players, and the ability to play formats like mp3s.

See, e.g.:
http://www.epinions.com/597525_Sony_...~latest_prices

http://www.epinions.com/pr-Sony_DVP-NC665P_S_DVD

http://www.epinions.com/pr-JVC_XV-N5...splay_~reviews

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
What Atticus said. But my recollection of NY law, from one complaint I drafted, is that you cannot collect damages greater than the amount alleged. So you'd better make sure your claims is greater than any possible amount you could actually prove.

Struck me as a pretty stupid rule, but, in went the claim for $500m in a contract case.

Stupid, but the rule in other places too. I guess it is intended to give the defendant some comfort that they won't get a judgment over X amount, and it has the added bonus that then people can campaign for tort reform citing ridiculous-but-true-but-kinda-meaningless ginormous sums of money people ask for in situations that don't sound so bad.

[Fugee]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Christ is just one of many manifestations of the Syzygy archetype.

Christians, acting like they invented the whole concept of Christ figures, instead of just giving an existing archetype a name that is now widely used.

No, we didn't invent the concept of Christ figures. We just follow Christ who was on earth as a real historical person, referred to in accepted historical secular writings of the era. You may not believe what the disciples wrote about him in the New Testament, but 10 of the 11 remaining disciples were willing to die for what they wrote and believed, which would be pretty stupid if they knew it was all a made-up archetype.

And even before Christ, the Old Testament is full of foreshadowing of what Christ would be like.

I think the archetype exists because people have always had a God-shaped hole in their lives and have looked for ways to fill it.

End of sermon.

Fu(Christianity Timmy)fee

[Jack Manfred]

Str8, you ignorant slut.

You carp on Rebel Without a Cause, the greatest teen exploitation movie of all time, and then you pronounce the majesty of Rush? He, I liked "Tom Sawyer" too.... when I was in 7th grade...and I wasn't cool in 7th grade... and Rush isn't cool now.

The best quote about Neil Finn of Crowded House reads thusly:

"Neil Finn pisses genius."

Fantastic songwriter. Great live. A must-see. He played the House of Blues a couple years back. He had a ton of guests backing him up: Wendy Melvoin (of Wendy & Lisa/Prince and the Revolution), Johnny Marr, Lisa Germano and others. At one point, Wendy pointedly remarked that playing with Neil was the most fun she'd had making music. At another show the next year, Neil brought out his son Liam for a few songs. Crowded House should have been huge. Of course, I think that the Screaming Blue Messiahs should have got more airplay, so my judgment is suspect.

In other music news: Bloodshot Records is having a sale. You can buy Neko Case CDs direct from the label. Or Jon Rauhouse's Steel Guitar Air Show which is really good. Or a children's album that has cooler music than The Wiggles. (Is Allyce Beasley making good money as the voice of the Disney Channel? Should she have saved her residual checks from Moonlighting? Did she really think that there was going to be an Agnes DiPesto spin-off?)

[purse junkie]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Please note that as there appear to be no Australians around, it's open season on Men At Work

No, goddammit, it is not.

As to Midnight Oil, however, have at it. Completely fucking overrated. If I shave my head, will someone give *me* a record contract?