Sandra Dodd

The quote below is from today's A.Word.A.Day email. A.Word.A.Day is
a list one can subscribe to at wordsmith.org



-=-Back in the 1870s, naturalist and explorer John Muir said, "One
day's exposure
to mountains is better than cartloads of books." Today, we might
update his
words for our time: "One day's exposure to mountains is better than
heaps of
video games and countless episodes of TV shows."
-=-

I believe John Muir was probably thinking of books about mountains
and trees, wildlife and rivers. If he had been thinking of pirate
novels and romances and mystery stories, maybe the parallel would
hold. And by "episodes of TV shows" I don't think Anu Garg (the
author of the comment above) meant Nova or National Geographic.

Probably John Muir had more nature intelligence than verbal, and so
he himself learned way more by direct experience than by pondering
the written words of others.

It seems to me that a very cool statement about learning was twisted
to insult video gaming. And that paragraph had nothing to do with
the word of the day, either. <g>

It's interesting to think, though, of what does parallel what. It's
a way to uncover principles. What is the principle behind John
Muir's statement? People can learn from nature, and they can't learn
from nature if they're home with a book. (I think that's what it
means.) What is the principle behind the commentary? I don't think
there is a clear, good principle unless it's "dead white 19th century
guys were all wise, and I read their words in books, but video games
and sitcoms suck." Total book-worshipping non-sequitor in my view.

Still, I like the word discussions.
The one from today is here:
http://wordsmith.org/words/moulin.html

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joyce Fetteroll

On Dec 26, 2005, at 10:19 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:

> Still, I like the word discussions.
> The one from today is here:
> http://wordsmith.org/words/moulin.html

That site has a nifty anagram maker too:

http://www.wordsmith.org/anagram/

I typed in Joyce Fetteroll and got 4,163. Using Joyce Ann Kurtak
Fetteroll I got 43,480 :-) If you click on Advanced and click the
Print candidate word list only button it will tell you all the words
that can be found in your name. The longest one in my name is
NONELECTROLYTE. Along with:

AUTOCORRELATE
CONNATURALLY
TERCENTENARY
COUNTERTENOR
COETERNALLY
RELUCTANTLY
TEETOTALLER
FORTUNATELY
EJACULATORY (!!)
NOCTURNALLY
FRATERNALLY
ALTERNATELY
REALLOCATOR
ROCKEFELLER
RETROLENTAL
ELECTROLYTE
CONFLATRATE
CREATURELY
CANTERELLE
TRACKLAYER
TURTLENECK
CONFUTATOR
CRENELLATE
FAUNTLEROY
RETREATANT
FORETELLER
CONTROLLER

Joyce

jessi koons

Hello, everyone, here's my first post in a long time...
I agree that the author twisted Muir's original meaning, but I'm confused about where you're getting the book worship from it. Sounds to me more like the message was, "In my day (or the good old days, etc.) we didn't have all these electronic toys...in my day, we went outside to play."


Sandra wrote:

> What is the principle behind the commentary? >I don't think
>there is a clear, good principle unless it's >"dead white 19th century
>guys were all wise, and I read their words in >books, but video games
>and sitcoms suck." Total book-worshipping >non-sequitor in my view.



---------------------------------





---------------------------------
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 26, 2005, at 4:32 PM, jessi koons wrote:

> -=- I agree that the author twisted Muir's original meaning, but
> I'm confused about where you're getting the book worship from it. -=-

Where would a guy who practically lives on the internet (maintains an
extensive website posts every day about things he has learned from
books) have learned about John Muir?

In a book.

And so when he (the modern guy) wanted to paraphrase Muir, he didn't
suggest books were bad, because he himself is learning from books and
not from trees and not from video games and not from TV. He's a book
guy. Muir lives in books now.

Muir's statement was anti-book.
Anu Garg wouldn't make an anti-book statement because he lives in/of/
for books.





> Sounds to me more like the message was, "In my day (or the good old
> days, etc.) we didn't have all these electronic toys...in my day,
> we went outside to play."

His day is now, the author of the commentary. He doesn't seem to be
going out to play.

In Muir's day, there wasn't electronic ANYthing. Electric lights
were new. He died before there was radio.

Sandra

wifetovegman2002

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd
<Sandra@S...> wrote:
>
> The quote below is from today's A.Word.A.Day email. A.Word.A.Day is
> a list one can subscribe to at wordsmith.org
>
>
>
> -=-Back in the 1870s, naturalist and explorer John Muir said, "One
> day's exposure
> to mountains is better than cartloads of books."
> -=-
>
> I believe John Muir was probably thinking of books about mountains
> and trees, wildlife and rivers.
>
> Probably John Muir had more nature intelligence than verbal, and so
> he himself learned way more by direct experience than by pondering
> the written words of others.


I googled it. I love google. LOL!


Here is the statement in context of the rest of the paragraph:

"19. I have a low opinion of books; they are but piles of stones set
up to show coming travelers where other minds have been, or at best
signal smokes to call attention. Cadmus and all the other inventors of
letters receive a thousandfold more credit than they deserve. No
amount of word-making will ever make a single soul to know these
mountains. As well seek to warm the naked and frostbitten by lectures
on caloric and pictures of flame. One day's exposure to mountains is
better than cartloads of books. See how willingly Nature poses herself
upon photographers' plates. No earthly chemicals are so sensitive as
those of the human soul. All that is required is exposure, and purity
of material. 'The pure in heart shall see God!'. . . ."

http://www.sierraclub.org/john_muir_exhibit/frameindex.html?http://www.sierraclub.org/john_muir_exhibit/writings/mountain_thoughts.html



> It's interesting to think, though, of what does parallel what. It's
> a way to uncover principles. What is the principle behind John
> Muir's statement? People can learn from nature, and they can't learn
> from nature if they're home with a book. (I think that's what it
> means.)


I think from the statement, within the context it was made, it might
mean that a book about nature is no substitute for the experience of
being there in real life.

There are some experiences, though, I would much rather read about in
books than experience in real life.

And there are times when books have inspired me to seek out new
real-life experiences.

The same with video games and movies and tv. I have experienced more
of the world through them than I could have had I ignored their value
and refused to use them.

Susan M (in VA)
wifetovegman

deedeanne

--- In [email protected], "wifetovegman2002"
<wifetovegman2002@y...> wrote:
> I think from the statement, within the context it was made, it
might
> mean that a book about nature is no substitute for the experience
of
> being there in real life.
>
> There are some experiences, though, I would much rather read about
in
> books than experience in real life.
>
> And there are times when books have inspired me to seek out new
> real-life experiences.
>
> The same with video games and movies and tv. I have experienced
more
> of the world through them than I could have had I ignored their
value
> and refused to use them.
>
> Susan M (in VA)
> wifetovegman

Well put, Susan. I heartily agree!

Deanne
>