Having just returned from Party In Paradise, it seems fitting to make my maiden posting. Since I hadn't participated in the bulletin board (I just tagged along with Cousin Craigsz to hang and Scuba dive), I went feeling a bit of a party crasher...yet I returned feeling a special guest. Not knowing any of you or your protocols, I had no particular expectations. Well, it was great fun from the moment I checked my liver in at the Red Carpet at LAX. I was so impressed about the great amount of work and creativity this took to pull off. Army invasions have less percision. Moreover, the generosity of so many of you was mind numbing. What struck me, however, was the total lack of glad-handing. The connections being made weren't business, but social, i.e., "Oh, I'll be in Brazil that week as well, let's get together for a drink."

Now, having returned and preparing for a financial audit that the State tells me will last 15 business days, I'm reflecting that the Gala was, in a sense, my Last Supper. Jesus should have eaten so well and been surrounded by so many fellow travelers. Thanks to all for everything.

Sky Masterson relays this message from Nathan who called after reading this posting and said:



"He did and He was." He also said that he and the guys at the track and casino understand that the writer's intentions are pure but the comparison is really not in good taste.Try Shakespeare for a more appropriate one.

I'm confused. The apostles were Communists?

Thanks RichG for getting the Communist slant. Seems to me that, unless my timeline is off, Jesus read Das Kapital more closely than Lenin or Mao.

As for Shakespeare, alas, he didn't say kill all the accountants. But I appreciate the suggestion and for my audit I should have considered Hamlet, "When sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions." Or Macbeth, "Double, double toil and trouble...."

Macbeth sums up the PIP weekend for me, "That which hath made them drunk hath made me bold."

Had good Will foreseen Bulletin Boards he never would have said, "Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice." Hamlet

Jailer: Or you could tell the auditors "And deeper than did ever plummet sound, I'll drown my book." (Prospero)

And, somewhat obviously, from Hamlet (Horatio to Laertes?) "Neither a borrower nor a lender be."

Almost forgot... Shylock: "If you prick us, do we not bleed?" (remember to roll the "r" in "prick")


[This message has been edited by RichG (edited 11-10-1999).]

Nathan replies through Sky: "Stick with old Will and forget the others. They were and are all losers; look at the mess they left behind. The comparison remains in poor taste, even if politically correct in today's fallen world. PIP and the Last Supper? Jesus and Marx-Engel-Lenin-Mao? Just poor taste- and from an obviously very literate and intelligent fellow. But everyone's happy that everyone had such a happy time."

Nathan replies through Sky: "Stick with old Will and forget the others. They were and are all losers; look at the mess they left behind. The comparison remains in poor taste, even if politically correct in today's fallen world. PIP and the Last Supper? Jesus and Marx-Engel-Lenin-Mao? Just poor taste- and from an obviously very literate and intelligent fellow. But everyone's happy that everyone had such a happy time."



And your time line is way off. And Henry said (through Will) "kill all the lawyers," not accountants. And the apostles and Jesus were not Marxian: "Render unto Caesar....."

Sky: could you tell nate that he is being a tad sensitive. Understandable, given his newly found proximity to Him. But poor taste? Relative to every second posting in OMNI and In the News? Back to your harp, nate...

BTW, if then who was the PiP Judas????????

The bush, of course.

RichG: Polonius to Laertes, Hamlet, Act I, scene iii.

Personally I believe the bush, is an innocent bystander. Have to look elsewhere for Judas.

Perhaps Judas just can't read a calendar?

If alive today, surely Karl Marx would say, "Bulletin boards are the opiate of the masses." Would not Karl see an airplane as a microcosm of the class struggle? The bourgeois business-class traveler yearns to be a first-class capitalist, while at the same time exploiting the proletariat tourist in coach. "Arise, you have nothing to lose buy your lack of leg room."

If old Will is thy idol, why does Nathan Detroit pick a character from a Shakespeare knock off (aren't all plays pale imitations of the Maestro?) I humbly suggest he take on a Shakespearean persona, perhaps Falstaff.

The Soviets and N. Koreans rendered unto Caesar plenty, so I don't get the "Render onto Caesar" disclaimer. Jesus, and therefore the apostles, would have subscribed to the Judaic custom of gleaning the fields, each unti his or her needs. However, I concede that the same backward engineering that makes Jesus a communist (little "c") could also be used to turn Moses into a terrorist....Please, no tacky responses about the Egyptian Air disaster.

"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." Marxist Leninism says that the state is supreme; Judiasm and Christianity say that God is supreme. Not too hard to deduce the meaning in this context. Nate may be sensitive, given his present home but he also took the writings of his old tutor CSLewis to heart many, many years ago. And he has no idols (see old writing called 10 Commandments, still valid, if often overlooked or ignored).

As for Judas, he can't make the connection here - any moe than he can make the earlier connections.



At least the Shakespeare students and scholars are having a field day with this one. And everyone had a wonderful time draining HNL dry! Ja?



The bells of hell go ting a ling a ling for thee but not for me.

------------------
nathan detroit

1. Isn't this a much more rewarding thread than "seat theft"?

2. The Lion doth protest too much, methinks.

3. Having said that, thank you for the correction. I should have looked it up.

4. The phrase "fellow traveler" is bound to come up from time to time on a frequent flyer bulletin board. I think it's useful to try to prevent it from reverting to general use without regard to cold war connotations.

5. I don't think it's possible to refer to yourself in the third person indefinitely without eventually requiring the giant economy size Ex-Lax.