Humanities desk
< June 6	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 7

Orange County where?

Until this edit, our article on Johnson County, Kansas read:

It is known as "the [[Orange County]] of the [[Midwest]]" for its extreme low-density sprawl and massive development of new, upper-middle class and upper-class homes, especially in its southern portion.

Is Woohookitty correct here, or is Orange County, New York more likely? Nyttend (talk) 01:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An unqualified "Orange County" is definitely the one in California. (But that sounds like a kind of in-joke for residents of Johnson County, like adding "-vegas" to the name of a dinky little town to make it sound more glamorous.) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, okay; thanks. I saw the bit about the southern portion as indicative of Orange County, New York, since obviously that portion is closest to New York City; on the other hand, I don't know much about Orange County, California. New York is generally my first thought — I know several people who grew up there — and it's close enough to New York City that I expected most people to think of it when they hear an unqualified "Orange County". Johnson County isn't a backwater, however; it has nearly 20% of the entire Kansas population. Nyttend (talk) 03:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I hear "Orange County" I think The O.C., Orange County (movie), and The Real Housewives of Orange County, which all refer to the one in California. I think stuff like that has saturated pop culture so that "Orange County" does not make people think of the one in New York...except, apparently, if you know people from that one :) Adam Bishop (talk) 03:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and how could I forget Laguna Beach and Arrested Development? Adam Bishop (talk) 03:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, you have the Orange County Choppers. Nyttend (talk) 04:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about 'extreme low-density sprawl and massive development of new, upper-middle class and upper-class homes', you are definitely talking about Orange County, California. That is OC, CA's raison d'etre. Though I'm curious why no one thought about Orange County Florida (which is what consistently pops up second for me when I'm googling OC). Is it so impossible to think that there's a little bit of Tampa hiding out in the Kansas corn fields? --Ludwigs2 05:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that an unqualified "Orange County" always refers to the one in California, except when a person is within the same media market as one of the other Orange Counties. Even within the New York media market, an unqualified "Orange County" would refer to the one in California anywhere except in counties bordering on Orange County, New York, plus maybe Bergen County, New Jersey (where many people have family connections in OC, NY, and to which many people commute from OC, NY). On Long Island, for example, most people are unaware of OC, NY, but very aware of Orange County, California. The reason is that Los Angeles is the media capital of the United States (arguably of much of the Western world), and content emanating from Los Angeles often refers to nearby Orange County. Also, Orange County, California, is by far the largest of the eponymous counties by population. Marco polo (talk) 13:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, OC, CA is notorious not only for its decadent bourgeois lifestyle, but also as the country's (political) conservative hotbed. Back in the nineties we even used to talk about the Orange Curtain (an invisible line behind which American liberals had a certain risk of being sent to transit camps...

). --Ludwigs2 18:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Orange County, without further qualifiers, almost certainly would refer to California. However, the post says that the nickname refers to "extreme low-density sprawl." That's definitely 'not' OC California. OC California has 3 million people in under 789 mi2 of land, for an official density of over 3,800 people per square mile, and the reality is more like 6,000/mi2, because about 1/3 of the land in the county is national forest or national wildnerness. By comparison, Rhode Island, the second-densest state in the USA, has slightly more land than OC but only one-third the population. --M @r ē ino 18:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely right that "low density" is not an accurate description of Orange County, California. So, if Johnson County, Kansas, is known as the "Orange County of the Midwest" while featuring low-density sprawl, it is not a very accurate label. Marco polo (talk) 19:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand the application of the term 'low density'. most of orange county, believe it or not, was originally lain out as bedroom communities for Los Angeles (starting in the late 50s). there are only two areas that are recognizable as 'cities' in the conventional sense of the word (Long Beach and Santa Ana) whereas the rest of the county is primarily development tracts with mall-type concentrations of businesses and nothing resembling a 'downtown'. The standard hallmarks of high-density urban settings - apartment buildings, skyscrapers, public transportation - are practically non-existent, and most of the infrastructure has gone to developing a commuter-based road system (surface streets in OC are built like highways with stoplights). the population density may be 600 people per square mile, but it's at the level uniformly, unlike Rhode island, where the population density spikes sharply in Providence and tapers to practically nothing outside the city. --Ludwigs2 05:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Long Beach proper is in Los Angeles County. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

humanities

why do we study humanities? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.200.54.130 (talk) 07:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because it encompasses the fields of human endeavor not covered by the physical, ~~natural~~ life, and social sciences. And it's interesting and relevant to study because we ourselves are humans. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the medieval precursor, see trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric) vs. quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy)... AnonMoos (talk) 12:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Humanities has a subsection (with further sub-subsections) titled "Legitimation of the humanities" offering different views which might interest you. ---Sluzzelin talk 12:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because some of us are terrible at math and science... Adam Bishop (talk) 16:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With some cross-mingling, science is the study of the "how" and humanities is the study of the "why". I find that a balance of the two is critically important. Falconus^{p t c} 16:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what you mean. Failing to ask "why" is I think usually regarded as borderline inductivism, and as poor science (falsification being all the rage) - it could also be seen as reductionism, another hazard. Behaviourism is an example of a much-derided branch of science (if we're not classing psychology as a humanity) which avoids asking "why". Perhaps science has sometimes been inclined towards this way of thinking, particularly in the early 20th century, but I don't think it's fair to say that avoiding asking "why" is part of the definition of science, quite the reverse. Maybe you mean something completely different, though - 'the study of the "why"' could mean the study of morality and the meaning of life, in which case fair enough, that's definitely philosophy, not science. 213.122.5.192 (talk) 01:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hardback fiction kept in print

In the UK, and I imagine in most other western countries as well, normal practice in the book industry is for new fiction to be published first in hardback and then in paperback a year or so later. But when the paperback is published, does the hardback remain in print or do the publishers take it out of print? I realize there is probably no hard-and-fast rule on this, I would like to know what happens most often. Many thanks. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a satisfactory answer on the internet. However, one of my close friends works as a librarian and is a real book enthusiast. I'll give her a ring tonight (in about 8 to 10 hours), and I'll write the answer on your talk page. SmokingNewton _{(MESSAGE ME)} 09:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, but please post anything you find on here. Best to keep discussions in one place I think. Thanks very much, --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please, post it here as well. The Ref Desk questions don't serve only as an education for the asker but also for those who just browse. Dismas|^(talk) 09:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, sure thing. I shall do. SmokingNewton _{(MESSAGE ME)} 11:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I worked in publishing for 25 years, and you're right: there is no hard-and-fast rule. It depends entirely on what the publisher thinks they can sell, so the books by top writers are more likely to sustain sales of hardback titles, the others are not. Of course, economies of scale often means that there will still be plenty of hardback copies available once the paperback comes out. Incidentally, with the increasing use of print on demand, the terms "in print" and "out of print" are starting to fall out of use.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to Shantavira's answer (as a former UK bookseller and publisher myself). Up until recently it has not been unusual for a book to appear in four successive trade-designated formats: Hardback; Softback (aka 'C' format - same size as the hardback but with card covers, and often issued simultaneously); 'A' format paperback (often for works perceived to be 'literary'), typically around 7¾"x5"; and finally 'B' format mass-market paperback, typically around 7"x4¾". Each appears at a successively lower cover price in order to fully exploit the balance of the buyers' desire against willingness to pay.

Demand for the larger/dearer formats, particularly the Hardback, may diminish but does not disappear after the cheaper formats appear: some people prefer Hardbacks for themselves or to give as presents, and libraries often require them, so once a particular Hardback printing has sold out the decision whether or not to reprint depends mostly on how well it's been selling lately (and also on anything likely to boost future sales, such as a new book by the same author, a TV or film adaptation, etc). 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT prejudice/discrimination against Aspies

Hello. It's me again. During my research, two Aspies from the same school told me that they were repeatedly bullied and harassed by a group of schoolmates who openly identified as LGBT. They believe the LGBT schoolmates targeted them not just because they were Aspies but also because of their race. They were also often called gay by other schoolmates. They say they cannot do much because there is a lot of support for LGBTs but almost none for Aspies.

I wish to know more about LGBT prejudice/discrimination against Aspies (causes/effects compared to non-LGBT prejudice/discrimination against Aspies, prevalence). Also, which countries have very strong LGBT rights records but also strong societal and institutional prejudice/discrimination against Aspies, and which countries are the opposite? This may sound controversial but I need this for my research and I hope people will answer with an open mind. Thanks.

--Friends of Aspies (talk) 12:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be looking for a corrolation of aspie abuse by LGBTs, but you're making an assumption that there is such a corrolation. The strongest correlation you seem to have found is between dumb schoolkids and people who abuse aspies. There's no evidence, and little likelihood, that LGBT have more or less issues with Aspies than anyone else. As for looking for correlations between very strong LGBT rights and societal and institutional prejudice/discrimination against Aspies ... you'll find countries with any number of combinations of these, but I question whether there's any corrolation whatsoever. In sum, I tend to think / gain the impression that you're a) wasting your time and b) don't know enough about social science research to be able to mount the sort of investiation you purport to be mounting. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your experiences seem to be anecdotal. As noted farther up the page, race is usually identifiable by sight. What race are your friends, and how was their being "Aspies" made known to others? Were they in a special class, or was it apparent from behavior, or what? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am a person who is both gay and almost certainly Aspie. (I haven't been diagnosed. I grew up before Aspergers was well known. But I get very high scores on the various diagnostic tests.) I was bullied when I was a kid, probably largely because of my Aspie behaviors (though they weren't recognized as such at the time). To this day, I face disadvantages at work because of my struggles with social cues. However, most of the discrimination I have faced has been from white heterosexual people. (As race is constructed in North America, where I live, I am also "white".) While I have certainly faced occasional rejection within the gay community because of my nontypical behavior, I find that gay and lesbian people are generally far more accepting of Aspie behavior, which can pass within the gay community as just another type of harmless eccentricity. So as someone who is both Aspie and gay, I would say that, if anything, in my lifelong experience there is a negative correlation between LGBT identity and prejudice toward Aspies. 192.251.134.5 (talk) 12:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are both Indian. Their teacher told their classmates and one of the LGBT classmates told his friends from other classes. Thankfully some classmates (and the teachers) are understanding. Some classmates do make fun of them but the worse bullying comes from the group of LGBT students. Of course I cannot confirm that LGBTs are more prejudiced against Aspies, that is why I am asking here. Will find and ask more Aspies to have a larger sample. Plus there is more than enough support for LGBTs but almost none for Aspies. --Friends of Aspies (talk) 12:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, schoolkids in general will pick on anyone who is different. It is probably a coincidence that the kids doing the harassing in this case happen to be LGBT. Marco polo (talk) 14:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do any adults know this stuff is going on? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

there is plenty of racism in the lgbt community http://www.youth-suicide.com/gay-bisexual/racism-gay-lesbian/index.htm http://www.colorq.org/articles/article.aspx?d=2000&x=gayracism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_LGBT_community —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.189.219.30 (talk) 15:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, just as there is plenty of homophobia in communities of color. What's the point? Marco polo (talk) 16:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the point you are trying to make is "See, there are examples of racism in the LGBT community; therefore, LGBT people are especially racist," that is an example of a logical fallacy. There are also examples of racism among heterosexuals. I don't think that there is evidence that LGBT people (who are of every race, incidentally) are any more racist than any other multiracial group. Marco polo (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there is a correllation in this particular case because these bullies form a group, which is cemented by a shared (alleged) LGBT identity, and bullying is usually easier and more often done in groups. Thus, the sole role of the LGBT identity in this would be its ability to give cohesion to a group - this could be achieved with many other cultural identities. --Alþykkr (talk) 00:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are people who overlap both (one self-identified above) LGBT and Aspergers communities. One high profile example is Daniel Tammet. I wouldn't say that there is widespread anti-Aspergers prejudice in the LGBT community. Aspergers people aren't likely to fit in very well in the clubbing-drug-taking-anonymous sex part of the LGBT community, but that is only one aspect of the community, and they fit in just as well as they do in mainstream heterosexual communities. I don't think incidences of anti-Aspergers prejudice are any higher in the LGBT community than in heterosexual communities. Steewi (talk) 00:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People often use their intuition out of others; actions to say, 'see, since W (insert any 'respected' person here) says X (such as LGBTs' sexual behavior) is not allowed so why support Y (in this case, LGBTs) which will harm Z (our id). You know this is also the same logical problem (though flawed). We know poverty is a big problem in Africa, as testified by UN's failures to work on this structural problem, which may not be good for our long-term development. Yet some people just finds time to quarrel on certain things that are meant to be good but still less important, such as LGBT rights and autism, although one might argue "autism should be accepted and LGBT behavior can be controlled!" Should we just set the quarrel aside and debate on other bigger issues that affect our lives as a whole? Like poverty? Sjsharksrs (talk) 10:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are people hungry on the streets but is disability or a certain medical condition really less important than poverty? Tupacrocks (talk) 11:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am Chinese and suspected Aspie. In real life I keep to myself and nobody is racist to me, some bully me a bit and call me gay (they don't know I am suspected Aspie) but I can take it. Online I talk to many people and get some very bad racism from the LGBT people (they also don't know I am suspected Aspie). Maybe the LGBT people are racist because our cultures don't support the LGBT people. Maybe they also hate the Aspie people because the way the Aspie people act looks a bit gay (why people in school call me and the Indian Aspie people gay) but they not gay. --Kaypoh (talk) 12:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your responses! Looks like there is no compelling evidence that LGBTs are more prejudiced against Aspies (though two editors mentioned reasons why this may be possible) but substantial evidence that LGBTs are more racist. I am more concerned that there is so much support for LGBTs but none for Aspies (so the teachers know but their hands are tied). Which is why I asked which countries have very strong support for LGBTs but massive societal and institutional discrimination against Aspies (even if they are not linked it shows how progressive societies are). --Friends of Aspies (talk) 05:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, I think it is a mistake to assume that there is more racism amongst the LGBT community than outside. What is shown in the discussion is that there is racism in the LGBT community, but then there is arguably racism in most communities - that doesn't tell us if it is more or less of a problem with any one of them. Generally, there does seem to be a problem with your approach, as you seem to be making broad negative generalizations about one group in the process of defending another.

In relation to the question of countries, I'm not sure where you are heading, as the two groups are not directly comparable. The issues facing each group are very different, so a comparison of the support each receives is unlikely to reveal anything. You might be better off finding groups which have more in common. - Bilby (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glorious! Victorious! One pint of beer between the four of us...

This came up on the talk page of Guns at Batasi. In the film, the sergeants sing "Glorious! Victorious!" to distract a gun crew's attention. We have an article The Goddamned Dutch, but it's not very good. Anyone know any more about the song and the tune? Strikes me it might be an old music hall number or an old hymn tune. DuncanHill (talk) 12:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From memory as an old UK Scout camp-fire song (some of our Leaders were WWII veterens). I can hum the tune but I'm not clever enough to put it into notation for you - it's not a hymn tune and I haven't heard it used for anything else - maybe just an old soldiers' song ...

"Glorious! Victorious!

One bottle o' beer between the four of us!

Glory be to God that there aint no more of us,

'Cause one of us could drink the bloomin' lot!

Cork an' all, label an' all, bottle an' all, start again..."

Alansplodge (talk) 12:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it![1] The second part of the tune is the one I know. Alansplodge (talk) 13:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another useful reference, especially for traditional song lyrics, is Mudcat.org; their Digital Tradition database has Drunk Last Night, and their Forum contains an extended discussion. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm most familar with the WWI version used in Oh! What a Lovely War: "They're over us, they're over us/ one little foxhole for the four of us/Glory be to God that there's no more of us/'Cause one of us could fill it all alone." (If I remember it right). "Drunk last night" is replaced with "Bombed last night". 86.164.69.239 (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone - I'm sure that in Guns at Batasi they weren't singing the "Drunk last night/bombed last night" tune for the first bit - will have to keep an eye out if it's on telly again. I think it was the King's Regiment version they were singing. Would still be good to know who composed the tune(s). DuncanHill (talk) 11:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

journalising payroll deductions

What entries do you pass for a loan deducted from the payroll? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.15.243.98 (talk) 13:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

need quick statistics on environmental degradation and conservation!

such as how many tonnes of waste is generated globally per day/year (that can fill how many football fields?) and level of energy consumption, etc. and how little acts can reduce it.

Sorry, I find this to be a very broad request, and would not want to start answering it because I'm not sure what exactly you want here. If I were you, I would start by browsing the articles in Category:Conservation. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can search from these links.

Please reply here whether they have been helpful. -- Wavelength (talk) 01:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who was Chingi Chkhana?

In the article The Ark (fortress), there is the statement "When the soldiers of Chingi Chkhana took Bukhara...", yet Chingi Chkhana gets zero Google hits, which it's hard to imagine anything getting zero hits in this day when people's cats' twitters have millions of followers. How can one destroy Bukhara and remain completely unknown to the web? Who was he? Or is the name "Chingi Chkhana" malformed? Herostratus (talk) 16:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell from the context, but Cengiz or Chinghiz is another of the (seemingly innumerable) spellings of Genghis Khan. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 17:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genghis Khan definitely did do that, and, if you check the page history, Herostratus (talk · contribs) translated the page from the Russian Wikipedia. I guess he saw "Чингисхан" and didn't recognize it. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Like most of the content of the page, that name was added in this edit, which says it was "using material translated from Russian Wikipedia". Today's version of the Russian article ru:Арк_(Бухара) contains the name ru:Чингисхан, which transliterates as "Chingiskhan" and is indeed the Russian article on Genghis Khan. It looks as if the translator did not recognise the name and made an error in the transliteration.

I have corrected the name and linked it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Thank you! It was my translation error, sorry. Thank you for fixing it and the article! Herostratus (talk) 02:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Multinational companies treating differently people from different countries

Any multinational company with a branch somewhere where work is cheap, will pay employees of this country less than in the central (in the US, UK or whatever), and only fulfill the local laws. Is this difference in the treatment of different people a case of discrimination? Has anyone tried to go to court against such companies?--Quest09 (talk) 17:57, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a lawyer, but I think that U.S. anti-discrimination laws apply only within the U.S. Also, anti-discrimination laws outlaw discrimination against protected categories, such as race or national origin. Geographic location is not one of these protected categories. So, as long as a U.S. firm pays people of Indian origin working in the United States the same as pays people of other national origins working in the United States, it doesn't matter that it pays people in India at a different rate. Even if the company did not have a single person of Indian origin working for them in the United States, I don't think that they would be liable for an anti-discrimination suit for paying people in India less. For example, I think that it is permissible to pay workers at a location in Mississippi less than comparable workers in California because prevailing wages and the cost of living are lower in Mississippi. A company could justify lower wages in India on similar grounds. Marco polo (talk) 18:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marco polo is correct; "discrimination" is only illegal in the US if it is against people in a protected class. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking, treating people differently in a way that is proportionate to their differences is not discrimination - treating them all the same without regard to their differences might be.

So if a company employs worker A who lives and works in a country with a much lower cost of living than worker B who lives and works in a country with a much higher cost of living, then it is entirely appropriate for the company to pay them different wages (a higher wage for worker B than worker A). However, if the company were to pay both people the same wages, then that would arguably be discrimination against worker B. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That happens within the USA itself. Each state has different labour laws and minimum wages so that kind of "discrimination" certainly already happens.Jabberwalkee (talk) 03:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this example. Worker A lives in a major Western city conurbation. Rent is $1000 - 1500/month, food, taxes and such another $900, that's before clothing and leisure. Worker B lives in a minor regional town in India. Half the townspeople are farmers and anyone earning more than $2 a day is going to be able to pay their (admittedly modest but culturally normal) living expenses quite happily. One townsman earns $250/month and is considered with envy by their neighbors. What's a fair wage for the multinational company employing both to pay? Is it fair to pay both the same? Caveat - numbers are not exact, it's more a "thought experiment" to help refine insights into a very good question of "what would 'fair' mean?" FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 18:47, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR: I’ve dealt with MNCs, mainly outside of their home countries, for 30 years. I’ve never met one that didn’t follow the laws of the places they work, to the best of their ability (at least, that’s the intention; mistakes do occur). And, I’ve only very rarely encountered a local company operating in its home country that treats its employees better than a foreign MNC in that same country.

So, if the minimum wage is US$7.15/hour in the US and Rmb800/month in China, that’s what they pay (if they don’t have to pay more to get the workers they want). At the executive level, when someone (say, a South African) is moved from a lower income environment to a higher one (say, London), compensation is based on the difference in actual cost of living between the two places. However, the base pay may be lower, because of the (say) South African's original employment contract. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Book written by Henry VIII

What was the book written by Henry VIII of England please? I cannot find any information about it. Apart from allegedly Greensleaves, what other cultural items did he do? 92.15.24.29 (talk) 19:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As long as I was in the neighborhood, perhaps you are thinking of the lyrical works of Henry VIII, here's some useful info. PЄTЄRS VЄСRUМВА ►talk 19:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not "Greenfleaves" but "Pastime with Good Company" and some others; he compiled a book of music. The famous tract Defence of the Seven Sacraments won him the title Defender of the Faith from Pope LeoX.--Wetman (talk) 19:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more on that...

Ad Leonem pontificem ejus nominis X.: Assertio Sacramentorum,
- lib. 1: Ad Epistolam Lutheri,
- lib. 1: De Christiani Hominis Institutione,
- lib. 1: De Instituenda Pube,
- lib. 1: Sententia de Mantuano Concilio,
- lib. 1: De justo in Scotos bello,
- lib. 1: Ad duces Saxoniae, Erasmum Roterodamum, et alios magni nominis viros, epistolae disertissimae

per The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe: A New and Complete Edition, George Townsend, Ed., Volume V, 1838 PЄTЄRS VЄСRUМВА ►talk 20:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do remember, that when something was attributed to the authorship of King Henry, he may not have written a line of it, personally. The most obvious "real" author was Sir / Saint Thomas More. MacOfJesus (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Henry VIII was a noted theologian, and skilled poet and composer of music. It stands to reason he wrote this book on his own.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]}. "It stands to reason" is not a reliable source. --ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source that says he didn't write it? If there are none, then we can reasonably concur with scholars and historians who say that he wrote the book. So far I see no refs which give Sir Thomas More as the author.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly the reign of Henry VIII and Henrican literature in general pre-dates my personal interests in English literature--which, except for quoting Chaucer on occassion--start mainly with the Age of Reason. Still, I have not read anything indicating Henry was not the author of the works attributed to him by scholars. PЄTЄRS VЄСRUМВА ►talk 19:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do remember the times. For example Henry always won the tennis tournament, as the opponent would rather keep his head.

In those days, and indeed now we say someone built a particular building. We say Pugin built many Churches, yet he probably never put one brick on another.

I don't think there is such a source.

However I do remember my History Professor mentioning that he presented his thesis on Henry! At the moment that is the best I can do.

I think, Henry, was a noted tennis player, too, always won!

Saint Thomas More, only objected when it came to a matter of principal, and lost his head!

Yes, he, Henry, was an all-round champion at all things in his day.

The one thing he, Henry, had to do, on his own, was have a "man-child".

It was important that Henry appeared strong in all things, as this conferred the idea that England had a strong kingship. MacOfJesus (talk) 09:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that OSV's Encyclopedia of Catholic History By Matthew Bunson[2] states that the Assertio Septum Sacramentorum.. was written "with the help of" John Fisher. Some information about Henry as composer here[3]. Alansplodge (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Alansplodge, I would never have thought of Bishop Saint John Fisher who met the same fate as Saint Thomas More. There is a lot more to this than meets the eye. MacOfJesus (talk) 17:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's this guy's name?

What is the name of a man, fairly young, an intellectual, author of some books (that enjoyed quite a bit of popularity), is probably a college professor, I think American, slight of build, somewhat longish hair, kind of frizzy hair (piled up on top of his head like an Afro, but he is a white guy)? I've seen him talking in interviews in online videos. He presents ideas that seem to have a lot about learning, education, and accomplishment. For some reason "Blagojevich" comes to mind. Maybe the name has a similar sound. Oh yes, he has kind of a twinkle in his eyes when he speaks. He is kind of impish, if I understand the meaning of that word. Other terms that seem naturally applicable to him might be geek or egghead. He seems "high-strung," definitely in a good way. Very alert. His frizzy hair makes him seem alert (like electrified), and he is alert, quick to speak, I think. Very much the intellectual, with very much groundbreaking, shocking ideas. He seems to be someone of whom it might be said that he is presenting a "new paradigm." Bus stop (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Gladwell? Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. Thank you! Bus stop (talk) 22:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]