|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Avebury » Developments at Avebury |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:25
|
||
|
The Sea Cat wrote: I honestly don't know what you're getting in such a blather about. I meant that agree wholeheartedly with tjj re. 'no ring road'. If I wanted to get talking abolut Stukeley, I would have. Well you kept the Stukeley quote in your post......why not delete that part then reply?? Once again..wholehearted agreement is not debate....it is opinion...valid or otherwise is for others to assess.
|
|||
|
jackyboy 145 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:27
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: jackyboy wrote: Nope, I don't get this anymore. The answer is quite aptly summed up by Rhett Butler's famous line from Gone With The Wind.(Don't worry I wn't quote it as it's content might be deemed inappropriate) If anyone feels intimidated by language(read back)...why in the name of all on earth claim to want to debate????? Sorry mate but your anger seems misplaced. I can see what is worth this much stress. We should all move on.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:30
|
||
I can understand you being mighty surprised to be told that famous Stukeley quote was inappropriate. I would have thought it was the most appropriate quote in the history of the world for a thread titled Developments at Avebury. It's a puzzle.
|
|||
The Sea Cat 3608 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:30
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: The Sea Cat wrote: I honestly don't know what you're getting in such a blather about. I meant that agree wholeheartedly with tjj re. 'no ring road'. If I wanted to get talking abolut Stukeley, I would have. Well you kept the Stukeley quote in your post......why not delete that part then reply?? Once again..wholehearted agreement is not debate....it is opinion...valid or otherwise is for others to assess. I'll edit what I like in my own posts, thankyou. Chill out. :-)
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:36
|
||
|
The Sea Cat wrote: I'll edit what I like in my own posts, thankyou. Even if it causes confusion to do otherwise?....Fair enough...I'll know in future, and be aware that you aren't talking about what might be in the quotes, but something else.
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:38
|
||
|
The Sea Cat wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: A Stukeley quote is quite appropriate here..(sorry if it's been done to death in this topic already) "And this stupendous fabric, which for some thousands of years, had brav'd the continual assaults of weather, and by the nature of it, when left to itself, like the pyramids of Egypt, would have lasted as long as the globe, hath fallen a sacrifice to the wretched ignorance and avarice of a little village unluckily plac'd within it." William Stukeley (1687-1765) I agree with you that the above quote has been done to death, I've read it many times but I disagree about its appropriateness to this topic. William Stukeley was part of the 'upper class' whilst the villagers of Avebury were mainly poor land workers who basically did as they were told. That isn't the case now of course but to some extent their views need to be at least considered. Anyway, as I said before ... I'll leave the politics of Avebury to people with much louder voices than mine. Sorry...you disagree..yet agree?...I can't find any reason for you to disagree with me using a quote in the way I have, other than some kind of inverted snobbery... ie..poor people are by dint of being poor absolved of all blame as they are victims of circumstance, what utter tommyrot. Stukeley(wealthy upper class know-it-all as you paint him)..does point out in this very quote...that the village is "unluckily placed".....and before anyone gets all high and mighty about "poor land workers" it was the LAND OWNERS who put the accommodation there for the workers(the reasons for churches being sited in proximity HAS been done to death). Please just don't disagree for the sake of disagreeing....it is rather ill becoming....just because one individual has read a quote several times doesn't mean everyone else has....or is this some kind of subtle censoring of opinions at variance with yours? Yes, I agree it WAS the landowners who placed the village there for their farm labourers to live in. For the record, I was not disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing - or operating 'some kind of subtle censorship of opinions at variance with my own'. This is a forum ie a place for debate ... my voice may not be as loud and articulate as your good self but it still has a right to be heard. I've just checked this thread and I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree with you tjj. I am vehemently opposed to a ring road, and of course, all our voices are of equal worth and merit, pro or against. We can and should debate and discuss freely and civilly. And may I add be particularly polite to the fairer sex.
|
|||
goffik 3926 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:40
|
||
|
Everything ever written ever in teh whole world ever wrote: Sanctuary wrote: The Sea Cat wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: A Stukeley quote is quite appropriate here..(sorry if it's been done to death in this topic already) "And this stupendous fabric, which for some thousands of years, had brav'd the continual assaults of weather, and by the nature of it, when left to itself, like the pyramids of Egypt, would have lasted as long as the globe, hath fallen a sacrifice to the wretched ignorance and avarice of a little village unluckily plac'd within it." William Stukeley (1687-1765) I agree with you that the above quote has been done to death, I've read it many times but I disagree about its appropriateness to this topic. William Stukeley was part of the 'upper class' whilst the villagers of Avebury were mainly poor land workers who basically did as they were told. That isn't the case now of course but to some extent their views need to be at least considered. Anyway, as I said before ... I'll leave the politics of Avebury to people with much louder voices than mine. Sorry...you disagree..yet agree?...I can't find any reason for you to disagree with me using a quote in the way I have, other than some kind of inverted snobbery... ie..poor people are by dint of being poor absolved of all blame as they are victims of circumstance, what utter tommyrot. Stukeley(wealthy upper class know-it-all as you paint him)..does point out in this very quote...that the village is "unluckily placed".....and before anyone gets all high and mighty about "poor land workers" it was the LAND OWNERS who put the accommodation there for the workers(the reasons for churches being sited in proximity HAS been done to death). Please just don't disagree for the sake of disagreeing....it is rather ill becoming....just because one individual has read a quote several times doesn't mean everyone else has....or is this some kind of subtle censoring of opinions at variance with yours? Yes, I agree it WAS the landowners who placed the village there for their farm labourers to live in. For the record, I was not disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing - or operating 'some kind of subtle censorship of opinions at variance with my own'. This is a forum ie a place for debate ... my voice may not be as loud and articulate as your good self but it still has a right to be heard. I've just checked this thread and I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree with you tjj. I am vehemently opposed to a ring road, and of course, all our voices are of equal worth and merit, pro or against. We can and should debate and discuss freely and civilly. And may I add be particularly polite to the fairer sex. Sexist pig! ;) G x
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:41
|
||
|
goffik wrote: Everything ever written ever in teh whole world ever wrote: Sanctuary wrote: The Sea Cat wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: A Stukeley quote is quite appropriate here..(sorry if it's been done to death in this topic already) "And this stupendous fabric, which for some thousands of years, had brav'd the continual assaults of weather, and by the nature of it, when left to itself, like the pyramids of Egypt, would have lasted as long as the globe, hath fallen a sacrifice to the wretched ignorance and avarice of a little village unluckily plac'd within it." William Stukeley (1687-1765) I agree with you that the above quote has been done to death, I've read it many times but I disagree about its appropriateness to this topic. William Stukeley was part of the 'upper class' whilst the villagers of Avebury were mainly poor land workers who basically did as they were told. That isn't the case now of course but to some extent their views need to be at least considered. Anyway, as I said before ... I'll leave the politics of Avebury to people with much louder voices than mine. Sorry...you disagree..yet agree?...I can't find any reason for you to disagree with me using a quote in the way I have, other than some kind of inverted snobbery... ie..poor people are by dint of being poor absolved of all blame as they are victims of circumstance, what utter tommyrot. Stukeley(wealthy upper class know-it-all as you paint him)..does point out in this very quote...that the village is "unluckily placed".....and before anyone gets all high and mighty about "poor land workers" it was the LAND OWNERS who put the accommodation there for the workers(the reasons for churches being sited in proximity HAS been done to death). Please just don't disagree for the sake of disagreeing....it is rather ill becoming....just because one individual has read a quote several times doesn't mean everyone else has....or is this some kind of subtle censoring of opinions at variance with yours? Yes, I agree it WAS the landowners who placed the village there for their farm labourers to live in. For the record, I was not disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing - or operating 'some kind of subtle censorship of opinions at variance with my own'. This is a forum ie a place for debate ... my voice may not be as loud and articulate as your good self but it still has a right to be heard. I've just checked this thread and I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree with you tjj. I am vehemently opposed to a ring road, and of course, all our voices are of equal worth and merit, pro or against. We can and should debate and discuss freely and civilly. And may I add be particularly polite to the fairer sex. Sexist pig! ;) G x Hampshire hog :D
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Feb 16, 2011, 14:42
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: And may I add be particularly polite to the fairer sex. Getting WAY off topic by such patrinising sexism.
|
|||
|
The Sea Cat 3608 posts |
Edited Feb 16, 2011, 14:49
Feb 16, 2011, 14:47
|
||
|
To be honest, and I don't like having to say this, but if any future replies of yours to any of my occasional posts would be in such a supercilious manner, I would rather you did not reply to them. edited for grammar
|
| Pages: 36 – [ Previous | 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
