When was the last time you heard the phrase "Larger than Life"? If you heard the phrase recently, it was probably being used to describe someone who is either dead or getting up there in years. What about today's leaders and artists? Does anyone use the words Larger than Life when talking about Sarah Palin or Justin Beiber? I doubt it.
The reason, at least from where I'm standing, is plain as day. Humanity has forgotten what life really is. They've forgotten how weird, how truly epic life can be. Think about those larger than life people, people like George Patton or Jack Churchill. These larger than life people were all half crazy and completely out of sinc with everyone around them. Because they knew how to have a good time. They knew what they enjoyed and they pursued it. They were the only ones with the stones to actually do what they wanted with life. Amelia Earhart wanted to fly, and nothing on earth would stop her from flying. She kept on flying until the day the disappeared. Nikola Tesla wanted to invent, and he did so up until his death. These people are exceptional because they couldn't be bothered with mediocrity.
You never hear about someone being Larger than Life anymore, is because no one seems to be willing to go out there and make themselves into a legend. No one is willing to push themselves to the very edge, to wage war against an arch enemy, to live life like it should be fucking lived! Instead we've got weak chinned politico's and reality TV. Humanity has castrated itself.
Knows the real enemy when he sees it.
Dr. James Semaj
I would love to see how today's politicians would fair against Teddy Roosevelt or Andrew Jackson.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 09:55:41 PM
I would love to see how today's politicians would fair against Teddy Roosevelt or Andrew Jackson.
Teddy would soundly beat them with a cudgel, and Andrew would probably beat them with a cane or shoot them.
QuoteTeddy would soundly beat them with a cudgel, and Andrew would probably beat them with a cane or shoot them.
Exactly! Those two knew how to wage a campaign. Man tries to shoot Jackson, the guns jam, whereupon Jackson beats the shit out of with his cane. Man shoots Roosevelt, and the man finishes his speech, and then goes to the hospital.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:02:29 PM
QuoteTeddy would soundly beat them with a cudgel, and Andrew would probably beat them with a cane or shoot them.
Exactly! Those two knew how to wage a campaign. Man tries to shoot Jackson, the guns jam, whereupon Jackson beats the shit out of with his cane. Man shoots Roosevelt, and the man finishes his speech, and then goes to the hospital.
QuoteIn a letter to Master James A. Garfield dated December 26, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt wrote:
Late in the afternoon I played at single stick with General Wood and Mr. Ferguson. I am going to get your father to come on and try it soon. We have to try to hit as light as possible, but sometimes we hit hard, and today I have a bump over one eye and a swollen wrist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jkH7An7dKk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jkH7An7dKk)
And no man, this isnt to shit on your thread, i consider it deconstruction, this is the last time i heard the phrase, and i wonder if it somehow tangentionally it triggered something in you to write this Op.
This meme seed exists from 9 years ago, and to be "larger than life" to the general population is:
"Every time we're down
You can make it right"
So basically to be "larger than life" is to act as a codependant/fixer??
Shouldnt being "larger than life" be something else?
QuoteIn a letter to Master James A. Garfield dated December 26, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt wrote:
Late in the afternoon I played at single stick with General Wood and Mr. Ferguson. I am going to get your father to come on and try it soon. We have to try to hit as light as possible, but sometimes we hit hard, and today I have a bump over one eye and a swollen wrist.
:lulz:
Quote
Singlestick, also known as cudgels, refers to both a martial art that uses a wooden stick as well as the weapon used in the art. It began as a way of training soldiers in the use of swords such as the sabre. Canne de combat, a French form of stick fighting, is similar to singlestick play, but is more a method of self-defense with a walking stick.
Man was still a badass.
"I'm still big! It's the pictures that got small!"
-Sunset Boulevard
There can be no great people any longer because their lives are watched continuously, clipped down to minutiae, and broadcast to seething morons that wish nothing more than to see them fall. Because people are small, reduced by their own complacency and their readiness to be manipulated. This is as true now as it was then, the difference being that the ignorance is celebrated, mimicked, taken to extremes, and sold. To survive in such a world, those that may have once been great appeal to that.
I think under the constant watching, the continued flubbing, the regular airing of their flaws, a good many great people of the past would be brought to light as the filth we see today. Then again, there are a few others that would not.
Like them or not, I would describe a few secondary or tirtiary known figures today as larger than life. Richard Branson comes to mind, and if you want an account of one that isn't a billionnaire, Greg Mortenson.
QuoteAnd no man, this isnt to shit on your thread, i consider it deconstruction, this is the last time i heard the phrase, and i wonder if it somehow tangentionally it triggered something in you to write this Op.
This meme seed exists from 9 years ago, and to be "larger than life" to the general population is:
"Every time we're down
You can make it right"
So basically to be "larger than life" is to act as a codependant/fixer??
Shouldnt being "larger than life" be something else?
No, this was triggered by a conversation with a friend earlier today. I was telling him about Jack Churchill, and my friend refused to believe that the guy was real.
And if you read the rant, you'd see that I meant Larger than Life as a refusal to be limited by what most people think of as "possible" or "realistic".
Larger than life tends to fit in a grave very nicely a lot of the time.
QuoteLarger than life tends to fit in a grave very nicely a lot of the time.
True, and most of the people I used as examples met unpleasant ends. But speaking personally, I'd rather live like one of those guys for one decade than spend a lifetime being just another face in the crowd.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:23:18 PM
QuoteLarger than life tends to fit in a grave very nicely a lot of the time.
True, and most of the people I used as examples met unpleasant ends. But speaking personally, I'd rather live like one of those guys for one decade than spend a lifetime being just another face in the crowd.
Your destiny is yours alone to control.
QuoteYour destiny is yours alone to control.
Aye. And I don't plan on wasting it.
Quote from: Charley Brown on January 24, 2011, 10:24:57 PM
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:23:18 PM
QuoteLarger than life tends to fit in a grave very nicely a lot of the time.
True, and most of the people I used as examples met unpleasant ends. But speaking personally, I'd rather live like one of those guys for one decade than spend a lifetime being just another face in the crowd.
Your destiny is yours alone to control.
I disagree with this idea, we are nowhere close to controlling a lot of things.
In and of itself "taking the reins" i find it to be heroic, even if it leads up to nothing or disaster; in other words
trying to accomplish what is meaningful for oneself.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:28:21 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on January 24, 2011, 10:24:57 PM
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:23:18 PM
QuoteLarger than life tends to fit in a grave very nicely a lot of the time.
True, and most of the people I used as examples met unpleasant ends. But speaking personally, I'd rather live like one of those guys for one decade than spend a lifetime being just another face in the crowd.
Your destiny is yours alone to control.
I disagree with this idea, we are nowhere close to controlling a lot of things.
In and of itself "taking the reins" i find it to be heroic, even if it leads up to nothing or disaster; in other words trying to accomplish what is meaningful for oneself.
Losers whine about trying, winners take the cheerleader home and fuck her.
Sean Connery in The Rock.
Quote
Losers whine about trying, winners take the cheerleader home and fuck her.
Sean Connery in The Rock.
I was going to say something similar in response to Johnny, but this is better than anything I could have said.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:32:51 PM
Quote
Losers whine about trying, winners take the cheerleader home and fuck her.
Sean Connery in The Rock.
I was going to say something similar in response to Johnny, but this is better than anything I could have said.
It goes deeper than that. Few, if any win on the first try. To become larger than life will require many losses.
I really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:36:05 PM
I really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
WTF has the world come to? None of those even crossed my mind.
Not saying its a good movie, but, ever seen "Little Miss Sunshine"?
The father has that kind of dialectic going on.
QuoteI really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Doesn't matter what its associated with, there's still truth to it. There are winners and there are losers in life. Nothing right or wrong about it, it just is.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:40:48 PM
Not saying its a good movie, but, ever seen "Little Miss Sunshine"?
The father has that kind of dialectic going on.
Never saw it.
QuoteIt goes deeper than that. Few, if any win on the first try. To become larger than life will require many losses.
Nothing worth achieving comes easy. My grandfather taught me that one. A lot of the folks I mentioned, had it rough time their entire lives or had parts of their life that fell by the wayside.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:45:02 PM
QuoteI really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Doesn't matter what its associated with, there's still truth to it. There are winners and there are losers in life. Nothing right or wrong about it, it just is.
Eh. It depends on the criteria for each. Biological win for reproducing? +Fame win for being well known? Cash money win? It's a load of horseshit, you ask me.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on January 24, 2011, 10:47:48 PM
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:45:02 PM
QuoteI really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Doesn't matter what its associated with, there's still truth to it. There are winners and there are losers in life. Nothing right or wrong about it, it just is.
Eh. It depends on the criteria for each. Biological win for reproducing? +Fame win for being well known? Cash money win? It's a load of horseshit, you ask me.
How do you personally measure success?
Quote
Eh. It depends on the criteria for each. Biological win for reproducing? +Fame win for being well known? Cash money win? It's a load of horseshit, you ask me.
The criteria I was going off of was life in general. I would call it a win if you created something that lasts, or lived life in whatever fashion seemed right to you.
But its the kind of thing that changes from person to person.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:55:50 PM
Quote
Eh. It depends on the criteria for each. Biological win for reproducing? +Fame win for being well known? Cash money win? It's a load of horseshit, you ask me.
The criteria I was going off of was life in general. I would call it a win if you created something that lasts, or lived life in whatever fashion seemed right to you.
But its the kind of thing that changes from person to person.
I agree.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:55:50 PM
Quote
Eh. It depends on the criteria for each. Biological win for reproducing? +Fame win for being well known? Cash money win? It's a load of horseshit, you ask me.
The criteria I was going off of was life in general. I would call it a win if you created something that lasts, or lived life in whatever fashion seemed right to you.
But its the kind of thing that changes from person to person.
Like Curly's One Thing from City Slickers?
QuoteLike Curly's One Thing from City Slickers?
It's been a while since I watched it, but, yeah, I think so.
The One Thing that makes you happy/gives meaning to your life? Am I correct?
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 11:09:52 PM
QuoteLike Curly's One Thing from City Slickers?
It's been a while since I watched it, but, yeah, I think so.
The One Thing that makes you happy/gives meaning to your life? Am I correct?
I think so. Been a while since I watched that movie too, but I vaugly recall it being along those lines.
You define the victory conditions for your life, and you have the right to change them at will.
QuoteYou define the victory conditions for your life, and you have the right to change them at will.
Exactly.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 11:13:58 PM
QuoteYou define the victory conditions for your life, and you have the right to change them at will.
Exactly.
Well then no wonder why there aren't any larger than life figures anymore. Everyone's too busy fucking off and then calling themselves personal winners.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on January 24, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 11:13:58 PM
QuoteYou define the victory conditions for your life, and you have the right to change them at will.
Exactly.
Well then no wonder why there aren't any larger than life figures anymore. Everyone's too busy fucking off and then calling themselves personal winners.
Sadly that's true.
I do have a slight bone to pick with a lot of the so-called "great men" of history. Not all, but a fair few.
Napoleon. Andrew Jackson. Peter the Great. Alexander the Great.
It seems that humanity loves no one quite as much as it loves its butchers.
</micro-rant>
Not that I completely disagree with the OP or its sentiment. I just think that sometimes the veneration of historical figures can be misplaced.
QuoteWell then no wonder why there aren't any larger than life figures anymore. Everyone's too busy fucking off and then calling themselves personal winners.
Yeah, you're right. I also think a big part of it is that people have been raised to think they can't manage it, or its not worth the effort.
QuoteI do have a slight bone to pick with a lot of the so-called "great men" of history. Not all, but a fair few.
Napoleon. Andrew Jackson. Peter the Great. Alexander the Great.
It seems that humanity loves no one quite as much as it loves its butchers.
</micro-rant>
Not that I completely disagree with the OP or its sentiment. I just think that sometimes the veneration of historical figures can be misplaced.
True enough. A fair number of them were right assholes, but I've got to respect most of them for at least trying to do something.
Quote from: Cainad on January 24, 2011, 11:20:32 PM
I do have a slight bone to pick with a lot of the so-called "great men" of history. Not all, but a fair few.
Napoleon. Andrew Jackson. Peter the Great. Alexander the Great.
It seems that humanity loves no one quite as much as it loves its butchers.
</micro-rant>
Not that I completely disagree with the OP or its sentiment. I just think that sometimes the veneration of historical figures can be misplaced.
Watch the movie Mrs. Henderson Presents. She was a fucking heroine.
QuoteWatch the movie Mrs. Henderson Presents. She was a fucking heroine.
Never seen it. To Netflix, away!
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 11:57:23 PM
QuoteWatch the movie Mrs. Henderson Presents. She was a fucking heroine.
Never seen it. To Netflix, away!
Laura Henderson (1864 – 29 November 1944) rose to prominence in the 1930s when, as a wealthy and eccentric widow, she founded the Windmill Theatre in London's Great Windmill Street in partnership with Vivian van Damm; they went on to turn it into a British institution, famed for its pioneering tableaux vivants of motionless female nudity and for having "never closed" during the Blitz.
QuoteLaura Henderson (1864 – 29 November 1944) rose to prominence in the 1930s when, as a wealthy and eccentric widow, she founded the Windmill Theatre in London's Great Windmill Street in partnership with Vivian van Damm; they went on to turn it into a British institution, famed for its pioneering tableaux vivants of motionless female nudity and for having "never closed" during the Blitz.
THis woman counts. Kick ass.
I always saw my own father as "larger than life." The type of guy that walked into a room and owned it, lock, stock and barrel. Force of personality and all that. And then he was suddenly whisked away in handcuffs and held out of his own life for ~7 years.
I think Hawk has a point when he says that great gain inevitably comes at great cost. Since most great gain comes with a terrible gamble, it's the ones that lose that either become infamous for losses (and not their gambles), or the ones that have won their gamble but their losses are not as prominent as said gains.
I see greatness like I see any other extreme--it should be handled with extreme care and is not for the "faint of butt" as they say. If you devour life, prepare to be devoured yourself.
..."there's always a bigger fish"...
I think that the quality of "larger than life" applies not so much to winners, but to the people who continue to steamroller through life and take it to the wall even when they aren't "winning".
QuoteI think that the quality of "larger than life" applies not so much to winners, but to the people who continue to steamroller through life and take it to the wall even when they aren't "winning".
From my point of view, that
is winning.
Also, just as an aside. I appreciate everyone who replied to this thread. But I get the impression that not everyone reading the OP or the thread is replying, which is cool, I don't post to every thread I read. But I'm hoping to become a professional writer, so its really important to me that I get everyone and anyone's thoughts on my work. So even if you don't think you have much to add, please reply anyway.
Dr. James Semaj
IMO, larger than life means that you are greater than the events that surround you.
It is within the abilities of almost anyone to achieve this. Many do, and you never hear about them...But most don't. Most sort of coast along from the cradle to the grave, marking time.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on January 24, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 11:13:58 PM
QuoteYou define the victory conditions for your life, and you have the right to change them at will.
Exactly.
Well then no wonder why there aren't any larger than life figures anymore. Everyone's too busy fucking off and then calling themselves personal winners.
:lulz:
And there's nothing wrong with that, if they're actually DOING it, though most don't.
Remove accomplishment, replace with "self-esteem".
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 10:16:02 PM
QuoteAnd no man, this isnt to shit on your thread, i consider it deconstruction, this is the last time i heard the phrase, and i wonder if it somehow tangentionally it triggered something in you to write this Op.
This meme seed exists from 9 years ago, and to be "larger than life" to the general population is:
"Every time we're down
You can make it right"
So basically to be "larger than life" is to act as a codependant/fixer??
Shouldnt being "larger than life" be something else?
No, this was triggered by a conversation with a friend earlier today. I was telling him about Jack Churchill, and my friend refused to believe that the guy was real.
And if you read the rant, you'd see that I meant Larger than Life as a refusal to be limited by what most people think of as "possible" or "realistic".
Jack Churchill had such huge balls, he used them to shield his men from shrapnel.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:36:05 PM
I really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Life is tough. Wear a hat.
QuoteJack Churchill had such huge balls, he used them to shield his men from shrapnel.
The fucker was the only one of his unit to survive an artillery strike. When the German's captured him, he was standing amid the corpses playing his bagpipes. Then, when he was being shipped off to a camp for interrogation, he reported his own fucking guard for dereliction of duty.
I fucking love Jack Churchill!
Quote
IMO, larger than life means that you are greater than the events that surround you.
It is within the abilities of almost anyone to achieve this. Many do, and you never hear about them...But most don't. Most sort of coast along from the cradle to the grave, marking time.
Its the way people just coast through life that infuriates me. They whine and worry, but never do anything about it. They're too scared to try and be what they want to be, and hate anyone who has the stones to try for it. I'm not saying everyone is going to get what they want, this isn't fucking Disneyland, but most people don't even fucking try!
The entire human race needs to be beaten to within an inch of extinction with baseball bats. Fucking cowards.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 26, 2011, 02:17:38 AM
QuoteI think that the quality of "larger than life" applies not so much to winners, but to the people who continue to steamroller through life and take it to the wall even when they aren't "winning".
From my point of view, that is winning.
Also, just as an aside. I appreciate everyone who replied to this thread. But I get the impression that not everyone reading the OP or the thread is replying, which is cool, I don't post to every thread I read. But I'm hoping to become a professional writer, so its really important to me that I get everyone and anyone's thoughts on my work. So even if you don't think you have much to add, please reply anyway.
Dr. James Semaj
Read it, did not comment. I agree with the sentiment, but have no meaningful critiques or additions at this time. And now I feel like a dick for giving a completely meaningless reply. Way to go, Semaj. :wink:
QuoteRead it, did not comment. I agree with the sentiment, but have no meaningful critiques or additions at this time. And now I feel like a dick for giving a completely meaningless reply. Way to go, Semaj.
Thanks for the reply. Its what I asked for.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 26, 2011, 02:17:38 AM
QuoteI think that the quality of "larger than life" applies not so much to winners, but to the people who continue to steamroller through life and take it to the wall even when they aren't "winning".
From my point of view, that is winning.
Also, just as an aside. I appreciate everyone who replied to this thread. But I get the impression that not everyone reading the OP or the thread is replying, which is cool, I don't post to every thread I read. But I'm hoping to become a professional writer, so its really important to me that I get everyone and anyone's thoughts on my work. So even if you don't think you have much to add, please reply anyway.
Dr. James Semaj
You want to be a professional writer? First piece of advice would be to suck it the fuck up and quit whining about not getting enough/the right kind of attention. The second piece of advice is that professional writing, if you're hoping to do it for a living, is about quantity, not quality. You are already a competent writer, and that's what you're going to get paid, poorly, for. Any competent writer who can produce sufficient output on a set schedule can make a (minimal) living on it.
Are you going to be able to roll out pieces of this level of competency, but with a publishable length, twice a week or more? Are you going to be able to get past your egoistic need for "the right kind" of feedback? Are you going to be able to accept having your work edited to the point where it might not even say what you intended it to say? Are you going to be able to suck it the fuck up?
QuoteFirst piece of advice would be to suck it the fuck up and quit whining about not getting enough/the right kind of attention.
Okay, fair enough. Wasn't trying to come across as whiny. Just asking for as much feedback as I can get.
Quote
The second piece of advice is that professional writing, if you're hoping to do it for a living, is about quantity, not quality. You are already a competent writer, and that's what you're going to get paid, poorly, for. Any competent writer who can produce sufficient output on a set schedule can make a (minimal) living on it.
That's what I'm currently working on. I'm trying to train myself to be able to pump out ten pages of quality writing a week. So far, the biggest issue is building it into a habit, but that's a matter of just sitting down and writing.
QuoteAre you going to be able to get past your egoistic need for "the right kind" of feedback?
I don't think I've ever had a need for any specific kind of feedback. Good or bad, I just want to improve on my work.
Quote
Are you going to be able to accept having your work edited to the point where it might not even say what you intended it to say? Are you going to be able to suck it the fuck up?
Haven't been in a situation in which I've had my work heavily edited, so the jury's still out on this one. I have family and a couple of my teachers look at my work for errors, but none of them have really edited to any extreme level.
Anyway, thanks for the tips. Much appreciated. If anything else occurs to you, let me know.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 26, 2011, 02:44:31 AM
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:36:05 PM
I really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Life is tough. Wear a hat.
You are reading me wrong.
My point is that there's a "speak" that revolves around some kind of objectivity towards winners-losers; i think that its very subjective-personal.
Some of us still think that "winning" is achieving personal meaning rather than MONEYMONEYMONEY which is the prevalent notion of "win".
Google Frank Abagnale Jr.
He is one of my personal larger than life heroes.
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 26, 2011, 01:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 26, 2011, 02:44:31 AM
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on January 24, 2011, 10:36:05 PM
I really dont like the "winners-losers" dialectic because its so tied to corporate speak, ruthless capitalism and self-help literature.
Life is tough. Wear a hat.
You are reading me wrong.
My point is that there's a "speak" that revolves around some kind of objectivity towards winners-losers; i think that its very subjective-personal.
Some of us still think that "winning" is achieving personal meaning rather than MONEYMONEYMONEY which is the prevalent notion of "win".
Oh, yes, then I did read you wrong.
Semaj, Nigel has a point, in that quantity matters. The way you learn how to write is by writing. A page a day, no less, even if you're just writing letters or a description of something you saw that day.
A few writer's workshops won't hurt a bit, but first and foremost is to get into the habit of writing. Eventually, the amount of effort required to produce goes from staggering to manageable.
James, it appears as though you made a point-by-point rebuttal back there somewhere. I'm sorry; I didn't read it.
However, I did read parts of your OP, and noticed that you made some claims about Nikola Tesla that are not founded in history. Might want to do something about that, for credibility's sake.
Are you saying Tesla didn't invent things, or that he wasn't beaten by his nemesis?
As far as I can see, those were the only two things Semaj said about him.
QuoteJames, it appears as though you made a point-by-point rebuttal back there somewhere. I'm sorry; I didn't read it.
However, I did read parts of your OP, and noticed that you made some claims about Nikola Tesla that are not founded in history. Might want to do something about that, for credibility's sake.
You're right. My information was wrong, Tesla was the one who won the War of the Current. Thanks for pointing that out Nigel.
QuoteSemaj, Nigel has a point, in that quantity matters. The way you learn how to write is by writing. A page a day, no less, even if you're just writing letters or a description of something you saw that day.
A few writer's workshops won't hurt a bit, but first and foremost is to get into the habit of writing. Eventually, the amount of effort required to produce goes from staggering to manageable.
QuoteGoogle Frank Abagnale Jr.
He was a counterfeiter right? Di Caprio played him in a movie? I'll check him out.
Yeah, she was completely right. I'm working on just sitting down and writing, which seems to be the hard part for me.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on January 26, 2011, 04:30:16 PM
Are you saying Tesla didn't invent things, or that he wasn't beaten by his nemesis?
As far as I can see, those were the only two things Semaj said about him.
Telsa is one of my heroes, in a sad-sack sort of way.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on January 26, 2011, 04:30:16 PM
Are you saying Tesla didn't invent things, or that he wasn't beaten by his nemesis?
As far as I can see, those were the only two things Semaj said about him.
What are you today, Requia's understudy?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 26, 2011, 09:05:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on January 26, 2011, 04:30:16 PM
Are you saying Tesla didn't invent things, or that he wasn't beaten by his nemesis?
As far as I can see, those were the only two things Semaj said about him.
Telsa is one of my heroes, in a sad-sack sort of way.
Mine as well.
Tesla was never "beaten by his nemesis". He did have many nemeses and many inventions stolen from him, including radio (eventually settled in a posthumous lawsuit ruling in his favor) but it was the lab fire that was his undoing, not some mythical nemesis. He never stopped inventing, although he did die poor and arguably insane.
QuoteTesla was never "beaten by his nemesis". He did have many nemeses and many inventions stolen from him, including radio (eventually settled in a posthumous lawsuit ruling in his favor) but it was the lab fire that was his undoing, not some mythical nemesis. He never stopped inventing, although he did die poor and arguably insane.
Yup. You were right.
Quote from: Nigel on January 26, 2011, 09:12:44 PM
Tesla was never "beaten by his nemesis". He did have many nemeses and many inventions stolen from him, including radio (eventually settled in a posthumous lawsuit ruling in his favor) but it was the lab fire that was his undoing, not some mythical nemesis. He never stopped inventing, although he did die poor and arguably insane.
Fair enough. I read that he was really bad at marketing himself, while Edison was a showman, which led a lack of investors.
But now I have been educated. Thanks!
You are all Edisons. I am Telsa.
That means I'll end up in a shitty motel room, obsessively counting my pubes.
Don't you wish you were me?
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on January 24, 2011, 09:54:19 PM
You never hear about someone being Larger than Life anymore, is because no one seems to be willing to go out there and make themselves into a legend. No one is willing to push themselves to the very edge, to wage war against an arch enemy, to live life like it should be fucking lived! Instead we've got weak chinned politico's and reality TV. Humanity has castrated itself.
IMO, Kurt Cobain was the last "Larger than Life" type personality. He pretty much put it all out there. He seemed to really pour every ounce of himself into his craft. It eventually seemed like it overwhelmed him and so he decided to end it on his terms. The whole "better to burn out than fade away." idea. (And of course I'm not condoning suicide.)
Saying that, I think he probably could've become even bigger. From everything I read, he was on the verge of a career shift when he killed himself. He was working on what sounded like a pretty epic collaboartion with Michael Stipe and was looking at taking his craft in a whole new direction.
Honestly, rock and roll hasn't been the same since he died. He left a huge mark and, IMO, a huge void.