Talk:Robert A. Heinlein

From Wikiquote

Contents 1 Duplicate quotations 2 Bolded quotes 3 Re-merging 4 Three-legged stool of understanding quote?

[edit] Duplicate quotations

I've noticed the "Attributed"-section contained quotes which are already mentioned beforehand. I deleted those in the "Attributed"-section which were identical (three quotes). The other two that should be checked which is more correct are listed here including the difference(s) in brackets. They are:

• A generation [without] OR [which ignores] history has no past— and no future.

• History does not record anywhere [at any time] a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.

Furthermore, I've added '(Note: 11th commandment according to Heinlein: Don't get yourself caught!)' to the corresponding quote in the same section. I'm not sure about the excact quote, I just cited it from memory, otherwise I'd have made up a new paragraph.

OK, so much for my first wikiquote edit. ;) Omones 17:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bolded quotes

Is there any specific reason why some passages are bolded, and some are not? Do the original sources read such? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 163.231.6.66 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Bolding quotes is a common Wikiquote practice for editors to express their belief that a quote or portion of a quote is particularly interesting or essential. It is usually not the original formatting. There are differences of opinion as to whether this is appropriate, but allowing editor-selected bolding has been the prevailing sentiment since the early days of Wikiquote. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It's my opinion that bolding of parts of quotes is a distortion of the material, and therefore should not be done, and that the bolding of only some quotes and not others is an expression of POV. 05:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

As I have stated many times, I believe quoting itself must always involve some exercise of "POV" as to what people find interesting, and bolding is just a further part of the selection and presentation process that permits famous or significant portions of larger statements to stand out on a page, though more extensive passages and other quotes are often needed for elucidating the fullest context. ~ Kalki 17:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

You are certainly right that the selection of a quote is, inherently, an expression of point of view (or individual taste, which amounts to the same thing), and that same is true for the order and manner of presentation of the quotes, but I think it's wrong to believe that because that is the case, the quoter is also free to alter the quote to suit their POV. It's a basic premise of quotation that you do not alter the text you are quoting without in some way letting the reader know that you have done so, with the use of brackets and ellipses, which indicate the editing that has been done. (And even then, the quoter is responsible for making sure that the editing hasn't altered the meaning of the quote.) Bolding is emphasis, and it's not the quoter's job to alter the originator's emphasis without in some way indicating that a change has been made. (The usual method is to add "Emphasis added" to the end of the quote.) Ed Fitzgerald 03:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re-merging

I understand the preference to keep an author's quotes all together, but this page just took an appreciable amount of time to load on my computer. It is clearly too long. Ed Fitzgerald 05:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I re-merged it simply because many of the "Lazarus Long" quotations are among Heinlein's most famous, and the page seemed rather gutted without them. The load times with slower connections or computers are one of the problems of using images, but I feel that they definitely make pages more interesting, and that is one of the trade-offs of using them. I have reduced the size of the images a bit, which should help a little. If others wish it, the page could be made separate again, but at least a few samples from "The Notebooks" should remain. ~ Kalki 17:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three-legged stool of understanding quote?

Does anyone have a source for the quote (mentioned in the Wall Street Journal recently [1]) that "the three-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages and mathematics . . . if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots"? I think it would make a good addition to this page (and I'm personally curious). --75.15.127.3 03:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

The three-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots.

This has been cited as a statement of Heinlein's alter-ego Lazarus Long, but off-hand I don't know what book it might be from. ~ Pan 05:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

This is actually Heinlein as himself in "The Happy Days Ahead" — the last essay in Expanded Universe (1980) ~ Kalki 06:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)