Can anyone explain me this one? I dont get it, maybe because i am not a native speaker.
- If you're referring to this:
Here lies a toppled god —
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and tall one.
I believe the writer is disclaiming any responsibility for the fall of the toppled god, despite having built the god's pedestal in such a way (narrow and tall) that it was likely to fall over. Ed Fitzgerald 05:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I thought the pedestal refered to a monument build after the fall. But that way it makes sense. --22.214.171.124 12:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
On some level the epigram is a warning: "If you want adulation and worship and glorification, it will be given to you - be careful with it!" A hero may be destroyed by the very forces he himself sets in motion. Rather than absolutely disclaiming responsibility, I believe the Tleilaxu here are telling us that ordinary people can wreck even the most terrible ruler even under the guise of working in his best interests. Further, this seems a desirable thing. --126.96.36.199 15:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Completely wrong. The "God" in the epigram is metaphoric for ANY leader, up to and including the "Gods" that are created by their "worshipers". When constructing a pedestal for the created Leader/God to stand upon (over the governed), one important quality to build into the "pedestal" is the ability to topple it over (along with the God/Leader), i.e. making it very narrow. Credit should not go to Herbert for this quote- it was written by H G Wells in a "Short history of the World" in 1922. He was referring to Alexander the Great. It goes as follows: Here lies a toppled God His fall was not a small one We did but build his pedestal A narrow and a tall one. It is an admonishment to the collective, to always make sure to retain the ability to revoke whatever power that is given over for the purposes of government. The US Constitution's 2nd Amendment is a perfect example of the "narrow" quality of the US Government's pedestal.
- That doesn't at all fit into the general attitude of the Duniverse, which is considerably more cynical when it comes to power, and certainly doesn't leave it confidently in the hands of the people. At least, not until after The Golden Path was achieved. This is a pre-God-Emperor maxim. From the Tleilaxu, no less, who sought to manipulate Muad'Dib for their own purposes, via Hayt. No, I'd say that, rather, this is a declaration of intention on the part of the Tleilaxu. "We will destroy Muad'Dib by seeming to give him everything the people expect him to assume for himself. We will raise him to the status of a God, and then, due to an intentional flaw in our construction which only we can exploit, he will fall to ruin, and what will be left... is us." Muad'Dib spent two books assiduously trying to avoid doing what Leto II ended up having to do as God-Emperor, and it was with this that the Tleilaxu tempted him. The temptation to Godhood. Instead Muad'Dib walked into the desert, as any blind Fremen is supposed to do. --188.8.131.52 16:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
A minor nitpick: the Tleilaxu Epigram is indeed attributed to H.G. Wells by certain sources; wrongly. There is no such fragment in "A short history of the world". Feel free to check.
Wait a minute. I think the interpretation is apparent:
Here lies a toppled God (Someone has failed who we put our faith and admiration in, and who we empowered)
His fall was not a small one (His failure was profound)
We did but build his pedestal (We put our hopes, dreams in his hands)
A narrow and a tall one (Our idealistic expectations were so great, that when he didn't measure up precisely, he, and we, came crashing down to reality)
This is a sobering lesson for limiting our expectations of our leaders. Our expectations can cause us to idealize another human, projecting our hopes onto him/her.
It's important to consider what it reveals about the Tleilaxu. It implies that they use technology and subterfuge to accomplish their goals, rather than brute strength.
My interpretation of this witty little poem is slightly different. It's about a leader who had an epic fall from power, and the author is saying slyly that they put the man up as high as he could possibly go (even letting himself convince himself he was a GOD), so that the fall would be all the bigger. Ie, they partially set him up for the fall. They did worship him, but at the same time *wanted* to see him fall. Hence building a very tall, *but very thin* pedestal...
It's very transparent. Read it from the middle out. A God was created, a God was toppled. It is a sardonic assertion that the Face Dancers created the circumstances for a God to fail, and gave the pillar a shove. I think it's more a rather literal reference to Muad'Dib. His Godhead was his narrow and tall pedestal, and eventually he fell from Godhood and became the Preacher.
Separate Page for Dune Chapter Openings?
Great books, lots of quotes already, and certaintly many more that could be added. I'm wondering if it might be prudent to put the chapter openings on a different page. It's already getting cluttered, and most readers know that they are chapter headings if they are looking for one, and nonreaders will be able to further appreciate Herbert's writings and quotes that are actually present in the storyline.
Is there rhyme or reason to the bolding and attribution of these quotes? --Maru
- The specific character attributions, for the most part, seem to those given within the books. The bolding is a form of emphasis permitted to the users of wikiquote to denote quotes that someone has found for some reason to be more notable than others. This can be especially useful upon large pages, or in long passages, where more famous or notable statements can become "lost". Italicization is generally reserved for some passages of poetry, titles, and such italicization as occurs in the original works. As all selection of quotation is to a great extent a process dependent upon the assessments of individuals as to a statements significance bolding is but a minor extension of the user's options in editing the articles here, and the placing of quotations. ~ Achilles 18:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Which quotes are notable is an arbitary thing to judge, personally i love 'A letter to CHOAM Attributed to The Preacher' from Children of Dune, which i just added, its been a great inspiration to me, thought about bolding it, but maybe its just myself who loves it.
This page does not use the standard format for literary works quotations. This creates inherent accuracy problems: instead of adding "context" in subbullets, add enough context from the text itself. This will make it easier to verify quotations. Thanks ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 15:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Not sure if the right book
I added some quoted to the machine crusade but I'm not yet sure if they are from that specific book. I'll look it up as soon as I can.
Fixed some spelling errors in the last Children of Dune quote: changed "civilisation to civilization"
The spice must flow
Why isnt this here(184.108.40.206 14:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC))
- Because it comes from the screenplay written by David Lynch for his film adaptation, and does not appear in any of the Dune books.
- Potentially related is the repeated reference in the first book to maintaining the balance of power. Maybe that should be on there if it isn't already. -- M0llusk 18:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Separate Pages for each dune?
Reading the Dune books for the fourth time, I've bookmarked a bunch of pages with what I consider to be noteworthy quotes. Having something like 15-30 of them from each book, I added them to the wiki. Anyway, this page is getting quite large. Perhaps it should be a separate page for quotes from each book? I think that'd be much better. --Erauqssidlroweht 20:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Your recent additions have been good ones, and though there are many more that could be added, I still prefer to keep the Dune series together on one page. I generally prefer keeping things by an author together as much as possible, though separating the Dune series was obviously a good idea for Herbert. Even larger listings occur for Discworld by Terry Pratchett, and I think they should also remain together. ~ Kalki 20:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- There are so many more that could be added. Heck, if I put down all my favourite quotes, you'd practically have the whole book up here. I do see the merit in having all the quotations of an author together. Perhaps, for ease of use, the quotations should be sorted, such as by alphabetical order by the person who says it? I might even do it myself in my spare time after exams. Also, like I said before, I'm rereading the entire series (the real series only). I'll be sure to put up the good ones from Heretics and Chapterhouse. --Erauqssidlroweht 21:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
What the hell is with them? They are not only unrelated, but are not needed either. They need to be removed. This article is absolutely ridiculous! You have a list of quotes, you dont need stupid pictures and to repeat the quotes with them. This article needs fixing, and if its not done I'll do it myself.
The images are certainly not merely "random" and often a great deal of thought and decision was used in their selection. Though the images are for the most part not directly related to the Dune universe or the desert ecology that dominates the planet of Arrakis (and to a great extent cannot be, given the limited nature of what can be made available at the commons), they all bear some relation to the quotations they illustrate, and, I believe, serve to make the page more interesting on the whole, and provide further avenues of assessing the broad applicability of some of Herbert's statements.
Within what limits exist, evocative images have been selected to illustrate such quotations as express some of Herbert's most oft-repeated ideas and themes. Among the primary themes which I believe are most evident in his works are those of Liberty, Justice, Truth, the limits of Perception, and many of the vitally important freedoms and virtues which many authors care to express themselves upon.
Eternal contests exist between freedom and influential growth such as Muad'Dib and those who attain wisdom in Herbert's stories stand for, live for, and die for, and such absolute confinement and control of others abilities and will as the most foolish regularly seek to obtain.
I contend the images for the most part augment the quotations they are used with, and in no case is detrimental to the meaning.
From the very first image used with what I believe to be fully relevant desert imagery, with the light of the sun on the edge of the horizon: "Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
From this there soon occurs an image of less obvious relevance, but I believe well indicates such mental imagery as arises in the mind in darkness, for the use of the mentat litany against fear; then comes an image of a higher dimensional figure in motion within a 3D perspective image on a 2D plane, involving the "folding" of spaces, such as is part of the abilities provided through the spice-visions. On this page as well as others I often also employ varied hued images that indicate patterns of vital and ever expanding processes of learning, as opposed to those of dogmatic presumption and stagnation. Also near the top is an image of a view through a cannon barrel to indicate some of the limits of prescience, even when genuine, and some of the potentials of it even when limited or flawed.
I will provide a few indications, but certainly not an exhaustive list of the rationale that was used in the processes of selecting some of the other images used with the quotes:
- "You can't draw neat lines around planet-wide problems. Planetology is a cut-and-fit science" — this uses an image of a terraformed Mars, certainly highly relevant to stories so grounded in concerns of the planetary ecology of a desert planet.
- "You have square thoughts which resist circles." — this uses the perspective of a 3D matrix formed of squares in perspective, which are clearly obstacles and constraints to any spherical or circular forms larger than the gaps within the matrix they define.
- "The person who takes the banal and ordinary and illuminates it in a new way can terrify. We do not want our ideas changed." — Uses an image of the sword of Justice, which sometimes can be harshly wielded, but in only in defense of what is valuable, and never for the sake of mere destruction.
- "Much depends on what people dream in the secrecy of their hearts. I have always been as concerned with the shaping of dreams as with the shaping of actions." — an image of an adult dancing with fire upon the water, repeating the use of metaphors of circles, immediately following an image with similar metaphors involving the playful action of a child with a sparkler on Guy Fawkes Night.
- "He was warrior and mystic, ogre and saint, the fox and the innocent, chivalrous, ruthless, less than a god, more than a man. There is no measuring Muad'Dib's motives by ordinary standards" — this is illustrated by an image of a moon, such as inspired Muad'Dib's choice of his public name, which is that of a humble and capable mouse well honored by the Fremen, which I also later make passing indication of with the image of a desert mouse and the quote "You do not take from this universe. It grants you what it will."
- "He taught a balanced way of life, a philosophy with which a human can meet problems arising from an ever-changing universe." — Uses an image of the Whirlpool Galaxy, one of the classic images of galaxies available to us.
- "Transient life, even the self-aware and reasoning life which we call sentient, holds only fragile trusteeship on any portion of the wholeness." — uses an interesting image of the blackhole at the center of the Whirlpool Galaxy.
- "In all of my universe I have seen no law of nature, unchanging and inexorable. This universe presents only changing relationships which are sometimes seen as laws by short-lived awareness." — uses an image of a sphere containing plasma arcs of electricity being touched by a hand illuminated by its light, and sensitive to its presences through the electrical impulses of its nerves, and those within the brain which guides it.
- "Give me the judgment of balanced minds in preference to laws every time." — uses the image of a figure balancing between sunlight and shadow on top of a dune's ridge.
- "When strangers meet, great allowances should be made for differences of custom and training." — uses an image of symbols from several of humanity's most popular religious traditions.
- "Live the best life you can. Life is a game whose rules you learn if you leap into it and play it to the hilt." — uses an image of a woman doing her exercise routine with a sword.
- "The wise person ... views history as a set of lessons to be learned, choices and ramifications to be considered and discussed, and mistakes that should never again be made." — uses an image of a nuclear explosion with the appearance of a sunset.
- "The future of prescience cannot always be locked into the rules of the past. The threads of existence tangle according to many unknown laws." — uses an evocative image of a person in whom energies from diverse sources seem to converge.
- "You will learn the integrated communication methods as you complete the next step in your mental education." — uses an integrated image of the entire fractal form known as the Mandelbrot set.
- "There exists no intransigent opposites except in the beliefs of men. Anyone can rip aside the veil of Time." — uses a black and white image of the Cosmic Tree Yggdrasil, with its roots and branches extending white into black and black into white.
- "This universe cannot be seen, cannot be heard, cannot be detected in any way by fixed perceptions." — uses a moving image of a simple fractal.
Even the apparently incongruous image of a surfer, does not come until very late on the page, to illustrate the quote "There's no secret to balance. You just have to feel the waves" after the limits of the desert realms have been alluded to in previous images and quotes, as well as the stories Herbert created.
I am very aware that it nearly always takes more effort to create than to destroy, and I know my own and others people's efforts to build pages of interest remain vulnerable to criticism, but I hope that the the approval or acceptance of others of such efforts will more than balance these.
Of course some might wish to totally ignore or remain totally oblivious to the very essence of much that Herbert says throughout his works, and instead defend such a sterile and fruitless absence of inspiration and imagination as he continually expresses himself against, but I hope and trust that such minds are not in the majority, though a few of them may occasionally be among the most vociferous and insulting to those who wish to maintain and defend creative freedoms and to guard against the most wantonly controlling and destructive impulses of others. ~ Kalki 19:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- You're a bunch of sad fucks. Pull your head out of your arse, Frank Herbert and Dune arent the only things in existence. Those picture ARE random, they ARE useless. Do you morons need a pretty picture to be able to understand a quote? Obviously theres nothing I can do to disuade you sad assholes, so keep your shitty pictures then, keep your sad fucking loves, and have fun re-reading Dune for the rest of your lives. You people are NOT Frank Herbert, so done presume to speak of him, and don't for a second try to tell everyone else what his novels are about, and no matter how much you try, you will always only be pretentious wankers, but you wont be able to even see that will you..
- —This unsigned comment is by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) .
The levels of perception and eloquence you have exhibited by your words are truly stupefying. Even so, I will make what is sure to be a sadly inadequate attempt to address some of these clearly astounding complaints:
In my response, I indicated some of my own insights and thought processes, and no one else made any comment, so addressing your response to anyone else but me is rather inappropriate. Many of the insults you seem ready to sling broadly at anyone clearly cannot be applied well to anyone beyond yourself, save in your own mind.
You assert despite my extensive indications of some thought behind them that "Those picture ARE random, they ARE useless." You obviously need to go to the dictionary and find out what "random" actually means, and if they do nothing more to instruct your mind than prompting you to do this they might not be totally "useless" even to someone so willing to label them so as you.
I have never made any indication that I held Frank Herbert or Dune anything close to "the only things in existence." Though I have read a few of Herbert's works, and hold them in high esteem, I certainly have not bothered to read all of them thoroughly, and even with the first Dune novel, I believe that I have only read the work from start to finish once, though I might be mistaken and could perhaps have read it twice, and I have browsed through it many times, though never more than a few times in a year.
It is one of many works I am acquainted with of good worth, but I would never go so far as to say that it or any other single work is indispensible to anyone's vital awareness; and though there are certainly many works that can be helpful, not everyone can be easily helped.
I have certainly never said anyone "needs" a "pretty picture" to understand a quote. I did indicate that I believe that images generally make the pages and quotes more interesting to the casual observer, and that very the thoughtful might appreciate some of the indications and evocations that are awakened or referred to by their presence. And I am quite aware that no mere abundance of words or images, however well chosen can suffice to make everyone fully insightful about anything. I have always been very aware that others would not be greatly appreciative of my own or others efforts, and that many people will be extremely hostile to presence of anything that indicates there might be things they are not fully comprehending, or to anyone who does not bow down abjectly to their efforts to condemn and damn all that they cannot fully understand or control.
I do not presume to speak "for" Frank Herbert in regards to anything, but I do speak for myself, and I must state that I am inclined to believe he would be more appreciative of my observations and comments than of yours. I have certainly not spent any great amount of time trying to limit anyone's notions of what Herbert's novels are about nor constrain their own imaginative capacities in any way. I have spent some time and effort in opening up potential avenues of interest, and indicating to others that his works are worthy of at least some attention. I do believe there is a great deal of wisdom shown in them, but each person must always gather for themselves what they can from what is shown to them by others.
I am hardly the first to observe that those who go about spending much of their time complaining, insulting, and accusing people of being pretentious, are usually the most pretentious and shallow people of all. Those who are not so interested in bitterly criticizing people or works which they cannot appreciate have far better things to do, like actually appreciating and cherishing what things they can, and defending them from such attacks as can often come from those with little capacity or inclination to do so. ~ Kalki 04:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I notice you removed my observation of you being a pretentious wanker, saying its vandalism.. how mature. When in fact it is actually a considered opion. Wanker.
- —This unsigned comment is by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs) .
This above troll also added this message to my talk page:
- Buddy.. you truly are a pretentious wanker, and, dont remove my opions on things from discussion pages, nothing gives you that right. Suppose you'll remove this anyway though, being the weak tosser you are though. Wanker.
- —This unsigned comment is by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) .
To which I responded:
I am not your "buddy", troll.
I do not presume to know what all your problems are, but plainly you are a person who has problems with both comprehension and civility. Your earliest comment at "Talk:Dune" was both presumptive and indeed pretentiously threatening, and yet I addressed it with a rational and detailed response. Your second was far fouler, and seemed primarily aimed at hurling insults rather than making any lucid or coherent arguments or reply, which I still responded to with a respectful answer, and the third one was simply a brief remark which was clearly meant as an insult, and nothing more, and was removed as nothing other than a mere personal attack by a troll. It is common practice to remove postings which are merely personal attacks as mere vandalism and trolling, as I could easily and rightfully do even with this one.
There are many anonymous cowards, who would probably not risk loosing their teeth and whatever shreds of dignity they might possess to say such things to a person's face as they regularly say with casual and safe abandon over the internet to others they are unlikely to ever meet.
It is not "pretentious" to express one's thoughts with precision and validity; it is very pretentious to presume either precision, validity of argument or anything resembling true courage, where they do not exist. And simply going around calling people "wankers" is an argument commonly used by shallow minded and pretentious cowards who are very little more than that.
I have just returned to the internet, seen your message, and replied to it with a typed response. Further messages merely to insult me or anyone else will be treated with the contempt they fully deserve, and flushed away as mere troll-droppings ~ Kalki 08:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- The pictures do not pertain to the subject matter. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it is debatable whether or not the pictures are at all informative. it is totally a matter of opinion.
- —This unsigned comment is by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs) .
- If you will look at the left hand corner of your page you might notice this is NOT Wikipedia, and it is NOT an encyclopedia. It is a place where quotations are gathered, investigated, selected, and presented in ways that, hopefully, for the most part, will be both interesting and pleasing to most people. Though there can be and have been debates on how best to do this, the use of images that have relevance to the ideas expressed in some of the more impressive quotations, in order to enhance the pages, is a long practice here. ~ Kalki 09:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I can see the relevance of certain pictures but most them seem totally random, and mostly I don't grasp the connection between picture and quote. Would I be incorrect in saying that all the pictures were gathered and added in by 1, single person? I don't see a great deal of variety in the pictures themselves.
i don't have an account at Wikiquote, though i do at Wikipedia, and so i wanted to say that i for one think the pictures add greatly to the "atmosphere" of the entry, despite the trollspeak in the air. anyhoo, i was skimming through, and thought that an image of a "desert chameleon" would fit nicely under your section for "Children of Dune". the only species of desert dwelling chameleon i know of is this one, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namaqua_Chameleon. i will leave it to others to post it, or not. take care! --Metanoid
- Now, I must admit the troll has a point. I has progressed further down, I was thinking, "nice images and atmophere, but what does that have to do with the quote?"
Only after I read the explanations was I able to grasp the concepts. I think that if you want to add images unrelated to the canon work, you should have a debate or something, instead of choosing images based on your thought processes. That way, we might get pictures that might be a bit more understandable to the general public, although most of them are well chosen. For instance: "In all of my universe I have seen no law of nature, unchanging and inexorable. This universe presents only changing relationships which are sometimes seen as laws by short-lived awareness." — uses an image of a sphere containing plasma arcs of electricity being touched by a hand illuminated by its light, and sensitive to its presences through the electrical impulses of its nerves, and those within the brain which guides it. I can see now real connections between the quote and your exploanation for the picture. Another one is the one with the Sierpinsky tetrahedron.
I agree the pictures seem to be only loosely related to the text, especially the kid with the sparkler. If a consistent set of images cannot be found they all should be removed.
Pictures not appropriate
This is apart from the "random" accusation thread which seems to serve no purpose, possibly in part because of the tone.
The pictures on this page are not appropriate. There are too many and they are too big, so limited bandwidth connections end up slowly downloading what should just be a big page of text with maybe some illustrations for the most relevant material. What we have instead is a kind of picture magazine. There is probably a good context for that, but Wikiquote is not it. The word "quote" implies some kind of direct relevance, while many of these pics are abstractions with tenuous links to the material. Some may even distract from the point that the quotes are about!
I am adding my own review of the pics here and hope others will build on it. We should try to provide some reason for each pic. If there is agreement among contributors which pics are wrong or don't belong then someone might fix that. I am especially concerned about a couple of pics that seem to introduce gender bias or unrelated or contradictory ideas.
By my (rough and quick) count there are 61 illustrations here, of which
good 12 + great 10 + perfect 1 = 23 or only 38% (look good)
meh 10 or 16% (not good, but not doing much harm)
pretentious crap 17 + unrelated 4 = 21 or 34% (this is junk and a distraction, especially with so much)
seriously flawed 7 or 11% which is significant by most measures (please let us address these concerns!)
Several images are also repeated in alternative forms including religious symbols and fire circles. Combine them somehow? Skip one? It doesn't work as it is.
01 early sun on sand - unconscious need for logic : pretentious crap
02 sunrise on sand - the beginning : great
03 abstract electric sheep - fear : pretentious crap
04 whirling geometry - process : good, but big, maybe a smaller version
05 geometric abstraction - trained to learn : pretentious crap
06 desert - maker prayer : meh
07 eye-ish abstract - seeing the future: great
08 lattice - nature of the future : great
09 whirling galaxy or odd desert storm portrayal - nature of Arrakis : pretentious crap
10 knife with horse handle - knives on Arrakis : with a horse handle?! WRONG.
11 moon - nature of Muad-Dib : perfect
12 planet - planetology: great
13 planet - ecology : great, but do we need two of these?
14 symbols - religion : great
15 light in haze with halo - proper teaching : great
16 nebula - senses : unrelated? any connection or relevant?
17 symbols - building shadow : meh
18 mist, branches, light effects - looking forward : meh
19 bright odd thing - where you dare not look : good
20 nebula - Muad'Dib myths : pretentious crap
21 woman in abstraction? - power of individuals : WRONG AND SEXIST
22 Hoag's object - Muad'Dib's vision : WRONG, the other one was better and correct: his visions always gravitated to the falling moon
23 beauty of life thing : meh
24 mouse - from the universe : good
25 nebula - teaching changing nature of the universe : WRONG, ITS NOT MOVING
26 transient life thing : good
27 universeglass - genetic memory : pretentious crap
28 mushroom cloud - atrocity : good
29 mouse neuron - inspiration : pretentious crap
30 energy discharge art - change and power : unrelated?
31 electric tree - probability : meh
32 buddha - mental education : pretentious crap
33 faces abstraction - no guilt or innocence : no meaning either--pretentious crap
34 woman abstraction - nature of prescience : WRONG AND SEXIST
35 galactic love abstraction - liberation : pretentious crap
36 tree and shadow abstraction - no opposites : meh
37 eye hole in the sky - God's command : pretentious crap
38 kalachakra - no end or beginning, observer : good
39 buddha abstraction - free will : pretentious crap
40 electricsheep abstraction - trance state : pretentious crap
41 thor's hammer - prophets and language : arguable, but I think that is WRONG and distracts from the point and context of the quote
42 sunset - awareness : good
43 centered abstraction - danger to stewardshp : arguable, but I think that is WRONG and distracts from the point and context of the quote
44 square matrix - squares resisting circles : meh, where are the circles? they got resisted?
45 hand on plasma ball - nature of the universe : awful pretentious crap
46 fire circle - who plays god: meh
47 more fire circle - dreams : pretentious crap, and we already had a fire circle
48 explosion - power : good
49 burning man - defiling a god : pretentious crap -- isn't there anywhere else to post burning man pics?
50 tree of life - plot layers : meh
51 fractal - magic : unrelated?
52 animated fractal - perceptions and the universe : unrelated, and animations make that file big
53 religious symbols again - when strangers meet : meh, but we already had the symbols!
54 fencing advance - living life : pretentious crap
55 the sword - illuminating the banal : great
56 MIRV - power corrupts : great
57 dune top walk - balance : great
58 plants and shadow in the desert - limits : good
59 surfer - balance on waves : good
60 light in tunnel - thinking machines : good
61 sunset - lessons learned : good
-- M0llusk 18:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Finally, someone who agrees! Also, finally someone on this talk page who isn't a pretentious fuckass. I agree, a lot of these pictures are useless pretentious crap.188.8.131.52 02:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Well first I would wonder if it's possible to ban the potty-mouth. I love this book series, and the existance of this person's words discourages me from even reading (much less participating in the development of) this wiki. Is there some way to report this and effect some permanent solution ? Better to have the worst wiki imaginable than even one of this person's crude sentiments expressed.
I think the pictures are distracting, too. Makes me feel like I'm in a Spencer's Gifts looking at the "mellow out" tchotchkes. Norvy 01:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)