![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jack1. From glasgow to cambridge I broke my train journey at edinborough and birmingham. I think they only stamped the ticket once, on the first leg. If so, what stops you using it repeatedly for the rest of the journey? I think all such attacks can only be used for repeat journeys (obviously you need some ticket the first time), but is there a reason, other than my honesty, this wouldn't work if you did commute that way a lot?
2. There was much help given to disabled people at the cons. It's just one aspect of a nice atmosphere. I remember Larry Niven writing a not-particularly-inspired book set in the near future when science has become reviled, and fandom exists underground. It was weird -- but I can see people doing exactly that :)
3. I only went to a couple of readings, but one was Susannah Clarke. It was an extensive footnote from near the end of the book that didn't make it in due to time, that we *jsut* got through in half an hour. It described a legend alluded to in the text where a poor charcoal burner got the better of the magician king, but it was very wonderful and very funny.
The question is, why do I always love books with footnotes? Jonathon Strange and Mr Norrel. Discworld. Amulet of Sammarkand. Cryptonomicon. All great, especially the footnotes. Maybe I like the compulsiveness to present all the necessary information[1]. But many are entirely irrelevent. Maybe I like that sort of discoursive digression?
[1] Eg. In Crypto, Shaftoe sees a $foo plane, and there's a footnote to describe why he recognises the model.
2. There was much help given to disabled people at the cons. It's just one aspect of a nice atmosphere. I remember Larry Niven writing a not-particularly-inspired book set in the near future when science has become reviled, and fandom exists underground. It was weird -- but I can see people doing exactly that :)
3. I only went to a couple of readings, but one was Susannah Clarke. It was an extensive footnote from near the end of the book that didn't make it in due to time, that we *jsut* got through in half an hour. It described a legend alluded to in the text where a poor charcoal burner got the better of the magician king, but it was very wonderful and very funny.
The question is, why do I always love books with footnotes? Jonathon Strange and Mr Norrel. Discworld. Amulet of Sammarkand. Cryptonomicon. All great, especially the footnotes. Maybe I like the compulsiveness to present all the necessary information[1]. But many are entirely irrelevent. Maybe I like that sort of discoursive digression?
[1] Eg. In Crypto, Shaftoe sees a $foo plane, and there's a footnote to describe why he recognises the model.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-23 01:29 pm (UTC)*The one about there being no excuse for pineapple on pizza (with which I disagree whilst my father agrees) and the other about a marriage being made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores!
no subject
Date: 2005-08-23 01:44 pm (UTC)