Low fantasy, anyone?

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Markdoc

Actually, partial healing happens a lot in Fantasy - both the mythological version and the modern version. To use arthurian myth as an example, after Arthur fought Pellinore, he was dying from his wounds (technically, below 0 BOD, I guess). The Hermit of the chapel healed his wounds, so that he did not die, but Arthur was too ill to continue his quest for some time.

 

In other words, the Hermit said to Merlin "OK, I've healed him up above 0 BOD, so he won't die, but that's all I can manage with two crummy dice of healing. He'll have to heal up some more before getting in any fights".

 

That's because of the curse on the land, not because of Arthur's physical infirmity, but because of Arthur's spiritual infirmity. If you understood Catholic theology better, you would understand the symbolism of the grail, and the kind of life and healing that the grail gives to Arthur, and through Arthur - the king (ala divine right) - to his kingdom.

 

This healed, but only partly, effect crops up multiple times in Arthurian myth (the quest of Lamorak's sons also springs to mind). Cuchulain's wounding was also only partially healed after the battle at the ford. And that good old chestnut LOTR has the same thing where Eowyn is healed by Aragorn - but only partly.

 

These are only three mythologies. What about....Greek, Roman, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Summarian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.? In the totality of mythologies, it happens rarely. In fantasy books, it happens almost never.

 

So I have no problem with it in gaming.

 

I was talking about literature.

 

I have more of a problem with the "Poof! Good as new!" style of healing. While it certainly occurs in fantasy, it is normally associated with holy relics, great quests, etc. Not only is it a problem with regard to game balance, it just seems (apart from exceptional cases as mentioned above) a bit "unfantasy" to me.

 

I agree, but in the totality of books, on the average, it doesn't happen - it's usually an all or nothing event. So executing a healing event, in literature, is not the same as a Hero Game: "I bought 3d6 of Healing so 3 body of that 6 body wound is healed." You can't justify a literary character partially healing anyone, on the average. Is that specific enough for you non-global thinkers?

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Galadorn

You can't justify a literary character partially healing anyone, on the average. Is that specific enough for you non-global thinkers?

 

Maybe you can't, but there's absolutely no reason a literary character can't benefit from partial healing.

[Markdoc]

>>>That's because of the curse on the land, not because of Arthur's physical infirmity, but because of Arthur's spiritual infirmity. If you understood Catholic theology better, you would understand the symbolism of the grail, and the kind of life and healing that the grail gives to Arthur, and through Arthur - the king (ala divine right) - to his kingdom.<<<

 

Actually, it has nothing to do with the curse on the land, You’re confusing the Arthur of the mythologies with the Arthur of recent fantasy literature and movies like Excalibur where he has been conflated with the Fisher king (the actual grail king). Arthur’s wounds in this instance have more to do with being stuck with a big pointy bit of metal and the point of the story of his clash with Pellinore is an allegory on pride: It is set early in Arthur’s story, while he is still young and healthy, before he received Excalibur, is apparently based on earlier myths and has not the slightest thing to do with the land or the grail.

 

Not meaning to be picky, but I’d avoid using phrases like “if you understood Catholic theology better…†*. Even if you don’t mean it to be so, it comes across as patronizing, and being patronizing when you yourself are clearly not versed in the subject – well, let’s just say it doesn’t make a good impression.

 

*side note – I studied catholic theology part time for 6 years and served in Church, although I decided to go to medical school rather than become a priest. I’m well aware that the Grail has had many meaning in catholic and christian mythology, few of which have much to do with Arthur outside English post-romance literature. I’d suggest starting with reading “De Civitate Deiâ€. The description there of the Grail as symbolic of the “true†church which holds the sacred blood of the saviour dominated grail symbology for many centuries.

 

>>>These are only three mythologies. What about....Greek, Roman, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Summarian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.? In the totality of mythologies, it happens rarely. In fantasy books, it happens almost never. <<<

 

In Norse mythology one can find many, many examples. The binding of Fenris is a one (Tyr is healed, but only partly – presumably the healer did not have the “replaces lost limbs†adder , the otter’s ransom is another. I suspect it would be easy enough to find examples in other mythologies as well – it certainly occurs in Chinese cinema, for example, so the concept is hardly foreign to them. A swift look through my fantasy library turns up healing which is only partially effective or which merely serves to slow the course of disease or injury in multiple books. I am sure there are books in which this is not the case but I wouldn’t assume that they are the vast majority – indeed they appear not to be. In the end, it comes down to personal preference. If in your own writings and gaming you prefer an all or nothing approach, it is easy enough to make it so. If you prefer not, that is also easy enough – and certainly precedent is easy to find.

 

cheers, Mark

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Markdoc

>>>That's because of the curse on the land, not because of Arthur's physical infirmity, but because of Arthur's spiritual infirmity. If you understood Catholic theology better, you would understand the symbolism of the grail, and the kind of life and healing that the grail gives to Arthur, and through Arthur - the king (ala divine right) - to his kingdom.<<<

 

Actually, it has nothing to do with the curse on the land, You’re confusing the Arthur of the mythologies with the Arthur of recent fantasy literature and movies like Excalibur where he has been conflated with the Fisher king (the actual grail king). Arthur’s wounds in this instance have more to do with being stuck with a big pointy bit of metal and the point of the story of his clash with Pellinore is an allegory on pride: It is set early in Arthur’s story, while he is still young and healthy, before he received Excalibur, is apparently based on earlier myths and has not the slightest thing to do with the land or the grail.

 

First, please site which source you are commenting on. I have read L'Morte D'Arthur. Which source are you commenting on?

 

You also have to look at the cultural and spiritual context, in which the Arthur stories where authored. No literary scholar worth his salt, takes a book out of these contexts, and thinks he can interpet a literary work accurately.

 

Not meaning to be picky, but I’d avoid using phrases like “if you understood Catholic theology better…†*. Even if you don’t mean it to be so, it comes across as patronizing, and being patronizing when you yourself are clearly not versed in the subject – well, let’s just say it doesn’t make a good impression.

 

That I am being patronizing, is your opinion, and I will leave it at that. And I am not clearly versed? You don't follow established scholarly methods...

 

*side note – I studied catholic theology part time for 6 years and served in Church, although I decided to go to medical school rather than become a priest. I’m well aware that the Grail has had many meaning in catholic and christian mythology, few of which have much to do with Arthur outside English post-romance literature.

 

Which is patently untrue. I suppose you know better then historians. Culture criticism mister former seminarian, cultural criticism.

 

I’d suggest starting with reading “De Civitate Deiâ€. The description there of the Grail as symbolic of the “true†church which holds the sacred blood of the saviour dominated grail symbology for many centuries.

 

No, the grail, according to the concensus of historians and literary experts, represents the salvation of the British people...period. True Church, I think is a missappropriated metaphor in this context, and far too specially innappropriate.

 

Secondly, I've read the City of God by Augustine.

 

Thirdly, you just proved my point with you attributed the story of the grail being a story of pride. Spiritual healing is the issue, the grail is the symbol and means, and pride is the object cured. True Church doesn't fit too well into the concept of a specific remedy for pride.

 

Fourthly, ever hear of temporal punishment? What about miraculous temporal punishments, ala Zecharia, the muted father of John the Baptist?

 

>>>These are only three mythologies. What about....Greek, Roman, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Summarian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.? In the totality of mythologies, it happens rarely. In fantasy books, it happens almost never. <<<

 

In Norse mythology one can find many, many examples. The binding of Fenris is a one (Tyr is healed, but only partly – presumably the healer did not have the “replaces lost limbs†adder , the otter’s ransom is another. I suspect it would be easy enough to find examples in other mythologies as well – it certainly occurs in Chinese cinema, for example, so the concept is hardly foreign to them.

[/b]

 

Using a very broad definition of the term mythology aren't we? Chinese cinema is not classic chinese mythology, necessarily, is it? Chinese cinema is not the prime source of Chinese religious myths is it? Ever hear of primary sources?

 

Think more specifically, please.

 

Secondly, regeneration is not healing. And Norse mythology is not Hero Games. FRPGs are not quality literature. And an adder to a power, is not the NORM.

 

A swift look through my fantasy library turns up healing which is only partially effective or which merely serves to slow the course of disease or injury in multiple books. I am sure there are books in which this is not the case but I wouldn’t assume that they are the vast majority – indeed they appear not to be. In the end, it comes down to personal preference. If in your own writings and gaming you prefer an all or nothing approach, it is easy enough to make it so. If you prefer not, that is also easy enough – and certainly precedent is easy to find.

 

When will people learn to think according to the MEAN? If you went to the Seminary, did you learn what the term NORM means in behavioral science, more specifically in sociology? What is the NORM in fantasy literature?

 

Focusing on exceptionalities doesn't do your argument justice.

 

Take Care.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Pattern Ghost

Maybe you can't, but there's absolutely no reason a literary character can't benefit from partial healing.

 

Justify it to a satisfying conclusion. I haven't found any up to this point. Think through the logic of it. Is this logic intellectually and emotionally satisfying? That's the point of fantasy literature, to satisfy the audience: emotionally, intellectually and even spiritually.

 

As many people have voiced in this thread. Instant healing after a major battle isn't intellectually or emotionally satisfying: it just doesn't do justice to heroic sacrifice.

 

Think of this: "Galadorn charges through the goblin troups, using his sword to thrust through one goblin, behead another, and chop the arm off another. The goblin kind's guards move to bar the way from Galadorn reaching their king.

 

Galadorn thrusts, parries, repostes, and dances his way through the troup, taking a slash from one king's guard, a stab from another, and finally a blow to the head from the another. Blood trickles from Galadorn's ears and oozes from a welt on Galadorn's forehead. Galadorn, knight, goblin-foe, orc-beheader, dragon-slayer, falls to the ground in a heap.

 

And along comes Father ToBen, with his healing spell, laying his hands upon the fallen knight. Galadorn hops up and brushes himself off: 'Boy was that a tough fight! Let's go it again, father.'"

 

Now you tell me, was that a satisfying end to this story?

[Markdoc]

Hmm. I don't really want to indulge in a grail literature debate, but anyone who says " No, the grail, according to the concensus of historians and literary experts, represents the salvation of the British people...period." doesn't know diddly squat about the subject.

 

The Ethiopians have their own grail legends, as do the French, Germans and Italians. None of them have anything to do with british people - indeed there's a fairish number of references to the grail which predate the founding of the kingdom of Britain.

 

I'll quote just a tiny chunk from the authorised catholic encyclopedia - specifically the bit discussing adoption of French Grail legends by later English writers. I've put it at the end, where those interested can read it, because it's really a bit beside the point (I have no love of those endless debates where people clip chunks from previous posts and misconstrue them).

 

The point is simply that there are a lot of well read people on the Hero boards with useful things to say. You don't have to listen to them, but there's no need to be dismissive.

 

Fine, so you know little or nothing about arthurian myth, but that's OK. There are plenty of topics where I know little or nothing. But it doesn't help to pretend to expertise - if you disagree with a post, just say so. Your opinion is as valid as any other.

 

OK, enough huffle - the quote:

 

"Of the first class is the "Conte del Graal" of Chrestien de Troyes and his continuators, a vast poetic compilation of some 60,000 verses, composed between 1180 qnd 1240, and the Middle High German epic poem "Parzival" of Wolfram von Eschenbach, written between 1205 and 1215, and based, according to Wolfram's statement, on the French poem of a certain Kyot (Guiot) of Provence, which, however, is not extant and the very existence of which is doubtful. To these may be added the Welsh folk-tales or "Mabinogion" known to us only from manuscripts of the thirteenth century, though the material is certainly older, and the English poem "Sir Percyvelle," of the fifteenth century. Of the Early History versions the oldest is the metrical trilogy of Robert de Boron, composed between 1170 and 1212, of which only the first part, the "Joseph d'Arimathie," and a portion of the second, the "Merlin," are extant. We have, however, a complete prose version, preserved in the so-called Didot manuscript. The most detailed history of the Grail is in the "Grand St. Graal," a bulky French prose romance of the first half of the thirteenth century, where we are told that Christ Himself presented to a pious hermit the book concerning this history. Besides these versions we have three French prose romances, also from the thirteenth century, which, though concerned chiefly with the quest, give also an account of the history of the sacred vessel. Of these the most notable is the "Queste del St. Graal," well known to English readers because it was enbodied almost entire in Malory's "Morte d' Arthur." The others are the so-called "Didot Perceval" or "La petite queste" and the lengthy and prolix "Perceval le Gallois," also known as "Perlesvaus."

 

 

"A word as to the attitude of the Church towards the legend. It would seem that a legend so distinctively Christian would find favour with the Church. Yet this was not the case. Generally, clerical writers do not mention the Grail, and the Church ignored the legend completely. After all, the legend contained the elements of which the Church could not approve. Its sources are in apocryphal, not in canonical, scripture, and the claims of sanctity made for the Grail were refuted by their very extravagance. Moreover, the legend claimed for the Church in Britain an origin well nigh as illustrious as that of the Church of Rome, and independent of Rome. It was thus calculated to encourage and to foster any separatist tendencies that might exist in Britain. As we have seen, the whole tradition concerning the Grail is of late origin and on many points at variance with historical truth."

 

Since this material is used directly in catholic schools for instruction - and is also a recommended text for religious studies at secular universities, I think that should answer the charge that:

 

>>>Which is patently untrue. I suppose you know better then historians. Culture criticism mister former seminarian, cultural criticism.<<<

 

I was quoting not my own opinion but mainstream historical analysis. The defence rests, m'lud

 

Likeiwse as for challenging me to "site" (sic.) the source of the wounding of Arthur by Pellinore it is one of the most famous incidents in Arthur's carreer since it occurrs immediately before Arthur gets Excalibur and is repeated in all of the english variants of the story that follow Malory. If you had read Le Mort d*Arthur you would certainly know it, but out of the goodness of my heart here it is reproduced:

 

>>Capitulum xxv

Ryghte so the kyng and he departed & wente vn tyl an ermyte that was a good man and a grete leche Soo the heremyte serched all his woundys & gaf hym good salues so the kyng was there thre dayes & thenne were his woundes wel amendyd that he myght ryde and goo & so departed<<

 

Happy now?

 

cheers, Mark

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Galadorn

Justify it to a satisfying conclusion. I haven't found any up to this point. Think through the logic of it. Is this logic intellectually and emotionally satisfying? That's the point of fantasy literature, to satisfy the audience: emotionally, intellectually and even spiritually.

 

As many people have voiced in this thread. Instant healing after a major battle isn't intellectually or emotionally satisfying: it just doesn't do justice to heroic sacrifice.

 

Think of this: "Galadorn charges through the goblin troups, using his sword to thrust through one goblin, behead another, and chop the arm off another. The goblin kind's guards move to bar the way from Galadorn reaching their king.

 

Galadorn thrusts, parries, repostes, and dances his way through the troup, taking a slash from one king's guard, a stab from another, and finally a blow to the head from the another. Blood trickles from Galadorn's ears and oozes from a welt on Galadorn's forehead. Galadorn, knight, goblin-foe, orc-beheader, dragon-slayer, falls to the ground in a heap.

 

And along comes Father ToBen, with his healing spell, laying his hands upon the fallen knight. Galadorn hops up and brushes himself off: 'Boy was that a tough fight! Let's go it again, father.'"

 

Now you tell me, was that a satisfying end to this story?

 

I don't know what you're talking about. First, you assert that you can't do partial healing in a literary context, not a gaming context, then the only example you can think of to support this claim is that of a gaming context.

 

I said you can have partial healing in a literary context and make it work.

 

I didn't say aything about the gaming context you put it in, in your example.

 

As for healing taking away from the heroic nature of the sacrifice, I agree. Full healing does more to that end than partial healing. There are all kinds of justifications for partial healing, if you allow healing at all. They can depend on the system of magic used, or the circumstance, or be as mundane as having the same requirements for recovery time as any modern life saving surgery would have. The needs of the plot and the setting should determine what kind of magical healing is available.

 

I personally prefer magic to be more of a special thing. It's hardly magical if it's as commonplace as it is in, say, the Forgotten Realms. I'd prefer to read about the quest to haul our hero or supporting character off to a hotsprings blessed by a dead saint and all the trials the journey itself entails than have Bob the Cleric wave his holy symbol at the character for 500 gp, for example.

[Galadorn]

I was quoting not my own opinion but mainstream historical analysis. The defence rests, m'lud

 

Likewise as for challenging me to "site" (sic.) the source of the wounding of Arthur by Pellinore it is one of the most famous incidents in Arthur's career since it occurrs immediately before Arthur gets Excalibur and is repeated in all of the english variants of the story that follow Malory. If you had read Le Mort d*Arthur you would certainly know it, but out of the goodness of my heart here it is reproduced:

 

>>Capitulum xxv

Ryghte so the kyng and he departed & wente vn tyl an ermyte that was a good man and a grete leche Soo the heremyte serched all his woundys & gaf hym good salues so the kyng was there thre dayes & thenne were his woundes wel amendyd that he myght ryde and goo & so departed<<

 

His wounds were amended, and you think that was miraculous healing? LOL. Amended also means repaired through normal means Mark, you need to check your Oxford English Dictionary.

 

Sounds like Authur was tended to through ordinary means, Let's see...a few key words for the former graduate student, who obviously didn't take any graduate courses in english literature. I'll point out the keywords and key phrases you seemed to have miss...

 

"gaf hym good salues"...salues = SALVES. Which is an ointment concocted from Medieval remedies, such as medicinal herbs and pig fat.

 

"his woundes wel amendyd"..amendyd = mended, e.g healed through normal means. Did you know that having a proper bandage and medicinal salves can heal some wounds quite rapidly? Did you also know that the line continues on...

 

"that he myght ryde and goo," not that he may do the olympics, and win the 20 meter race, but only that me might ride and go. For goodness sake, might a wounded man who was tended too, enough so that his wounds were naturally healed enough through normal means, be well enough after three days to ride a horse? We're not running an olympic 20 meters here...

[AnotherSkip]

You want to ride a horse three days after a life saving operation?

 

 

erm lemme go check on my list of post operation suggested activities....

[Markdoc]

>>>"that he myght ryde and goo," not that he may do the olympics, and win the 20 meter race, but only that me might ride and go. <<<

 

Ummm - "goo" in this context does not mean go - but walk (from the danish gå) - this meaning was standard in many english dialect and commonplace in Northern English into the 20th century. In general, any medieval english that uses a double vowel like this (goo, gaard, etc) has a danish or norwegian root, the double being used to identify long vowel sounds that don't exist in English: being a danish speaker has some advantages in interpreting these, obviously .

 

It was from this phrase that I plucked the partial healing bit since after 3 days Arthurs was well enough to ride eand walk (implying he was not previously) - but also implying he wasn't up to another bout with Pellinore.

 

Anyway, since in the previous chapter Merlin pleads with the hermit to save Arthurs life, to me going from "about to die " to fit enough to ride cross-country is pretty miraculous: but then no-one reads Arthurian myth for realism. Maybe the old hermit is just a hell of a herbalist. I doubt it though - all the hermits in arthurian myth seem to have magical powers - they tell fortunes, know knight's names and quests without being told, can sense sin, have their heads chopped off without harm, etc. Salves, powders and strange animals hanging about the house were all as obviously magical to the mindset of the day as the Robe of the Archmagi.

 

Anyway, I have to admit this discussion has gone so far off the rails (From Low Fantasy to Danish vowel sounds! Gotta love the Hero boards) that I suggest we drop it here.

 

cheers, Mark

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

You want to ride a horse three days after a life saving operation?

 

erm lemme go check on my list of post operation suggested activities....

 

You just proved me case - you're don't even know what historical criticism is. This is the MIDDLE AGES: you think they had a list of post operation suggested activities? When, you do your masters in literature, like I am, get back to me.

 

Yeah, I'm sure Arthur and the hermit checked with the AMA before deciding whether he should ride on or not.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Galadorn

You just proved me case - you're don't even know what historical criticism is. This is the MIDDLE AGES: you think they had a list of post operation suggested activities? When, you do your masters in literature, like I am, get back to me.

 

Yeah, I'm sure Arthur and the hermit checked with the AMA before deciding whether he should ride on or not.

 

Haha, you don't need an AMA guideline to tell you common sense, i.e., "don't ride a horse when you've recently suffered grievous wounds that, while somewhat healed, could reopen and kill you or get infected".

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Markdoc

>>>"that he myght ryde and goo," not that he may do the olympics, and win the 20 meter race, but only that me might ride and go. <<<

 

Anyway, since in the previous chapter Merlin pleads with the hermit to save Arthurs life, to me going from "about to die " to fit enough to ride cross-country is pretty miraculous: but then no-one reads Arthurian myth for realism.

 

Yeah, I'm sure Merlin had his M.D. from Johns Hopkins, and knew the precise medicial diagnosis needed to examine Arthur. You proved my point again - you don't know what historical criticism is, or even psychological perception for that matter.

 

This was Merlin's perspective. I don't think Merlin had a 4.0 in his herbal lore Ph.D. with a 20th century medical core. Give me a break! Get inside Merlin's head, and all these people's heads. Some people thought you could die from a headache! LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

 

Go back to college my dear doctor, quit attributing study and experience in medicine and theology/philisophy to literary criticism of the Middle Ages - which is my specialty in grad school.

 

Take Care

[AnotherSkip]

Heh,

 

after getting some of the headaches I do on this board, I can quite agree with headaches=death.

 

 

besides if we are trying to read things into this we do have to suggest some sort of modicum of basis in reality.

 

 

You ever ridden a horse? nope not the best way to keep wounds closed in any shape or form.

 

 

BTW Galadorn Im not the idiot you have been arguing with.

 

Im some other idiot. pay attention mr, the pop quiz is 0 end, persistant, always on

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Galadorn

When, you do your masters in literature, like I am, get back to me.

 

 

So, your college doesn't have a requirement to master basic grammar before getting into grad school? Interesting. When you learn to use commas properly, then you get to be condescending about your education.

[Markdoc]

Bad Pattern Ghost! Spelling flames are uncool (OK, I did it too, so that makes me bad as well I admit it)

 

But seriously Galadorn, ya can't expect people to take your posts seriously if that's your approach. To explain away a weakness in your argument by pretending to apply psychological analysis to Merlin in this situation is simply laughable. In La Morte D'Arthur Merlin is a symbol - just as the whole story of the fight with Pellinore is an allegory on pride. We're not discussing Jane Austen here - applying historographical analysis to say, Third Highest in The Deluding of Gylfi is even less useful than arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin - that at least is a philosophical approach to the concept of infinity.

 

If you can't take anything said by the characters at face value, nor anything described by the author, then you have essentially cut the legs off your argument that you can extract material from classical myths to apply to your writing/gaming.

 

As an aside, in the alternative fantasy thread you were in Marketing: are you studying literary criticism and marketing? It would be nice to see characters advertising cereal with a bit more real depth to their personalities and backstory.

 

cheers, Mark

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Markdoc

Bad Pattern Ghost! Spelling flames are uncool (OK, I did it too, so that makes me bad as well I admit it)

 

I don't do spelling flames. My own spelling is pretty lacking nowdays. That was a grammar flame.

 

Actually, it was the attitude I was commenting on. I think the guy has some interesting points, but they aren't being delivered very well with that attitude. It's one thing to say, "In my studies of..." to support an argument, another to disparage someone else's education (or presumed lack thereof) to do so.

 

Wasn't there a saying about elevating yourself by putting others down? Not a good thing.

 

I haven't really been the target of Galadorn's commentary, so I should really butt out, but...I didn't.

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Markdoc

As an aside, in the alternative fantasy thread you were in Marketing: are you studying literary criticism and marketing? It would be nice to see characters advertising cereal with a bit more real depth to their personalities and backstory.

 

cheers, Mark

 

It is possible to get into an MFA program with a bachelor's in something that's not strictly related, like marketing. Or he could be going for dual degrees.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Hehe,

 

After getting some of the headaches I do on this board, I can quite agree with headaches=death.

 

Hehe.

 

Besides if we are trying to read things into this we do have to uggest some sort of modicum of basis in reality. You ever ridden a horse? nope not the best way to keep wounds closed in any shape or form.

 

I was hoping this topic would come up. I grew up with horses, I rode both western and english saddles. My sister was the state equestrian champion for english saddle in this 70s. She is also the coach of last year's national champion in the U.S. I think I know what I'm talking about, and she's talking about.

 

And btw, by riding do you mean, trot, gallop or walk? There are many ways to ride a horse, and many strides and paces you can set your horse to. If Arthur galloped his horse, I think he might have some trouble, if he walked, he might be able to make it...

 

And I have ridden horses, walking themm with a broken ankle, and stitches in my right arm. It worked out fine. I also have ridden horses with stitches in my foot, no problems. Gut wounds may be a little more troublesome though, but walking a horse, is not very troublesome.

 

BTW Galadorn I'm not the idiot you have been arguing with.

 

Ummmm... your name isn't Markdoc is it? Then you must not be the guy I was talking to. And I don't like it when people call people derogatory names, thank you.

 

Im some other idiot.

I wouldn't call you an idiot.

 

Take care.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Pattern Ghost

So, your college doesn't have a requirement to master basic grammar before getting into grad school? Interesting. When you learn to use commas properly, then you get to be condescending about your education.

 

Check the literary degrees, no grammar is not required. And to be more appropriate, Is a message board a place where my thesis is being graded?

 

BTW "Interesting.", is an incomplete sentence.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Markdoc

Bad Pattern Ghost! Spelling flames are uncool (OK, I did it too, so that makes me bad as well I admit it)

 

But seriously Galadorn, ya can't expect people to take your posts seriously if that's your approach. To explain away a weakness in your argument by pretending to apply psychological analysis to Merlin in this situation is simply laughable.

 

You obviously haven't taken psychology. Or not enough to properly define perception.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Pattern Ghost

It is possible to get into an MFA program with a bachelor's in something that's not strictly related, like marketing. Or he could be going for dual degrees.

 

You get a gold star. Dual degrees, an MBA, and a MA in english literature degree. Kudos, for someone who has a clue about the academic system. And btw I think I said I was IN marketing, not doing my MBA - but maybe I did.

[Pattern Ghost]

Originally posted by Galadorn

Check the literary degrees, no grammar is not required. And to be more appropriate, Is a message board a place where my thesis is being graded?

 

I suppose you missed the point. Or you were shooting for irony, perhaps.

 

BTW "Interesting.", is an incomplete sentence.

 

Interestingly enough, that alone doesn't make it grammatically incorrect. Maybe when you learn more about grammar, we can return to this discussion.

[Muldegian]

Someone needs to go back to all those psychology classes. Do they still teach "how to win friends and influence people?" I am thinking "how to come off like a condescending chump" would be more in line with posts. Of course, I am likely to be told what classes I obviously missed.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Galadorn

 

You obviously haven't taken psychology. Or not enough to properly define perception. [/b]

 

Defining perception is probably better addressed by philosophy than psychology, though of course psychology has only come into its own from philosophy in the last 100 years or so anyway. But if you want to move from more theoretical to more concrete, maybe neurobiology would be yet another better place than psychology.