![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 53. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by kid a on September 11, 2002, at 19:26:46
> "We must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig, cow after cow, village after village, army after army..."
((Sorry, but I don't think I can consider quotes suggesting that others be harmed to be civil, let alone supportive, so please refrain from posting them. --Bob))
Okay, I thank the other posters (Alii and Beardy) who have come to my support in this matter, but I think I need to make some additional clarifications on this particular matter.
First off, if you have read or seen any documentary or criticism of the movie I quoted, Apocalypse Now, you would know how vehemently AGAINST the war, and the killing, and the destruction, director Francis Ford Copola was.
The line I quoted was spoken in the movie in anger by Colonel Kurtz, what would be in reference to Conrad's Kurtz in the short novel, Heart of Darkness.
It vehemently criticizes the United States Army's act of violence in colonialism, it is NOT endorsing violence. At the same time it is on the defensive for crimes that pale in comparison, crimes that are mainly aimed at ending violence in the region. The line, "Those nabobs. I hate them. How I hate them..." specifically admonishes colonialism, if you know the definition of the word nabob. Nabobs, also called nawab, were word for the British colonialists who took control of India and profited most from it's occupation. It's use in the quote seems quite appropriate once you understand it's meaning.
[Hindi nawb, nabb, from Arabic nuwwb, pl. of n’ib, deputy active participle of nba, to represent. See nwb in Semitic Roots.]
The title of the post is a direct quote from Conrad's Heart of Darkness, which is also in fact referenced in the movie, as read from the poem The Hollow Men, by T.S. Eliot.
The movie can also be read as a loose adaptation of the Fisher King myth, Kurtz's kingdom, his encampment that he has established is dying, Kurtz is dying. In the end there is a transfer of power from Kurtz to his assassin, Captain Willard, in the end, it is in so many words only Willard who can SAVE Kurtz.
In my not so humble opinion, my posts are neither arbitrary, nor illiterate. They are meant not to cause anyone duress or consternation, yet to provoke thought. I do not often reference non-poetic work because I think the words themselves act as a sort of picture that can be read without a set frame of origin.
You might also want to PBC or block me for a few posts I made from the movie American Psycho, which though not descriptively violent, one of which describes the torment that the character feels over his IMAGINED murders. You see, the movie, and the book it was based on is a satire, not unlike Swifts' Modest Proposal. Swift never really endorsed eating Irish children as a means to solve the British hunger problem and in the same light the novel American Psycho is not meant to glamorize or fetishise murder. It is a direct criticism of the greed and shallowness of the wealthy elite of the Reagan era 1980's. What people don't get is that the murders NEVER happen... It is all imagined, it is all a metaphor for the vast wasteland that enveloped all of power hungry, consumer conscious, wealthy elite.
I won't draw this out any longer, but I will ask one thing, and state another. Must I provide reference for every piece of literature I post, and should I only post literature that might be deemed sterile and safe for any and all readers?
Secondly, would you prefer that instead of what I post, this board continue to act as a Psycho-Babble-Flirting-and-Dating board? Bob, people being criticized for asking women to get in the hot tub is ludicrous. This type of behavior is crass and inappropriate. It puts a black mark on all the male posters of this board and ignores the multiplicity of sexuality that this board consists of. I for one don't want the few male posters of this board to be considered sexual predators... I can put up with the mutual flirting, if it seems to be consensual; but lets not let this board devolve into a random display of meat market bar chat up lines...
That is all.
Posted by judy1 on September 11, 2002, at 19:46:28
In reply to BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read., posted by kid a on September 11, 2002, at 19:26:46
Personally it would help me if you referenced some of your quotes, sorry I don't see as many movies as I wish I could- and that would greatly help me understand the context. Thanks- judy
Posted by ShelliR on September 11, 2002, at 22:02:56
In reply to BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read., posted by kid a on September 11, 2002, at 19:26:46
I don't know, Dr. Bob.
You've gotten more and more petty re warnings and blocks. When we all wait to be totally uncontroversial, we miss great opportunities of expression. You're gonna eventually have to call this board Pollyanna's Psychobabble.
Re kid a's warning: if you're not sure what a post even means, perhaps you should err on the side of trusting that the poster has meant no harm. (sort of like tennis: if a ball is too close to the line for the linesperson to see clearly, he/she is supposed to call the ball in, rather than out. I think that rule is there for a reason; and I think you could probably learn something from that tradition.)
I am noticing lately a very busy PSB; however, the number of *posters* looks to be very limited. Could just be timing, but it does appear to me that you censor many of the more creative and therefore, perhaps controversial posters. The personality kids. (Maybe you need a creativity consult; like what is creative, opposed to offensive).
On a different note, I hope you had a fun and/or relaxing vacation.
Shelli
Posted by wendy b. on September 11, 2002, at 23:34:37
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob and Warnings, posted by ShelliR on September 11, 2002, at 22:02:56
Posted by ~Alii~ on September 12, 2002, at 1:38:03
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob bans Literature!? what next? (nm), posted by wendy b. on September 11, 2002, at 23:34:37
Posted by Gabbix2 on September 12, 2002, at 3:30:01
In reply to What's next? Book burning? Witch hunts? (nm) » wendy b., posted by ~Alii~ on September 12, 2002, at 1:38:03
I'm being redundant, but had to say something.
I found the P.B.C. offensive and degrading. This is frighteningly Orwellian. Paint the world with happy faces icons, and rose motifs.. It won't fool any of us. Most of us have been through hell and the denial disguised a plea for civility insulting beyond words. Sorry but you'll have to put a few more drops of alcohol in the breeding decanter before we'll recite
"I'm so happy to have been assimilated"
"Emotion is uncivil" "Learning breeds discontent" in an ignorant stupor.
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 8:03:12
In reply to BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read., posted by kid a on September 11, 2002, at 19:26:46
> First off, if you have read or seen any documentary or criticism of the movie I quoted, Apocalypse Now, you would know how vehemently AGAINST the war, and the killing, and the destruction, director Francis Ford Copola was...
> my posts are neither arbitrary, nor illiterate. They are meant not to cause anyone duress or consternation, yet to provoke thought. I do not often reference non-poetic work because I think the words themselves act as a sort of picture that can be read without a set frame of origin.
> Must I provide reference for every piece of literature I post, and should I only post literature that might be deemed sterile and safe for any and all readers?
If a reference -- or an exegesis -- is necessary to keep something from being misinterpreted, then yes, please provide one. Safety is important here.
> people being criticized for asking women to get in the hot tub is ludicrous. This type of behavior is crass and inappropriate.
Also, please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 8:08:28
In reply to Re: What's next? , posted by Gabbix2 on September 12, 2002, at 3:30:01
> I found the P.B.C. offensive and degrading. This is frighteningly Orwellian. Paint the world with happy faces icons, and rose motifs.. It won't fool any of us. Most of us have been through hell and the denial disguised a plea for civility insulting beyond words. Sorry but you'll have to put a few more drops of alcohol in the breeding decanter before we'll recite
> "I'm so happy to have been assimilated"
> "Emotion is uncivil" "Learning breeds discontent" in an ignorant stupor.It's fine to be supportive of Kid A, but please don't be sarcastic or post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, thanks.
Bob
Posted by BeardedLady on September 12, 2002, at 9:48:04
In reply to Re: please be civil » kid a, posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 8:03:12
How come you're the only one who needs an explanation of it before it becomes civil? Others may not have understood it, but no one found it uncivil.
At some point in your life, Dr. Bob, you have to say to yourself, "Hmmm. I could be wrong." I believe you have done that a number of times. But the next step is admitting it to the rest of us! You didn't do it when 20 people told you Colin's post was a pun and funny, not a criticism of anyone else, and you should have. You're not doing it now, and you should.
I wish that at some point you would acknowledge the fact that written communication is more complex than what words are used in what order. And if you do acknowledge that, you need to show it.
beardy
Posted by mist on September 12, 2002, at 10:39:07
In reply to Re: please be civil » kid a, posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 8:03:12
>Safety is important here.
Safety or civility?
There are some sites that are designated "safe" for people who get triggered by certain topics of conversation or words (including the content of creative works, I presume). Those sites are very restricted for that reason and are clearly labeled as such. Is this one of those sites? If it is, that—and the restrictions imposed because of it—should be openly explained here. So members can know what they're getting into when they post. Because the issue of 'safety' goes beyond issues of civility. For example, if someone has a phobia about dogs, say, because they were bitten by one as a kid, is it uncivil for others to mention dogs in their posts here?
Posted by IsoM on September 12, 2002, at 14:01:04
In reply to Re: please be civil » kid a, posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 8:03:12
You keep telling us "Also, please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down." Yet your PCBs to those of us who haven't said anything wrong (except in your eyes) make US feel put down & accused.
Doesn't it clue in to you that in your fevered attempts to keep this board civil, that you've overdone it in a major way & end up putting the majority of us down instead? Those of us whose main purpose is to help & support others are instead told that we're putting people down. That just makes us feel great, & supported by you, doesn't it?
And no matter who asks you a question or desires to understand something better, you answer them with brief, ambiguous statements, often in return questions (& often cryptic themselves) that never clear anything up or claifies the questions asked. Most are left as confused as when they first asked. Is it your aim to be purposefully vague & cyrptic? And if you ask 'how?' (as I expect you too), I can't see how we can make it any clearer without spelling it out letter by letter for you & only to have it ignored anyway.
Frustrated? Yes, we're all VERY frustrated. Can't you possibly see that?
Posted by kid a on September 12, 2002, at 15:35:46
In reply to Re: please be civil Dr. Bob yourself, posted by IsoM on September 12, 2002, at 14:01:04
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 16:40:29
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by mist on September 12, 2002, at 10:39:07
> >Safety is important here.
>
> Safety or civility?Both. If it's civil here, that makes it more safe.
> There are some sites that are designated "safe" for people who get triggered by certain topics of conversation or words (including the content of creative works, I presume). Those sites are very restricted for that reason and are clearly labeled as such. Is this one of those sites? If it is, that—and the restrictions imposed because of it—should be openly explained here. So members can know what they're getting into when they post. Because the issue of 'safety' goes beyond issues of civility. For example, if someone has a phobia about dogs, say, because they were bitten by one as a kid, is it uncivil for others to mention dogs in their posts here?
This site has a general audience, so the civility guidelines are general, too. If someone needs to be sure dogs won't be mentioned, they'd need to find a site with more specific safety guidelines.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 17:09:56
In reply to Re: please be civil Dr. Bob yourself, posted by IsoM on September 12, 2002, at 14:01:04
> You keep telling us "Also, please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down." Yet your PCBs to those of us who haven't said anything wrong (except in your eyes) make US feel put down & accused.
Sorry about that, but as I've mentioned before:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020627/msgs/6529.html
there's inevitably some tension between administration and support, and my role here is more administrative.
> Frustrated? Yes, we're all VERY frustrated. Can't you possibly see that?
I see that. Please try to accept the things you cannot change.
If there are other questions about posting quotes, I'd be glad to try to answer them, otherwise, I'd like to consider this issue clarified (though I know not everyone agrees with me) and to get back to our primary goals, support and education...
Bob
Posted by IsoM on September 12, 2002, at 17:41:56
In reply to Re: administration and support, posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 17:09:56
You're right, of course, you *always* are -
"Please try to accept the things you cannot change."I'd get a better response out of a rock. Your quote of the other message meant little. I think I'll go bang my head against a tree trunk - at least, I'll be benefitting from the *fresh* air instead of the same stale rhetoric we continue to hear.
>>>Do as I say, not as I do<<<
.........BE SUPPORTIVE.........
.........BE SUPPORTIVE.........
.........BE SUPPORTIVE.........
>>>>Because I won't be<<<<<
>>>>I'm administrative!<<<<<Hello, rock - would you like to hear how I feel today? Sorry, tree, if I bruised your bark at all.
Posted by ShelliR on September 12, 2002, at 20:11:23
In reply to Re: administration and support, posted by Dr. Bob on September 12, 2002, at 17:09:56
> > Frustrated? Yes, we're all VERY frustrated. Can't you possibly see that?
> I see that. Please try to accept the things you cannot change.
Dr. Bob, I thought that I had already reached the point that nothing you do now surprises me, or could disappoint me further. Then you say or do something else that increases the depth of my disappointment and further diminishes my respect for your administrative abilities.
> I see that. Please try to accept the things you cannot change. <
Okay, that would seem at this point like a reasonable thing to say and way to go if we're still talking about something like the added boards. They have already been decided upon after lots of discussion re pros and cons. Not that the discussion had anything to do with the results, but yes, a decision has been made and I agree that it would be a waste of time and energy to continue to address the issue.
On the other hand, each time you warn or censor a poster, a different decision has to be made. No two posts are alike; so each must be analyzed individually.
So I truly do not get your advise to "try to accept things that you cannot change" in this context, finding it incredibly demeaning and disturbing that any negative feedback distresses you so. It reveals a determination to be totally closed-minded.
Re my disappointment: I already have learned that you lack the humility to admit EVER that you had made an error in a warning or censor. I didn't realize, however, that you were not even processing and analyzing the actions you take that produce a myriad of complaints. For example, the title line fiasco, (when Sandra Dee was censored because she innocently forgot to change a title line, while the creator of the title line didn't even receive a warning). This was a time when not one poster agreed or supported you in a post, yet you continue to repeat your familiar adage: "please try to accept the things you can not change."
I would just like to modify that line to include the whole serenity prayer: "grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.So I am waiting, perhaps very foolishly, for you to develop both courage and wisdom--the totality of serenity. At this point, I believe the majority of posters are light years ahead of you in having both courage and wisdom, as well as acceptance. And I don't understand how a man compassionate enough to set up a board to support people with depression, can lack such simple courtesy as to tell people basically to "shut up" regarding decisions they think you have handled badly. I also find it sort of tackless than when someone praises you for your administrative skills or your generousity, you write a thank you post back to them. I find it offensive because, and only because, you so discourage negative feedback and yet you shamelessly acknowledge positive feedback only.
I feel so foolish that I once volunteered to set up a pledge drive to raise money for this site, in light of the increasing totalitarianism. I certainly believe the LEAST you can do is pay for the site out of pocket.
Shelli
Posted by oracle on September 12, 2002, at 22:58:16
In reply to BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read., posted by kid a on September 11, 2002, at 19:26:46
> "We must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig, cow after cow, village after village, army after army..."
((Sorry, but I don't think I can consider quotes suggesting that others be harmed to be civil, let alone supportive, so please refrain from posting them. --Bob))
Even without the referance to rivets I knew this was "Heart of Darkness" as it was required reading in HS. Saying that one should indicate
who is being quoted seems to me to indicate Dr Bob
felt it was OK if this was added. Since this is the first time this seems to have come up it would of been nicer to ask first before judgement
was cast.Personally I think the quotes are enough. It is clear to me what quotes mean.
Posted by BeardedLady on September 13, 2002, at 8:23:54
In reply to Re: administration and support » Dr. Bob, posted by ShelliR on September 12, 2002, at 20:11:23
Thanks for saying what so many of us are thinking, Librans and otherwise.
Cheers.
Beardy
Posted by Phil on September 13, 2002, at 10:46:09
In reply to Re: administration and support » Dr. Bob, posted by ShelliR on September 12, 2002, at 20:11:23
Posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 12:06:37
In reply to Re: BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read., posted by oracle on September 12, 2002, at 22:58:16
> Even without the referance to rivets I knew this was "Heart of Darkness" as it was required reading in HS. Saying that one should indicate
who is being quoted seems to me to indicate Dr Bob
felt it was OK if this was added.You see this is where I am a little confused about the policy. Does providing a source for the material immediately explain it? I would say for some people no, so you haven't gained anything... In some cases I leave this out because one, Id like people to take a chance on a guess, and I as well don't want them necisarily distracted by the source, I want the words to take precedence.
So, if you have no idea what Apocalypse Now, or Heart of Darkness is, you are no better off then when you started.
Chinua Achebe, a great writer himself, refered to Condrad's work as racist in a very famous essay. If you are familiar with that, maybe you'll take offense to Conrad in the first place, remember he did write The Nigger of the Narcissus, whose title might make some people reel regardeless if they have ever even read it; but generally thats how it works, people ignorant of the work will have a knee jerk reaction. As far as Achebe is concerned, that was just one person's opinion, granted a very important person's opinion, but it wasnt without it's detractors.
I've been accused of an anti-semite, and posting anti-semitic links, I've been accused (by the same person) of being anti-islamic, I angered someone in the same thread who incorectly stated that Afghanistan fought OUR war for us against the Soviets, when the exact opposite is true, and this is very easy to find out if you read any accurate history whatsoever...
I personally don't see how I'm going to explain every single thing I post, and I admit, I do post things that may be obtuse, but thats why I post them... Thats who I am... And I dont think adding a source reference does much of anything if you aren't even familiar with the source.
oh well, la de da... I am Dog, son of man...
Posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 14:32:40
In reply to Re: BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read. » oracle, posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 12:06:37
the only thing i could come up with is that it gives the reader the chance to further research the text if they so choose, however likely that is... so in that case i can see the use...
i most always cite poetry since i write it, and i dont want anyone to mistakingly think that it is mine... but i dont cite my own work no matter it is i write, i suppose i dont even know if people read it to begin with...
since i feel im probably just talking to myself on this one, ill wrap it up by saying that Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery" caused such a furor when it was published in the New Yorker because it completely horrified people...
it is, an expertly crafted and yes, horrifying work of literature that should be read by everyone who has a taste for sublte and omninous, yet somehow nameless untouchable dread... it stays with you long after the reading... maybe i'm just trying to relate some of that, how it echoes my life, probably many peoples lives here, the horror, the horror.
Posted by Tabitha Ðòñë ƒ£îþþëÐ on September 13, 2002, at 15:16:24
In reply to one case for citing the written word..., posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 14:32:40
Kid A,
First let me say I enjoy your posts, even without sources, since they're always beautifully written excerpts of whatever they are. Dark subjects don't disturb me personally. I can see though how having a source might make them less potentially disturbing to others, even if someone is not familiar with the source. For instance, if you post the words of a psychotic murderous character, some people might think the words are your own, and that there's a psychotic murderous Babbler in our midst. With a source though, it's obviously a quote from something.
Posted by oracle on September 13, 2002, at 18:16:38
In reply to Re: BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read. » oracle, posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 12:06:37
Thats who I am... And I dont think adding a source reference does much of anything if you aren't even familiar with the source.
If people do not know what quotes mean they missed
something in school.Conrad lived in another time, I cannot judge him with present day morals.
Posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 19:44:42
In reply to Re: one case for citing the written word... » kid a, posted by Tabitha Ðòñë ƒ£îþþëÐ on September 13, 2002, at 15:16:24
>For instance, if you post the words of a psychotic murderous character, some people might think the words are your own, and that there's a psychotic murderous Babbler in our midst.
i do thank you for reading, but perhaps you've shown me as who i am... maybe thats the disease in me... i think im bad, so i want these bad things to be associated with me... something in me wants to horrify, to be punished.
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 13, 2002, at 20:12:20
In reply to Re: BOB PBC: Mistah Kurtz, He Dead. pls Read. » oracle, posted by kid a on September 13, 2002, at 12:06:37
> I truly do not get your advise to "try to accept things that you cannot change" in this context, finding it incredibly demeaning and disturbing that any negative feedback distresses you so. It reveals a determination to be totally closed-minded.
I apologize (especially to IsoM), I did put that too strongly. Sorry if I disappointed.
> I don't understand how a man compassionate enough to set up a board to support people with depression, can lack such simple courtesy as to tell people basically to "shut up" regarding decisions they think you have handled badly. I also find it sort of tackless than when someone praises you for your administrative skills or your generousity, you write a thank you post back to them. I find it offensive because, and only because, you so discourage negative feedback and yet you shamelessly acknowledge positive feedback only.
>
> ShelliI don't mean to discourage all negative feedback. I do, however, think that repeated negative feedback from the same people about the same issues not only takes us away from the primary goals of this site, but, realistically, is unlikely to change my mind (of stone :-).
----
> Does providing a source for the material immediately explain it? I would say for some people no...
>
> Dog, son of manI agree; that's why I also snuck in "or an exegesis". :-)
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/7373.html
Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.