Official Great Works Draft (5 Viewers)

[rodg12]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

 

[Genedoc]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Wholeheartedly concur. It's the ultimate naked emperor to me.

 

[Fennis]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

It represents man's inhumanity towards man.

 

[rodg12]

Skipped

39.10 - Thatguy

39.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.02 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.11 - Thatguy (autoskip))

41.05 - Doug B (autoskip)

41.06 - Abrantes (autoskip)

41.08 - Tides of War (autoskip after time out)

41.10 - thatguy (autoskip)

41.11 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

41.15 - Bob Lee Swagger

41.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around - Get Better GB)

41.20 - Yankee23Fan - OTC until :03

42.01 - Yankee23Fan - On Deck

42.02 - Tirnan (autoskip)

42.03 - Genedoc - In The Hole

42.04 - DC Thunder

42.05 - Scott Norwood

42.06 - Bob Lee Swagger (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.07 - MisfitBlondes

42.08 - Uncle Humuna

42.09 - Team CIA (autoskip)

42.10 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.11 - Thatguy (autoskip)

42.12 - Big Rocks

42.13 - Tides of War

42.14 - BobbyLayne (autoskip if not around)

42.15 - Abrantes (autoskip)

42.16 - Doug B (autoskip)

42.17 - Timschochet

42.18 - Postradamus (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.19 - Rodg

42.20 - Krista

 

[Frostillicus]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

It represents man's inhumanity towards man.

It's like the black-and-white cookie. All about race relations.

 

[BobbyLayne]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Karl Malevich's art and his Suprematist manifesto are among the most vital artistic developments of this the 21st century. Most of his paintings are limited to geometric shapes and a narrow range of colors. The White series is the pinnacle of his Suprematism; he claimed to have reached the summit of abstract art by denying objective representation."The object itself is meaningless...the ideas of the conscious mind are worthless"

What he wanted was a non-objective representation, "the supremacy of pure feeling."

All of that sounds pretty convincing until you ask the simple question what it actually means.

Here's the problem with Malevich, Ernst, and Dali - their importance and influence is greater in terms of how they drove a movement - in Ernst's case, several movements, in Dali's case, the importance and promotion of his self. But I won't be judging the totality of their work - I will placing a ranking or value on the individual piece.

All three of these artists are easily identified as great, but what made them great may not necessarily work well for this particular draft. Malevich's work is so minimalist it evokes no feeling - or perhaps I am misinterpreting my own pure feeling. Ernst was a genius who invented one new method after another, but the actual work he produced is often garish. Dali was a gifted artist who wasted his talent on his own ego and self-importance - but there is no denying the power of his work. It is simultaneously distasteful, intense, and applicable to our world.

None of the three artists I mentioned are likely to score well in the rankings, yet that in no way diminishes their importance or greatness in the grand scheme of things. What it does speak to is the quality of other picks.

ETA: correction

 

[Genedoc]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Karl Malevich's art and his Suprematist manifesto are among the most vital artistic developments of this century. Most of his paintings are limited to geometric shapes and a narrow range of colors. The White series is the pinnacle of his Suprematism; he claimed to have reached the summit of abstract art by denying objective representation."The object itself is meaningless...the ideas of the conscious mind are worthless"

What he wanted was a non-objective representation, "the supremacy of pure feeling."

All of that sounds pretty convincing until you ask the simple question what it actually means.

Here's the problem with Malevich, Ernst, and Dali - their importance and influence is greater in terms of how they drove a movement - in Ernst's case, several movements, in Dali's case, the importance and promotion of his self. But I won't be judging the totality of their work - I will placing a ranking or value on the individual piece.

All three of these artists are easily identified as great, but what made them great may not necessarily work well for this particular draft. Malevich's work is so minimalist it evokes no feeling - or perhaps I am misinterpreting my own pure feeling. Ernst was a genius who invented one new method after another, but the actual work he produced is often garish. Dali was a gifted artist who wasted his talent on his own ego and self-importance - but there is no denying the power of his work. It is simultaneously distasteful, intense, and applicable to our world.

None of the three artists I mentioned are likely to score well in the rankings, yet that in no way diminishes their importance or greatness in the grand scheme of things. What it does speak to is the quality of other picks.

It's a black square. On a white page. A world class philosopher, marketer, self-promoter, business man...sure. But IMHO suggesting a black square on a white page it great art stretches the boundaries of what art actually is beyond it's breaking point. Staring at a blank wall and pontificating the meaning of life is cool and all, but it's not art to me. I realize others disagree, and I'm OK with that.

 

[rodg12]

My write-up for pick 41.01......

41.01 - A Dictionary of the English Language - Samuel Johnson - Non-fiction Book

Published on 15 April 1755 and written by Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language, sometimes published as Johnson's Dictionary, is among the most influential dictionaries in the history of the English language. It was viewed as the pre-eminent English dictionary for a full 150 years after its completion. The Dictionary "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who labored under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time."

Johnson's dictionary was neither the first English dictionary, nor among the first dozen. Over the previous 150 years more than twenty dictionaries had been published in England. However, it set itself apart for its predecessors. The problem with the other dictionaries was that they tended to be little more than poorly organized, poorly researched, glossaries of "hard words": words that were technical, foreign, obscure or antiquated. But perhaps the greatest single fault of these early lexicographers was, as one historian put it, that they "failed to give sufficient sense of [the English] language as it appeared in use." In that sense Dr. Johnson's dictionary was the first to comprehensively document the English lexicon. Johnson added notes on a word's usage rather than being merely descriptive. Its definitions were also more meticulous than anything before.

- The word "turn" had 16 definitions with 15 illustrations

- The word "time" had 20 definitions with 14 illustrations

- The word "put" ran more than 5,000 words spread over 3 pages

- The word "take" had 134 definitions, running 8,000 words, over 5 pages

Wiki

 

[rodg12]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Karl Malevich's art and his Suprematist manifesto are among the most vital artistic developments of this century. Most of his paintings are limited to geometric shapes and a narrow range of colors. The White series is the pinnacle of his Suprematism; he claimed to have reached the summit of abstract art by denying objective representation."The object itself is meaningless...the ideas of the conscious mind are worthless"

What he wanted was a non-objective representation, "the supremacy of pure feeling."

All of that sounds pretty convincing until you ask the simple question what it actually means.

Here's the problem with Malevich, Ernst, and Dali - their importance and influence is greater in terms of how they drove a movement - in Ernst's case, several movements, in Dali's case, the importance and promotion of his self. But I won't be judging the totality of their work - I will placing a ranking or value on the individual piece.

All three of these artists are easily identified as great, but what made them great may not necessarily work well for this particular draft. Malevich's work is so minimalist it evokes no feeling - or perhaps I am misinterpreting my own pure feeling. Ernst was a genius who invented one new method after another, but the actual work he produced is often garish. Dali was a gifted artist who wasted his talent on his own ego and self-importance - but there is no denying the power of his work. It is simultaneously distasteful, intense, and applicable to our world.

None of the three artists I mentioned are likely to score well in the rankings, yet that in no way diminishes their importance or greatness in the grand scheme of things. What it does speak to is the quality of other picks.

It's a black square. On a white page. A world class philosopher, marketer, self-promoter, business man...sure. But IMHO suggesting a black square on a white page it great art stretches the boundaries of what art actually is beyond it's breaking point. Staring at a blank wall and pontificating the meaning of life is cool and all, but it's not art to me. I realize others disagree, and I'm OK with that.

My feelings as well.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

My apologies if I pick anything that's already been selected. I missed 10 days and I checked the first page, so I think I'm OK. Bonzai did an awesome job playing to his strengths, and our team is better off/more balanced because of it. I asked him to focus on philosophy, non-fiction, and a couple of others, and I'd handle Inventions/Science when I returned.

That said, I'm going to play to my strengths and make a pick I knew I'd make when the draft started. I figured Mendel and Darwin would go early based on name recognition, followed closely by Watson/Crick. All important characters in the field of genetics, no doubt. However, IMHO Watson/Crick get way too much credit. Without them, the structure is discovered pretty imminently anyway. Everyone was looking for it, they simply won the race.

Our modern understanding of genetics, biology, inheritance, etc is a beautiful blending of Mendelian genetics with Darwinian evolution. The two dovetail amazingly. However, neither was aware of the other's work, and they only blend together so beautifully because they were both so, so right and so, so visionary in their science. Even considering how right they were, it took nearly half a century to even begin blending the two together. The link which seems so incredibly obvious now was not remotely obvious, which is why it eluded the best and the brightest for so long. It took the work of a true genius to bridge the gap between the two fields. He was a pioneer in the science of genetics and forms a holy trinity with Mendel and Darwin. He did most of the early work in Drosophila melanogaster, creating a model genetic system from scratch. He is responsible for the discoveries of sex-linked inheritance, epistasis, alleles, early genetic mapping - any one of which would have been enough to have defined a career. However, is largest contribution was discovering that genes were contained within chromosomes, a discovery for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1933, making him the first researcher to win the prize for work in the field of genetics (many more have followed). We take his work for granted now, but it was the critical bridge between Darwin and Mendel. He penned the seminal The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity, and absolutely nailed it. Looking back at the work of Darwin, Mendel, and Morgan, everything makes beautiful, elegant, brilliant sense. Remove any one of those essential pieces, and who knows what becomes of modern biology and genetics. With that write up, Bonzai and I are proud to add...

41.18 - Scientific Discovery - Thomas Hunt Morgan; Genes are Located on Chromosomes

This was my next pick.

 

[BobbyLayne]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Karl Malevich's art and his Suprematist manifesto are among the most vital artistic developments of the 20th century. Most of his paintings are limited to geometric shapes and a narrow range of colors. The White series is the pinnacle of his Suprematism; he claimed to have reached the summit of abstract art by denying objective representation."The object itself is meaningless...the ideas of the conscious mind are worthless"

What he wanted was a non-objective representation, "the supremacy of pure feeling."

All of that sounds pretty convincing until you ask the simple question what it actually means.

Here's the problem with Malevich, Ernst, and Dali - their importance and influence is greater in terms of how they drove a movement - in Ernst's case, several movements, in Dali's case, the importance and promotion of his self. But I won't be judging the totality of their work - I will placing a ranking or value on the individual piece.

All three of these artists are easily identified as great, but what made them great may not necessarily work well for this particular draft. Malevich's work is so minimalist it evokes no feeling - or perhaps I am misinterpreting my own pure feeling. Ernst was a genius who invented one new method after another, but the actual work he produced is often garish. Dali was a gifted artist who wasted his talent on his own ego and self-importance - but there is no denying the power of his work. It is simultaneously distasteful, intense, and applicable to our world.

None of the three artists I mentioned are likely to score well in the rankings, yet that in no way diminishes their importance or greatness in the grand scheme of things. What it does speak to is the quality of other picks.

It's a black square. On a white page. A world class philosopher, marketer, self-promoter, business man...sure. But IMHO suggesting a black square on a white page it great art stretches the boundaries of what art actually is beyond it's breaking point. Staring at a blank wall and pontificating the meaning of life is cool and all, but it's not art to me. I realize others disagree, and I'm OK with that.

And I'm OK with your opinion. Post-modernism as a cultural and intellectual phenomenon is often rejected as meaningless or disingenuous.Now a word to other drafters...my critique of the three 20th century artists above should not be interpreted as an inclination on my part to place a higher value on renaissance or rococo or romantic artists or any other period. I'm not trying to value one movement over another (although, as an aside, my biggest personal bias is against impressionists - and its been a struggle overcoming). Picasso and Pollock should score exceptionally well (in general...there are a couple favorites by each which are still out there). Magritte is from my least favorite movement, but I recognize a depth and subtlety to his work that is lacking in other surrealists. Monet is incredibly overrated, but there is no denying his popular rise in the last 30 years.

In other words, I am trying my best to give weight to the canon that has developed over time. If it were up to me, Michangelo's Sistine Chapel would rank around 15th or 20th. The guy was a master sculptor, and the figures in his paintings have pained, contorted positions and the blank non-descript laconic look we associate with marble. But I'll get beyond my personal bias and rank it in an appropriate placement.

Overall, the quality of painting draft picks has been outstanding. Its made my task difficult - but immensely enjoyable and worthwhile as an exercise in self-education.

 

[Genedoc]

My apologies if I pick anything that's already been selected. I missed 10 days and I checked the first page, so I think I'm OK. Bonzai did an awesome job playing to his strengths, and our team is better off/more balanced because of it. I asked him to focus on philosophy, non-fiction, and a couple of others, and I'd handle Inventions/Science when I returned.

That said, I'm going to play to my strengths and make a pick I knew I'd make when the draft started. I figured Mendel and Darwin would go early based on name recognition, followed closely by Watson/Crick. All important characters in the field of genetics, no doubt. However, IMHO Watson/Crick get way too much credit. Without them, the structure is discovered pretty imminently anyway. Everyone was looking for it, they simply won the race.

Our modern understanding of genetics, biology, inheritance, etc is a beautiful blending of Mendelian genetics with Darwinian evolution. The two dovetail amazingly. However, neither was aware of the other's work, and they only blend together so beautifully because they were both so, so right and so, so visionary in their science. Even considering how right they were, it took nearly half a century to even begin blending the two together. The link which seems so incredibly obvious now was not remotely obvious, which is why it eluded the best and the brightest for so long. It took the work of a true genius to bridge the gap between the two fields. He was a pioneer in the science of genetics and forms a holy trinity with Mendel and Darwin. He did most of the early work in Drosophila melanogaster, creating a model genetic system from scratch. He is responsible for the discoveries of sex-linked inheritance, epistasis, alleles, early genetic mapping - any one of which would have been enough to have defined a career. However, is largest contribution was discovering that genes were contained within chromosomes, a discovery for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1933, making him the first researcher to win the prize for work in the field of genetics (many more have followed). We take his work for granted now, but it was the critical bridge between Darwin and Mendel. He penned the seminal The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity, and absolutely nailed it. Looking back at the work of Darwin, Mendel, and Morgan, everything makes beautiful, elegant, brilliant sense. Remove any one of those essential pieces, and who knows what becomes of modern biology and genetics. With that write up, Bonzai and I are proud to add...

41.18 - Scientific Discovery - Thomas Hunt Morgan; Genes are Located on Chromosomes

This was my next pick.

I may have cried and quit if I'd have gotten this one sniped. I based my whole draft on being able to get exceptional late round value in fields I'm more versed in than others, and this was a centerpiece of that strategy. Should score right alongside Mendel and Darwin and well ahead of Watson/Crick.

 

[Doug B]

Make-up pick:

41.5 - Alien, Movie [4]

Alien is a 1979 science fiction/horror film directed by Ridley Scott and starring Tom Skerritt, Sigourney Weaver, Veronica Cartwright, Harry Dean Stanton, John Hurt, Ian Holm and Yaphet Kotto. The film's title refers to its primary antagonist: a highly aggressive extraterrestrial creature which stalks and kills the crew of a spaceship.

Alien garnered both critical acclaim and box office success, receiving an Academy Award for Visual Effects and Saturn Awards for Best Science Fiction Film, Best Direction for (Ridley) Scott, and Best Supporting Actress for (Veronica) Cartwright, and a Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation, along with numerous other award nominations. It has remained highly praised in subsequent decades, being inducted into the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress in 2002 for historical preservation as a film which is "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" ...

Reaction to the film was positive, even by critics who were not usually favorable towards science fiction such as Barry Norman of the BBC's Film series. It was a commercial success as well, making $78,900,000 in the United States and £7,886,000 in the United Kingdom during its first run. It ultimately grossed $80,931,801 in the United States and $24,000,000 internationally, bringing its total worldwide gross to $104,931,801.

Lasting critical praise

Alien has continued to receive critical praise over the years, particularly for its realism and unique environment ... Critical interest in the film was re-ignited in part by the theatrical release the "Director's Cut" in 2003. In his "Great Movies" column that year, critic Roger Ebert ranked it among "the most influential of modern action pictures", praising its pacing, atmosphere, and settings:

One of the great strengths of Alien is its pacing. It takes its time. It waits. It allows silences (the majestic opening shots are underscored by Jerry Goldsmith with scarcely audible, far-off metallic chatterings). It suggests the enormity of the crew's discovery by building up to it with small steps: The interception of a signal (is it a warning or an SOS?). The descent to the extraterrestrial surface. The #####ing by Brett and Parker, who are concerned only about collecting their shares. The masterstroke of the surface murk through which the crew members move, their helmet lights hardly penetrating the soup. The shadowy outline of the alien ship. The sight of the alien pilot, frozen in his command chair. The enormity of the discovery inside the ship ("It's full of ... leathery eggs ...").

(Film author David) McIntee praises Alien as "possibly the definitive combination of horror thriller with [science fiction] trappings." He notes, however, that it is a horror film first and a science fiction film second, since science fiction normally explores issues of how humanity will develop under other circumstances. Alien, on the other hand, focuses on the plight of people being attacked by a monster: "It's set on a spaceship in the future, but it's about people trying not to get eaten by a drooling monstrous animal. Worse, it's about them trying not to get raped by said drooling monstrous animal." ... (McIntee) describes it as a prototype for the slasher film genre: "The reason it's such a good movie, and wowed both the critics, who normally frown on the genre, and the casual cinema-goer, is that it is a distillation of everything that scares us in the movies." He also describes how the film appeals to a variety of audiences: "Fans of Hitchcockian thrillers like it because it's moody and dark. Gorehounds like it for the chest-burster. [science fiction] fans love the hard [science fiction] trappings and hardware. Men love the battle-for-survival element, and women love not being cast as the helpless victim."

Salon.com critic Andrew O'Hehir notes that Alien "has a profoundly existentialist undertow that makes it feel like a film noir" and praises it over its "increasingly baroque" sequels as "a film about human loneliness amid the emptiness and amorality of creation. It's a cynical '70s-leftist vision of the future in which none of the problems plaguing 20th century Earth—class divisions, capitalist exploitation, the subjugation of humanity to technology—have been improved in the slightest by mankind's forays into outer space."

In 2002, Alien was deemed "culturally, historically or aesthetically significant" by the National Film Preservation Board of the United States, and was inducted into the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress for historical preservation ... In 2008 the American Film Institute ranked Alien as (one of the top ten all time) in the science fiction genre as part of AFI's 10 TOP 10, a CBS television special ranking the ten greatest movies in ten classic American film genres. The ranks were based on a poll of over 1,500 film artists, critics, and historians ...

 

[Doug B]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Well, since my first pick of two got sniped I'll post the other one for now.

Going novel here. Very happy with the value I'm getting in this one as it was one of the targets at the beginning. It's one of the best works of an American master. Like so many of his stories, the evil that we learn of and follow is so perfectly described and so magically unfolds in the pages that we get caught up in the romance of it all. In each dispicable act we see so much more then pain. His ability to make the written horror physically make the reader shudder as they turn the pages is simply amazing. I will admit that this isn't my personal favorite work of his, but it's close. And it's one of his stories that I can almost remember every single scene and important moment like it was a movie. A good movie. Not the made for TV crapfest that they tried to portray as entertainment.

I select, The Stand by Stephen King

 

[timschochet]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

Yeah, I want to comment on this, too. I think we must accept this choice, but it's really stretching our definitions beyond the breaking point. The other wildcards chosen like Apollo 11, 13, D-Day, even the Underground Railroad have in common that they are great human achievements which did not fit into other categories, and are therefore worthy of wildcard and of this draft. The Jackie Robinson thing is less an achievement and more a decision- one of the great decisions in American history, of course. But not an achievement in the way that a massive logistical invasion of Western Europe would be. I don't know if I'm explaining this exactly right. I hope I am. As a great a decision it was to accept Jackie Robinson into baseball, don't expect it to be ranked equally to great achievements. Hope that makes sense.

 

[BobbyLayne]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

Wat?I'm not part of your reindeer games.

Just over here making slide shows for my judging writeups.

Stop bothering me.

As I told Abrantes, apathy is the only way I get through another 19 rounds.

 

[timschochet]

Well, since my first pick of two got sniped I'll post the other one for now.

Going novel here. Very happy with the value I'm getting in this one as it was one of the targets at the beginning. It's one of the best works of an American master. Like so many of his stories, the evil that we learn of and follow is so perfectly described and so magically unfolds in the pages that we get caught up in the romance of it all. In each dispicable act we see so much more then pain. His ability to make the written horror physically make the reader shudder as they turn the pages is simply amazing. I will admit that this isn't my personal favorite work of his, but it's close. And it's one of his stories that I can almost remember every single scene and important moment like it was a movie. A good movie. Not the made for TV crapfest that they tried to portray as entertainment.

I select, The Stand by Stephen King

Excellent book, not quite his best, IMO.

 

[Doug B]

As I told Abrantes, apathy is the only way I get through another 19 rounds.

 

[BobbyLayne]

The slippery slope factor was why I was objecting earlier.

At this point, let's see how deep the rabbit hole goes...

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I'm going to grab one of the cooler scientific discoveries I have learned about. And I owe this one to my 5 year old son.

This discovery fundamentally altered our understanding of our solar system, and has further along the various theories of planet formation and the accompayning sciences. I'm going to take the liberty and paste the wiki article below because it pretty hits every point I would in a write up.

I select The discovery of the Dwarf Planet Eris by the team led by Michael Brown. A discovery that made the international astronomy community define "planet" for the first time, and declassified Pluto from a planet to a dwarf planet.

Eris is the largest known dwarf planet in the Solar System and the ninth-largest body known to orbit the Sun directly. It is approximately 2,500 kilometres in diameter and 27% more massive than Pluto.[9][12]

Eris was first spotted in January 2005 by a Palomar Observatory-based team led by Mike Brown, and its identity verified later that year. It is a trans-Neptunian object (TNO) native to a region of space beyond the Kuiper belt known as the scattered disc. Eris has one moon, Dysnomia; recent observations have found no evidence of further satellites. The current distance from the Sun is 96.7 AU,[10] roughly three times that of Pluto. With the exception of some comets the pair are the most distant known natural objects in the Solar System.[2]

Because Eris is larger than Pluto, its discoverers and NASA called it the Solar System’s tenth planet. This, along with the prospect of other similarly sized objects being discovered in the future, motivated the International Astronomical Union (IAU) to define the term planet for the first time. Under a then-new IAU definition approved on August 24, 2006, Eris is a "dwarf planet" along with Pluto, Ceres, Haumea and Makemake.[

Eris was discovered by the team of Mike Brown, Chad Trujillo, and David Rabinowitz[2] on January 5, 2005, from images taken on October 21, 2003. The discovery was announced on July 29, 2005, the same day as Makemake and two days after Haumea.[14] The search team had been systematically scanning for large outer solar system bodies for several years, and had been involved in the discovery of several other large TNOs, including 50000 Quaoar, 90482 Orcus, and 90377 Sedna.

Routine observations were taken by the team on October 21, 2003, using the 1200 mm Samuel Oschin reflecting telescope at Mount Palomar Observatory, California, but the image of Eris was not discovered at that point due to its very slow motion across the sky: The team's automatic image-searching software excluded all objects moving at less than 1.5 arcseconds per hour to reduce the number of false positives returned. When Sedna was discovered, it was moving at 1.75 arcsec/h, and in light of that the team reanalyzed their old data with a lower limit on the angular motion, sorting through the previously excluded images by eye. In January 2005, the re-analysis revealed Eris' slow motion against the background stars.

More observations released in October 2005 revealed that Eris had a moon, later named Dysnomia. Observations of Dysnomia's orbit permitted scientists to determine the mass of Eris, which in June 2007 they calculated to be (1.66 ± 0.02) × 1022 kg, 27% greater than Pluto.

Eris is classified as a dwarf planet and trans-Neptunian object (TNO); the intersection of these categorizations makes it a "plutoid"[15]. Eris' orbital characteristics can be used to more specifically categorize it a scattered disk object (SDO), or a TNO that is believed to have been "scattered" from the Kuiper belt into more distant and unusual orbits following gravitational interactions with Neptune as the Solar System was forming. Although its high orbital inclination is unusual among the known SDOs, theoretical models suggest that objects that were originally near the inner edge of the Kuiper belt were scattered into orbits with higher inclinations than objects from the outer belt.[16] Inner-belt objects are expected to be generally more massive than outer-belt objects, and so astronomers expect to discover more large objects like Eris in high-inclination orbits, which have traditionally been neglected.

As Eris is larger than Pluto, it was initially described as the "tenth planet" by NASA and in media reports of its discovery.[17] In response to the uncertainty over its status, and because of ongoing debate over whether Pluto should be classified as a planet, the IAU delegated a group of astronomers to develop a sufficiently precise definition of the term planet to decide the issue. This was announced as the IAU's Definition of a Planet in the Solar System, adopted on August 24, 2006. At this time both Eris and Pluto were classified as dwarf planets, a category distinct from the new definition of planet.[18] Brown has since stated his approval of the "dwarf planet" label.[19] The IAU subsequently added Eris to its Minor Planet Catalogue, designating it (136199) Eris.

Eris is named after the goddess Eris (Greek Έρις), a personification of strife and discord.[21] The name was assigned on September 13, 2006 following an unusually long period in which it was known by the provisional designation 2003 UB313, which was granted automatically by the IAU under their naming protocols for minor planets. The regular adjectival form of Eris is Eridian.

Xena

Due to uncertainty over whether the object would be classified as a planet or a minor planet, as different nomenclature procedures apply to these different classes of object,[22] the decision on what to name the object had to wait until after the August 24, 2006 IAU ruling.[23] As a result, for a time the object became known to the wider public as Xena.

"Xena" was an informal name used internally by the discovery team. It was inspired by the eponymous heroine of the television series Xena: Warrior Princess. The discovery team had reportedly saved the nickname "Xena" for the first body they discovered that was larger than Pluto. According to Brown,

We chose it since it started with an X (planet "X"), it sounds mythological (OK, so it’s TV mythology, but Pluto is named after a cartoon, right?), and (this part is actually true) we've been working to get more female deities out there (i.e. Sedna). Also at the time the TV show was still on TV, which shows you how long we've been searching![24]

"We assumed [that] a real name would come out fairly quickly, [but] the process got stalled," Mike Brown said in interview,

One reporter called me up from the New York Times who happened to have been a friend of mine from college, [and] I was a little less guarded with him than I am with the normal press. He asked me, "What's the name you guys proposed?" and I said, "Well, I'm not going to tell." And he said, "Well, what do you guys call it when you're just talking amongst yourselves?"... As far as I remember this was the only time I told anybody this in the press, and then it got everywhere, which I only sorta felt bad about — I kinda like the name.[25]

Choosing an official name

Brown initially wanted to call the object "Lila" after a concept in Hindu mythology that described the cosmos as the outcome of a game played by Brahma. The name was very similar to "Lilah", the name of his newborn daughter. Brown was mindful of making his name public before it had been officially accepted; he had done so with Sedna a year previously, and had been heavily criticised. However, he listed the URL path of his personal web page announcing the discovery as /~mbrown/planetlila and, in the chaos following the controversy over the discovery of Haumea, forgot to change it. Rather than needlessly anger more of his fellow astronomers, he simply said that the webpage had been named for his daughter and dropped "Lila" from consideration.[26]

Brown had also speculated that Persephone, the wife of the god Pluto, would be a good name for the object.[2] The name had been used several times in science fiction,[27] and was popular with the public, having handily won a poll conducted by NewScientist magazine ("Xena", despite only being a nickname, came fourth).[28] However, this was not possible once the object was classified as a dwarf planet, because there is already an asteroid with that name, 399 Persephone.[2] Because IAU regulations require a name from creation mythology for objects with orbital stability beyond Neptune’s orbit, the team had also been considering such possibilities. [29]

With the dispute resolved, the discovery team proposed Eris on September 6, 2006. On September 13, 2006 it was accepted as the official name by the IAU.[29][30] Brown decided that, as the object had been considered a planet for so long, it deserved a name from Greco-Roman mythology, like the other planets. However, the asteroids had taken the vast majority of Graeco-Roman names. Eris, whom Brown described as his favorite goddess, had fortunately escaped inclusion.[25] The name in part reflects the discord in the astronomical community caused by the debate over the object’s (and Pluto’s) nature, while the name of its moon, Dysnomia ("lawlessness"), retains an oblique reference to the dwarf planet’s old informal name Xena, portrayed on TV by Lucy Lawless.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I select The discovery of the Dwarf Planet Eris by the team led by Michael Brown. A discovery that made the international astronomy community define "planet" for the first time, and declassified Pluto from a planet to a dwarf planet.

Very cool.

About time they put that Pluto fraud to bed, anyway.

 

[DCThunder]

I'm going to grab one of the cooler scientific discoveries I have learned about. And I owe this one to my 5 year old son.

This discovery fundamentally altered our understanding of our solar system, and has further along the various theories of planet formation and the accompayning sciences. I'm going to take the liberty and paste the wiki article below because it pretty hits every point I would in a write up.

I select The discovery of the Dwarf Planet Eris by the team led by Michael Brown. A discovery that made the international astronomy community define "planet" for the first time, and declassified Pluto from a planet to a dwarf planet.

Eris is the largest known dwarf planet in the Solar System and the ninth-largest body known to orbit the Sun directly. It is approximately 2,500 kilometres in diameter and 27% more massive than Pluto.[9][12]

Eris was first spotted in January 2005 by a Palomar Observatory-based team led by Mike Brown, and its identity verified later that year. It is a trans-Neptunian object (TNO) native to a region of space beyond the Kuiper belt known as the scattered disc. Eris has one moon, Dysnomia; recent observations have found no evidence of further satellites. The current distance from the Sun is 96.7 AU,[10] roughly three times that of Pluto. With the exception of some comets the pair are the most distant known natural objects in the Solar System.[2]

Because Eris is larger than Pluto, its discoverers and NASA called it the Solar System’s tenth planet. This, along with the prospect of other similarly sized objects being discovered in the future, motivated the International Astronomical Union (IAU) to define the term planet for the first time. Under a then-new IAU definition approved on August 24, 2006, Eris is a "dwarf planet" along with Pluto, Ceres, Haumea and Makemake.[

Eris was discovered by the team of Mike Brown, Chad Trujillo, and David Rabinowitz[2] on January 5, 2005, from images taken on October 21, 2003. The discovery was announced on July 29, 2005, the same day as Makemake and two days after Haumea.[14] The search team had been systematically scanning for large outer solar system bodies for several years, and had been involved in the discovery of several other large TNOs, including 50000 Quaoar, 90482 Orcus, and 90377 Sedna.

Routine observations were taken by the team on October 21, 2003, using the 1200 mm Samuel Oschin reflecting telescope at Mount Palomar Observatory, California, but the image of Eris was not discovered at that point due to its very slow motion across the sky: The team's automatic image-searching software excluded all objects moving at less than 1.5 arcseconds per hour to reduce the number of false positives returned. When Sedna was discovered, it was moving at 1.75 arcsec/h, and in light of that the team reanalyzed their old data with a lower limit on the angular motion, sorting through the previously excluded images by eye. In January 2005, the re-analysis revealed Eris' slow motion against the background stars.

More observations released in October 2005 revealed that Eris had a moon, later named Dysnomia. Observations of Dysnomia's orbit permitted scientists to determine the mass of Eris, which in June 2007 they calculated to be (1.66 ± 0.02) × 1022 kg, 27% greater than Pluto.

Eris is classified as a dwarf planet and trans-Neptunian object (TNO); the intersection of these categorizations makes it a "plutoid"[15]. Eris' orbital characteristics can be used to more specifically categorize it a scattered disk object (SDO), or a TNO that is believed to have been "scattered" from the Kuiper belt into more distant and unusual orbits following gravitational interactions with Neptune as the Solar System was forming. Although its high orbital inclination is unusual among the known SDOs, theoretical models suggest that objects that were originally near the inner edge of the Kuiper belt were scattered into orbits with higher inclinations than objects from the outer belt.[16] Inner-belt objects are expected to be generally more massive than outer-belt objects, and so astronomers expect to discover more large objects like Eris in high-inclination orbits, which have traditionally been neglected.

As Eris is larger than Pluto, it was initially described as the "tenth planet" by NASA and in media reports of its discovery.[17] In response to the uncertainty over its status, and because of ongoing debate over whether Pluto should be classified as a planet, the IAU delegated a group of astronomers to develop a sufficiently precise definition of the term planet to decide the issue. This was announced as the IAU's Definition of a Planet in the Solar System, adopted on August 24, 2006. At this time both Eris and Pluto were classified as dwarf planets, a category distinct from the new definition of planet.[18] Brown has since stated his approval of the "dwarf planet" label.[19] The IAU subsequently added Eris to its Minor Planet Catalogue, designating it (136199) Eris.

Eris is named after the goddess Eris (Greek Έρις), a personification of strife and discord.[21] The name was assigned on September 13, 2006 following an unusually long period in which it was known by the provisional designation 2003 UB313, which was granted automatically by the IAU under their naming protocols for minor planets. The regular adjectival form of Eris is Eridian.

Xena

Due to uncertainty over whether the object would be classified as a planet or a minor planet, as different nomenclature procedures apply to these different classes of object,[22] the decision on what to name the object had to wait until after the August 24, 2006 IAU ruling.[23] As a result, for a time the object became known to the wider public as Xena.

"Xena" was an informal name used internally by the discovery team. It was inspired by the eponymous heroine of the television series Xena: Warrior Princess. The discovery team had reportedly saved the nickname "Xena" for the first body they discovered that was larger than Pluto. According to Brown,

We chose it since it started with an X (planet "X"), it sounds mythological (OK, so it’s TV mythology, but Pluto is named after a cartoon, right?), and (this part is actually true) we've been working to get more female deities out there (i.e. Sedna). Also at the time the TV show was still on TV, which shows you how long we've been searching![24]

"We assumed [that] a real name would come out fairly quickly, [but] the process got stalled," Mike Brown said in interview,

One reporter called me up from the New York Times who happened to have been a friend of mine from college, [and] I was a little less guarded with him than I am with the normal press. He asked me, "What's the name you guys proposed?" and I said, "Well, I'm not going to tell." And he said, "Well, what do you guys call it when you're just talking amongst yourselves?"... As far as I remember this was the only time I told anybody this in the press, and then it got everywhere, which I only sorta felt bad about — I kinda like the name.[25]

Choosing an official name

Brown initially wanted to call the object "Lila" after a concept in Hindu mythology that described the cosmos as the outcome of a game played by Brahma. The name was very similar to "Lilah", the name of his newborn daughter. Brown was mindful of making his name public before it had been officially accepted; he had done so with Sedna a year previously, and had been heavily criticised. However, he listed the URL path of his personal web page announcing the discovery as /~mbrown/planetlila and, in the chaos following the controversy over the discovery of Haumea, forgot to change it. Rather than needlessly anger more of his fellow astronomers, he simply said that the webpage had been named for his daughter and dropped "Lila" from consideration.[26]

Brown had also speculated that Persephone, the wife of the god Pluto, would be a good name for the object.[2] The name had been used several times in science fiction,[27] and was popular with the public, having handily won a poll conducted by NewScientist magazine ("Xena", despite only being a nickname, came fourth).[28] However, this was not possible once the object was classified as a dwarf planet, because there is already an asteroid with that name, 399 Persephone.[2] Because IAU regulations require a name from creation mythology for objects with orbital stability beyond Neptune’s orbit, the team had also been considering such possibilities. [29]

With the dispute resolved, the discovery team proposed Eris on September 6, 2006. On September 13, 2006 it was accepted as the official name by the IAU.[29][30] Brown decided that, as the object had been considered a planet for so long, it deserved a name from Greco-Roman mythology, like the other planets. However, the asteroids had taken the vast majority of Graeco-Roman names. Eris, whom Brown described as his favorite goddess, had fortunately escaped inclusion.[25] The name in part reflects the discord in the astronomical community caused by the debate over the object’s (and Pluto’s) nature, while the name of its moon, Dysnomia ("lawlessness"), retains an oblique reference to the dwarf planet’s old informal name Xena, portrayed on TV by Lucy Lawless.

If the 9th planet is named Pluto after Mickey Mouse's dog, shouldn't the Dwarf Planet be name Sneezy or Dopey or Sleepey or Horny after Snow White's 7 Dwarfs?

 

[rodg12]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

Yeah, I want to comment on this, too. I think we must accept this choice, but it's really stretching our definitions beyond the breaking point. The other wildcards chosen like Apollo 11, 13, D-Day, even the Underground Railroad have in common that they are great human achievements which did not fit into other categories, and are therefore worthy of wildcard and of this draft. The Jackie Robinson thing is less an achievement and more a decision- one of the great decisions in American history, of course. But not an achievement in the way that a massive logistical invasion of Western Europe would be. I don't know if I'm explaining this exactly right. I hope I am. As a great a decision it was to accept Jackie Robinson into baseball, don't expect it to be ranked equally to great achievements. Hope that makes sense.

You're really downplaying the importance of this and all that went into it, IMO. Calling it simply a 'decision' and not an accomplishment is an insult to Jackie Robinson and his legacy.

 

[Doug B]

You're really downplaying the importance of this and all that went into it, IMO. Calling it simply a 'decision' and not an accomplishment is an insult to Jackie Robinson and his legacy.

Well ... the decision was an accomplishment, yes. And a historically important one, to boot.But I see where BL was coming from Saturday. Actually, I saw where he was coming from at the time, too, and was prepared to re-pick

 

[Yankee23Fan]

The dwarf planet phenomenon is really cool if you are into astronomy at all. With the discovery of Eris and the resulting understanding of the Kuiper Belt and KBO's ( Kuiper Belt objects) our understanding of our own neighborhood was radically altered. Now there is the Oort Cloud in the distance making up the final outer rim of our solar system and is believed to be the birth place of comets.

Then they had to go back, finally come to the conclusion that Pluto wasn't a planet and move from there. Poor Pluto. First it was planet X and believed to be greater in mass then Uranus. When discovered everyone missed it at first and then didn't believe it thinking instead it was a comet because it was too small. They finally make it the 9th planet and then come to realize that it has a "moon" in Charon that could be considered a double planet with Pluto given the orbital path they take. So Pluto has been the source of much research over the decades.

But now with dwarf planets - many having their own moons - everything changed. They even needed to make Ceris, the largest asteroid object in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, a dwarf planet as well because it fit the definition now credited to define a planet. We also have Sedna, Quaor and a bunch of others now. Planets we've never seen, including Pluto. Simply amazing.

 

[timschochet]

You're really downplaying the importance of this and all that went into it, IMO. Calling it simply a 'decision' and not an accomplishment is an insult to Jackie Robinson and his legacy.

See, this is why I was afraid of even writing that, because I didn't want to be misunderstood, and apparently I have been. Yes it was a great accomplishment which should not have been necessary in the first place. Jackie Robinson is a true hero, and he had to go through a terrible amount of pressure, as did Rickey for making the decision. But when we discuss "Great works" we're talking about a person or persons getting together and creating something or helping to create something substantial. The rescue of Apollo 13 involved scientific ingenuity and planning. The invasion of D-Day involved incredible logistical planning to pull it off. The Underground Railroad was a planned, organized effort to break the law which required great human skill. All of these are, in my mind, legitimate "works" (though the Underground Railroad is right on the border of that definition.)The Jackie Robinson story goes off the border, IMO, into something else entirely. It is an incredibly important incident in our history and possibly world history as well, but I don't believe that calling it a "work" is an accurate decision.Before BobbyLayne gets in a richly deserved "I told you so", let me say that I don't regret stretching the boundaries here because I think it was important to get some of these picks in the Wildcard that have been taken, and a few upcoming that should be taken. It was, IMO, the correct decision. But that doesn't mean we can't take a look at this particular pick and state that it is an example of what BL was warning us about.

 

[krista4]

As I told Abrantes, apathy is the only way I get through another 19 rounds.

 

[Chiwawa]

But when we discuss "Great works" we're talking about a person or persons getting together and creating something or helping to create something substantial. The rescue of Apollo 13 involved scientific ingenuity and planning. The invasion of D-Day involved incredible logistical planning to pull it off. The Underground Railroad was a planned, organized effort to break the law which required great human skill. All of these are, in my mind, legitimate "works" (though the Underground Railroad is right on the border of that definition.)

Already planning not to score it as highly as deserves I suppose?

 

[Genedoc]

Gotta run shortly, so this write up will be more brief than previously (pause for applause).

We all know germs killed people for centuries before we figured out how to slow them down. The discovery/invention categories is littered with things that reflect this reality. Discovery of Antibiotics, Germ Theory, etc. However, one similarly important invention has saved the lives of millions. You all know the name and you've all used products descended from his inventions, probably today. While Ehrlich's discovery of antibiotic drugs was a life saver for millions, it was another man who invented the topical antiseptic and popularized it's use in surgery, also saving the lives of millions.

42.03 - Joseph Lister - Topical Antiseptic/Antiseptic Surgical Techniques - Invention

 

[timschochet]

But when we discuss "Great works" we're talking about a person or persons getting together and creating something or helping to create something substantial. The rescue of Apollo 13 involved scientific ingenuity and planning. The invasion of D-Day involved incredible logistical planning to pull it off. The Underground Railroad was a planned, organized effort to break the law which required great human skill. All of these are, in my mind, legitimate "works" (though the Underground Railroad is right on the border of that definition.)

Already planning not to score it as highly as deserves I suppose?

Of course not. I will score it EXACTLY as highly as it deserves.

 

[rodg12]

Skipped

39.10 - Thatguy

39.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.02 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.11 - Thatguy (autoskip)

41.06 - Abrantes (autoskip)

41.08 - Tides of War (autoskip after time out)

41.10 - thatguy (autoskip)

41.11 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

41.15 - Bob Lee Swagger

41.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around - Get Better GB)

42.02 - Tirnan (autoskip)

42.04 - DC Thunder - OTC until :04

42.05 - Scott Norwood

42.06 - Bob Lee Swagger (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.07 - MisfitBlondes

42.08 - Uncle Humuna

42.09 - Team CIA (autoskip)

42.10 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.11 - Thatguy (autoskip)

42.12 - Big Rocks

42.13 - Tides of War

42.14 - BobbyLayne (autoskip if not around)

42.15 - Abrantes (autoskip)

42.16 - Doug B (autoskip)

42.17 - Timschochet

42.18 - Postradamus (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.19 - Rodg

42.20 - Krista

 

[DCThunder]

42.04--Laputa: Castle in the Sky (天空の城ラピュタ, Tenkū no Shiro Rapyuta)-Movie

I'm not usually an anime or manga fanboy. Cartoons of little girls with big eyes and big boobs in sailor suits seem sort of silly and VERY Japanese. But one night I caught a few minutes of Laputa: Castle in the Sky on AMC and was fascinated by it. So much so that I had to get down to Blockbuster and rent the DVD. I took it on a trip to Istanbul with me and watched the movie at night before going to bed on my laptop. And this is simply a wonderful movie. Produced and released in Japan in 1986, the rights were purchased by Disney and it was dubbed into English with voices by such people as Cloris Leachman, Anna Paquin, James Van Der Beek and Mark Hamil.

Filled with fantastic airships (blimps and dirigibles and "flaptors") and floating cities held a loft by magic crystals, it tells a sweet story of loss and love and redemption. But it also includes fearsome robots with death rays and hairbreadth escapes of the heros and heroine. In fact, the main character is a young girl who finds herself in posession of a magic crystal that controls untold power.

This is an animated movie, but it is unlike anything else from Disney. Not Pixar or Dreamworks or anything else, or true Jamanese anime. But it's a movie that will enchant anyone who sees it.

 

[krista4]

42.04--Laputa: Castle in the Sky (天空の城ラピュタ, Tenkū no Shiro Rapyuta)-Movie

I'm not usually an anime or manga fanboy. Cartoons of little girls with big eyes and big boobs in sailor suits seem sort of silly and VERY Japanese. But one night I caught a few minutes of Laputa: Castle in the Sky on AMC and was fascinated by it. So much so that I had to get down to Blockbuster and rent the DVD. I took it on a trip to Istanbul with me and watched the movie at night before going to bed on my laptop. And this is simply a wonderful movie. Produced and released in Japan in 1986, the rights were purchased by Disney and it was dubbed into English with voices by such people as Cloris Leachman, Anna Paquin, James Van Der Beek and Mark Hamil.

Filled with fantastic airships (blimps and dirigibles and "flaptors") and floating cities held a loft by magic crystals, it tells a sweet story of loss and love and redemption. But it also includes fearsome robots with death rays and hairbreadth escapes of the heros and heroine. In fact, the main character is a young girl who finds herself in posession of a magic crystal that controls untold power.

This is an animated movie, but it is unlike anything else from Disney. Not Pixar or Dreamworks or anything else, or true Jamanese anime. But it's a movie that will enchant anyone who sees it.

Well, this brings up a question...when you draft a movie such as this, which had two dubbed versions, do you have to choose one or do you get both? I guess I'd say you get all versions of the movie (including the original in Japanese), though I think there's a substantial difference in quality between the two English-dubbed ones. I can't imagine anyone would take another version anyway, so I'll judge based on the quality of both. Does this make sense?I like this movie a lot, but in my opinion there were a couple of other better anime movies that I'd prefer.

 

[DCThunder]

42.04--Laputa: Castle in the Sky (天空の城ラピュタ, Tenkū no Shiro Rapyuta)-Movie

I'm not usually an anime or manga fanboy. Cartoons of little girls with big eyes and big boobs in sailor suits seem sort of silly and VERY Japanese. But one night I caught a few minutes of Laputa: Castle in the Sky on AMC and was fascinated by it. So much so that I had to get down to Blockbuster and rent the DVD. I took it on a trip to Istanbul with me and watched the movie at night before going to bed on my laptop. And this is simply a wonderful movie. Produced and released in Japan in 1986, the rights were purchased by Disney and it was dubbed into English with voices by such people as Cloris Leachman, Anna Paquin, James Van Der Beek and Mark Hamil.

Filled with fantastic airships (blimps and dirigibles and "flaptors") and floating cities held a loft by magic crystals, it tells a sweet story of loss and love and redemption. But it also includes fearsome robots with death rays and hairbreadth escapes of the heros and heroine. In fact, the main character is a young girl who finds herself in posession of a magic crystal that controls untold power.

This is an animated movie, but it is unlike anything else from Disney. Not Pixar or Dreamworks or anything else, or true Jamanese anime. But it's a movie that will enchant anyone who sees it.

Well, this brings up a question...when you draft a movie such as this, which had two dubbed versions, do you have to choose one or do you get both? I guess I'd say you get all versions of the movie (including the original in Japanese), though I think there's a substantial difference in quality between the two English-dubbed ones. I can't imagine anyone would take another version anyway, so I'll judge based on the quality of both. Does this make sense?I like this movie a lot, but in my opinion there were a couple of other better anime movies that I'd prefer.

As I said, I'm not a big anime fan. But I think this movie is the most accessible of the ones I've seen or seen parts of, in that it doesn't require a whole lot of backstory to understand why the characters are doing what they are doing. You don't have to watch an entire series of movies to get the particular one you are watching, if you understand my meaning. As I said, I simply really liked this movie, regardless of where it ranks.

 

[Fennis]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

Yeah, I want to comment on this, too. I think we must accept this choice, but it's really stretching our definitions beyond the breaking point. The other wildcards chosen like Apollo 11, 13, D-Day, even the Underground Railroad have in common that they are great human achievements which did not fit into other categories, and are therefore worthy of wildcard and of this draft. The Jackie Robinson thing is less an achievement and more a decision- one of the great decisions in American history, of course. But not an achievement in the way that a massive logistical invasion of Western Europe would be. I don't know if I'm explaining this exactly right. I hope I am. As a great a decision it was to accept Jackie Robinson into baseball, don't expect it to be ranked equally to great achievements. Hope that makes sense.

You're really downplaying the importance of this and all that went into it, IMO. Calling it simply a 'decision' and not an accomplishment is an insult to Jackie Robinson and his legacy.

You could alwats trade Jackie in for a Tinker-Evers-Chance double play.

 

[anborn]

Team Norwood/Anborn select....

42.05 - The Who's Tommy (Townshend and McAnuff, 1992) - Play

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Who's_Tommy

You want a rock opera... I've got your rock opera.

 

[Bob Lee Swagger]

Makeup pick from last round...

41.15 - Top Gear (2002-Present Incarnation) - TV Show

Seriously, if you haven't seen this show yet, watch it. It's the best thing on TV now that Battlestar Galactica is done.

Top Gear is a BAFTA, multi-NTA and International Emmy Award-winning BBC television series about motor vehicles, primarily cars. It began in 1977 as a conventional motoring magazine show. Over time, and especially since a relaunch in 2002, it has developed a quirky, humorous style. The show is currently presented by Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond, James May and The Stig, an anonymous test driver. The programme is estimated to have 350 million viewers worldwide.[1]

First run episodes are broadcast in the United Kingdom on BBC Two. Top Gear is also shown on Dave, BBC America, Special Broadcasting Service in Australia, and a number of other television channels around the world. The popularity of the show has led to the creation of three international versions, with local production teams and presenters, for Australia, the United States and Russia. Episodes of the Australian version premiered on 29 September 2008, while NBC is holding the American version for broadcast in February or March 2009, as a possible mid-season replacement.[2][3]

The show has received acclaim for its visual style and presentation, as well as considerable criticism for its content and comments made by presenters. Columnist A. A. Gill described the show as "a triumph of the craft of programme-making, of the minute, obsessive, musical masonry of editing, the french polishing of colourwashing and grading".[4] Pressure groups such as the Environmental Investigation Agency have accused the BBC of allowing the Top Gear team to cause damage to environmentally sensitive areas, such as the Makgadikgadi salt pan in Botswana.[5]

42.06 - The Pantheon, Rome - Building/Structure

The Pantheon (pronounced /pænˈθiː.ən/ or /ˈpænθi.ən/,[1] Latin: Pantheon,[nb 1] from Greek: Πάνθεον, meaning "Every god") is a building in Rome, originally built by Marcus Agrippa as a temple to all the gods of Ancient Rome, and rebuilt circa 126 AD during Hadrian's reign. The intended degree of inclusiveness of this dedication is debated. The generic term pantheon is now applied to a monument in which illustrious dead are buried. It is one of the best preserved of all Roman buildings. It has been in continuous use throughout its history. The design of the extant building is sometimes credited to Trajan's architect Apollodorus of Damascus, but it is equally likely that the building and the design should be credited to Emperor Hadrian's architects, though not to Hadrian himself as many art scholars once thought.[2] Since the 7th century, the Pantheon has been used as a Roman Catholic church dedicated to "St. Mary and the Martyrs". The Pantheon is the oldest large-scale dome in Rome. The height to the oculus and the diameter of the interior circle are the same, 43.3 metres (142 ft).[3]

Front EntranceSide View

The Dome

Some Interior

More Interior

 

[rodg12]

Gotta run to a meeting. Site/spreadsheet should be up-to-date to this point.

Skipped

39.10 - Thatguy

39.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.02 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around)

40.11 - Thatguy (autoskip)

41.06 - Abrantes (autoskip)

41.08 - Tides of War (autoskip after time out)

41.10 - thatguy (autoskip)

41.11 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

41.19 - Tirnan (autoskip if not around - Get Better GB)

42.02 - Tirnan (autoskip)

42.07 - MisfitBlondes - OTC until :52

42.08 - Uncle Humuna - On Deck

42.09 - Team CIA (autoskip)

42.10 - El Floppo (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.11 - Thatguy (autoskip)

42.12 - Big Rocks

42.13 - Tides of War

42.14 - BobbyLayne (autoskip if not around)

42.15 - Abrantes (autoskip)

42.16 - Doug B (autoskip)

42.17 - Timschochet

42.18 - Postradamus (autoskip if not here in first 15)

42.19 - Rodg

42.20 - Krista

 

[Mister CIA]

You're really downplaying the importance of this and all that went into it, IMO. Calling it simply a 'decision' and not an accomplishment is an insult to Jackie Robinson and his legacy.

See, this is why I was afraid of even writing that, because I didn't want to be misunderstood, and apparently I have been. Yes it was a great accomplishment which should not have been necessary in the first place. Jackie Robinson is a true hero, and he had to go through a terrible amount of pressure, as did Rickey for making the decision. But when we discuss "Great works" we're talking about a person or persons getting together and creating something or helping to create something substantial. The rescue of Apollo 13 involved scientific ingenuity and planning. The invasion of D-Day involved incredible logistical planning to pull it off. The Underground Railroad was a planned, organized effort to break the law which required great human skill. All of these are, in my mind, legitimate "works" (though the Underground Railroad is right on the border of that definition.)The Jackie Robinson story goes off the border, IMO, into something else entirely. It is an incredibly important incident in our history and possibly world history as well, but I don't believe that calling it a "work" is an accurate decision.Before BobbyLayne gets in a richly deserved "I told you so", let me say that I don't regret stretching the boundaries here because I think it was important to get some of these picks in the Wildcard that have been taken, and a few upcoming that should be taken. It was, IMO, the correct decision. But that doesn't mean we can't take a look at this particular pick and state that it is an example of what BL was warning us about.

Generally speaking, I view the greatness of a work as proportional to the degree of difficulty required for me to perform the same. Of course this rule of thumb falls apart as degree of difficulty approaches infinity, which it does in many cases.

 

[El Floppo]

40.10 Painting, Black Square on White- Malevich

I've never understood the appeal of this painting and ones similar to it. Big deal, he painted a black square. I could do that and I have little to no artistic ability.

Karl Malevich's art and his Suprematist manifesto are among the most vital artistic developments of this century. Most of his paintings are limited to geometric shapes and a narrow range of colors. The White series is the pinnacle of his Suprematism; he claimed to have reached the summit of abstract art by denying objective representation."The object itself is meaningless...the ideas of the conscious mind are worthless"

What he wanted was a non-objective representation, "the supremacy of pure feeling."

All of that sounds pretty convincing until you ask the simple question what it actually means.

Here's the problem with Malevich, Ernst, and Dali - their importance and influence is greater in terms of how they drove a movement - in Ernst's case, several movements, in Dali's case, the importance and promotion of his self. But I won't be judging the totality of their work - I will placing a ranking or value on the individual piece.

All three of these artists are easily identified as great, but what made them great may not necessarily work well for this particular draft. Malevich's work is so minimalist it evokes no feeling - or perhaps I am misinterpreting my own pure feeling. Ernst was a genius who invented one new method after another, but the actual work he produced is often garish. Dali was a gifted artist who wasted his talent on his own ego and self-importance - but there is no denying the power of his work. It is simultaneously distasteful, intense, and applicable to our world.

None of the three artists I mentioned are likely to score well in the rankings, yet that in no way diminishes their importance or greatness in the grand scheme of things. What it does speak to is the quality of other picks.

It's a black square. On a white page. A world class philosopher, marketer, self-promoter, business man...sure. But IMHO suggesting a black square on a white page it great art stretches the boundaries of what art actually is beyond it's breaking point. Staring at a blank wall and pontificating the meaning of life is cool and all, but it's not art to me. I realize others disagree, and I'm OK with that.

First off- thanks BL for the writeup/explanation. I'd disagree with you about what the painting evokes- seems clear based on the reaction in the thread it's highly evocative.Stretching the boundaries is what great art is all about, IM0. That this actually breaks those boundaries for you means that it made you think about Art and it's meaning (maybe at large, or maybe just for you- either way... worthwhile). That we're still having these discussions a hundred years after Malevich broke things up- that people are still having to justify to themselves and to others what Art is because of this painting (and many others) makes it great Art to me. Pretty art? No. In this vein, I'll take Rothko for his sense of color and even brush-work over Malevich's Suprematism.

 

[simey]

The Underground Railroad was a planned, organized effort to break the law which required great human skill. All of these are, in my mind, legitimate "works" (though the Underground Railroad is right on the border of that definition.)

The Underground Railroad is an excellent pick. It was so much more than about "breaking the law." It was such a secretive operation that there is still so many people and places still undocumented that played a part in it. Here in Greensboro, there is an Underground Railroad tour at Guilford College. Guilford College is a Quaker College here, and Vestal and Levi Coffin made it a station of the Underground Railroad many moons ago. When you go on the tour, you can't help but get a sensation that something so significant and monumental took place there. The slaves were hid and took care of under these 3 huge beech trees in the woods at Guilford College. If only the trees could talk... In Jamestown (which is right beside Greensboro) there is the Mendenall Plantation that still has an original false-bottom wagon where they transported slaves to new stations. Of course there is no written evidence, but the story is Mr. Mendenhall hid the slaves in his basement. The code word for the homes and places that hid the slaves were known as "stations", and the wagons that transported them were known as "trains", and the drivers were called "conductors", and the slaves were called "baggage" or "cargo." I find the Underground Railroad as one of the most fascinating parts of American History.

 

[El Floppo]

Makeup pick from last round...

41.15 - Top Gear (2002-Present Incarnation) - TV Show

Seriously, if you haven't seen this show yet, watch it. It's the best thing on TV now that Battlestar Galactica is done.

Top Gear is a BAFTA, multi-NTA and International Emmy Award-winning BBC television series about motor vehicles, primarily cars. It began in 1977 as a conventional motoring magazine show. Over time, and especially since a relaunch in 2002, it has developed a quirky, humorous style. The show is currently presented by Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond, James May and The Stig, an anonymous test driver. The programme is estimated to have 350 million viewers worldwide.[1]

First run episodes are broadcast in the United Kingdom on BBC Two. Top Gear is also shown on Dave, BBC America, Special Broadcasting Service in Australia, and a number of other television channels around the world. The popularity of the show has led to the creation of three international versions, with local production teams and presenters, for Australia, the United States and Russia. Episodes of the Australian version premiered on 29 September 2008, while NBC is holding the American version for broadcast in February or March 2009, as a possible mid-season replacement.[2][3]

The show has received acclaim for its visual style and presentation, as well as considerable criticism for its content and comments made by presenters. Columnist A. A. Gill described the show as "a triumph of the craft of programme-making, of the minute, obsessive, musical masonry of editing, the french polishing of colourwashing and grading".[4] Pressure groups such as the Environmental Investigation Agency have accused the BBC of allowing the Top Gear team to cause damage to environmentally sensitive areas, such as the Makgadikgadi salt pan in Botswana.[5]

42.06 - The Pantheon, Rome - Building/Structure

The Pantheon (pronounced /pænˈθiː.ən/ or /ˈpænθi.ən/,[1] Latin: Pantheon,[nb 1] from Greek: Πάνθεον, meaning "Every god") is a building in Rome, originally built by Marcus Agrippa as a temple to all the gods of Ancient Rome, and rebuilt circa 126 AD during Hadrian's reign. The intended degree of inclusiveness of this dedication is debated. The generic term pantheon is now applied to a monument in which illustrious dead are buried. It is one of the best preserved of all Roman buildings. It has been in continuous use throughout its history. The design of the extant building is sometimes credited to Trajan's architect Apollodorus of Damascus, but it is equally likely that the building and the design should be credited to Emperor Hadrian's architects, though not to Hadrian himself as many art scholars once thought.[2] Since the 7th century, the Pantheon has been used as a Roman Catholic church dedicated to "St. Mary and the Martyrs". The Pantheon is the oldest large-scale dome in Rome. The height to the oculus and the diameter of the interior circle are the same, 43.3 metres (142 ft).[3]

Front EntranceSide View

The Dome

Some Interior

More Interior

Wow... about time.

 

[Abrantes]

42.04--Laputa: Castle in the Sky (天空の城ラピュタ, Tenkū no Shiro Rapyuta)-Movie

I'm not usually an anime or manga fanboy. Cartoons of little girls with big eyes and big boobs in sailor suits seem sort of silly and VERY Japanese. But one night I caught a few minutes of Laputa: Castle in the Sky on AMC and was fascinated by it. So much so that I had to get down to Blockbuster and rent the DVD. I took it on a trip to Istanbul with me and watched the movie at night before going to bed on my laptop. And this is simply a wonderful movie. Produced and released in Japan in 1986, the rights were purchased by Disney and it was dubbed into English with voices by such people as Cloris Leachman, Anna Paquin, James Van Der Beek and Mark Hamil.

Filled with fantastic airships (blimps and dirigibles and "flaptors") and floating cities held a loft by magic crystals, it tells a sweet story of loss and love and redemption. But it also includes fearsome robots with death rays and hairbreadth escapes of the heros and heroine. In fact, the main character is a young girl who finds herself in posession of a magic crystal that controls untold power.

This is an animated movie, but it is unlike anything else from Disney. Not Pixar or Dreamworks or anything else, or true Jamanese anime. But it's a movie that will enchant anyone who sees it.

MIYAZAKI~!Although this isn't my favorite of his films, I'm thrilled that Hayao Miyazaki is getting some love here. He might just be the finest filmmaker alive today.

 

[Chiwawa]

MisfitBlondes' Pick

42.07 Annabel Lee - Edgar Allan Poe (Poem)

It was many and many a year ago,

In a kingdom by the sea,

That a maiden there lived whom you may know

By the name of Annabel Lee;

And this maiden she lived with no other thought

Than to love and be loved by me.

I was a child and she was a child,

In this kingdom by the sea:

But we loved with a love that was more than love -

I and my Annabel Lee;

With a love that the winged seraphs of heaven

Coveted her and me.

And this was the reason that, long ago,

In this kingdom by the sea,

A wind blew out of a cloud, chilling

My beautiful Annabel Lee;

So that her high-born kinsmen came

And bore her away from me,

To shut her up in a sepulchre

In this kingdom by the sea.

The angels, not half so happy in heaven,

Went envying her and me -

Yes! that was the reason (as all men know,

In this kingdom by the sea)

That the wind came out of the cloud one night,

Chilling and killing my Annabel Lee.

But our love it was stronger by far than the love

Of those who were older than we -

Of many far wiser than we -

And neither the angels in heaven above,

Nor the demons down under the sea,

Can ever dissever my soul from the soul

Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;

For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams

Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;

And the stars never rise but I feel the bright eyes

Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;

And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side

Of my darling -my darling -my life and my bride,

In the sepulchre there by the sea -

In her tomb by the sounding sea.

One of Poe's most indelible works is the poem Annabel Lee, which was written shortly before his death. In its entirety, this poem encompasses several aspects that set it apart from some of his other works.

The language and imagery used in Annabel Lee gives the poem a kind of strength, and emotion, that could not be accomplished though prose alone. Other elements, common to poetry, contribute to this poem's uniqueness and contrariety from prose.

Annabel Lee is a work that expresses great loss and sadness. The speaker laments that he has lost the one true love of his life. The loneliness and sadness that permeate the lines of the poem result in an obsession of sorts over the love that the two shared. Every thought and all the dreams he has -- everything has to do with this love that was lost.

One aspect that makes this poem unique, from prose, is the element of rhythm. The rhythm of Annabel Lee is fairly fast paced. In the opening lines, the language flows in such a way that the rhythm is established with the syntax alone. The rhythm is maintained throughout the poem by the repetition of the name Annabel Lee.

This poem is so full of love yet simultaneously full of sadness that it touched my heart many years ago. Also this is one of the only poems that I truly love to hear read aloud.

 

[El Floppo]

39.11 WildCard- Branch Rickey & Jackie Robinson breaking the Color Barrier in MLB

Bobby? We are through the looking glass at this point, I imagine.

Yeah, I want to comment on this, too. I think we must accept this choice, but it's really stretching our definitions beyond the breaking point. The other wildcards chosen like Apollo 11, 13, D-Day, even the Underground Railroad have in common that they are great human achievements which did not fit into other categories, and are therefore worthy of wildcard and of this draft. The Jackie Robinson thing is less an achievement and more a decision- one of the great decisions in American history, of course. But not an achievement in the way that a massive logistical invasion of Western Europe would be. I don't know if I'm explaining this exactly right. I hope I am. As a great a decision it was to accept Jackie Robinson into baseball, don't expect it to be ranked equally to great achievements. Hope that makes sense.

It's the scale of the achievement that makes it great?

fwiw- calling Branch Rickey's actions simply a "decision" really does downplay the whole thing (somebody else mentioned). This was a four year course of action... how long did D-Day take to plan?

Rickey had already set the process in motion, having sought (and gained) approval from the Dodgers Board of Directors in 1943 to begin the search for "the right man". On August 28, 1945, Rickey signed Jackie Robinson to a minor league contract. On October 23, 1945, it was announced that Robinson would join the Montreal Royals, the Dodgers' International League affiliate, for the 1946 season. He would end up as the league's batting champion, and led the Royals to a dominant league championship.

Branch Rickey signing Jackie Robinson for the Brooklyn DodgersPeople[who?] noted that Rickey's determination to desegregate Major League Baseball was born out of a combination of idealism and astute business sense. The idealism was at least partially rooted in an incident involving a team for which Rickey worked early on. An African-American player, Charles Thomas, was extremely upset at being refused accommodation at the hotel where the team stayed because of his race. The business element was based on the fact that the Negro Leagues had numerous star athletes, and logically, the first Major League team to hire them would get first pick of the players at a reasonable price. At the time, Mexican brewery czar Jorge Pasquel was raiding the US for black talent (eg: Satchel Paige) as well as disgruntled white players, for the Mexican League with the idea of creating an integrated league that could compete on a talent level with the US major leagues.

Five days before the start of the 1947 season, Rickey purchased Jackie Robinson's contract from the minor leagues. Amid much fanfare, Jackie debuted, turned out to be a fantastic success.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

42.08 The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County - Mark Twain (Short Story)

In compliance with the request of a friend of mine, who wrote me from the East, I called on good-natured, garrulous old Simon Wheeler, and inquired after my friend's friend, Leonidas W. Smiley, as requested to do, and I hereunto append the result. I have a lurking suspicion that Leonidas W. Smiley is a myth; that my friend never knew such a personage; and that he only conjectured that, if I asked old Wheeler about him, it would remind him of his infamous Jim Smiley, and he would go to work and bore me nearly to death with some infernal reminiscence of him as long and tedious as it should be useless to me. If that was the design, it certainly suceeded.

I found Simon Wheeler dozing comfortably by the barroom stove of the old, dilapidated tavern in the ancient mining camp of Angel's, and I noticed that he was fat and bald-headed, and had an expression of winning gentleness and simplicity upon his tranquil countenance. He roused up and gave me good-day. I told him a friend of mine had commissioned me to make some inquiries about a cherished companion of his boyhood named Leonidas W. Smiley—Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley—a young minister of the Gospel, who he had heard was at one time a resident of Angel's Camp. I added that, if Mr. Wheeler could tell me anything about this Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, I would feel under many obligations to him.

Simon Wheeler backed me into a corner and blockaded me there with his chair, and then sat me down and reeled off the monotonous narrative which follows this paragraph. He never smiled, he never frowned, he never changed his voice from the gentle-flowing key to which he tuned the initial sentence, he never betrayed the slightest suspicion of enthusiasm; but all through the interminable narrative there ran a vein of impressive earnestness and sincerity, which showed me plainly that, so far from his imagining that there was anything ridiculous or funny about his story, he regarded it as a really important matter, and admired its two heroes as men of transcendent genius in finesse. To me, the spectacle of a man drifting serenely along through such a queer yarn without ever smiling, was exquisitely absurd. As I said before, I asked him to tell me what he knew of Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, and he replied as follows. I let him go on in his own way, and never interrupted him once:

There was a feller here once by the name of Jim Smiley, in the winter of '49—or maybe it was the spring of '50—I don't recollect exactly, somehow, though what makes me think it was one or the other is because I remember the big flume wasn't finished when he first came to the camp; but anyway, he was the curiousest man about always betting on anything that turned up you ever see, if he could get anybody to bet on the other side; and if he couldn't, he'd change sides. Any way that suited the other man would suit him—any way just so's he got a bet, he was satisfied. But still he was lucky, uncommon lucky; he most always come out winner. He was always ready and laying for a chance; there couldn't be no solit'ry thing mentioned but that feller'd offer to bet on it, and take any side you please, as I was just telling you. If there was a horse race, you'd find him flush, or you'd find him busted at the end of it; if there was a dogfight, he'd bet on it; if there was a cat-fight, he'd bet on it; if there was a chicken-fight, he'd bet on it; why, if there was two birds setting on a fence, he would bet you which one would fly first; or if there was a camp meeting, he would be there reg'lar, to bet on Parson Walker, which he judged to be the best exhorter about here, and so he was, too, and a good man. If he even seen a straddlebug start to go anywheres, he would bet you how long it would take him to get wherever he was going to, and if you took him up, he would foller that straddlebug to Mexico but what he would find out where he was bound for and how long he was on the road. Lots of the boys here has seen that Smiley, and can tell you about him. Why, it never made no difference to him—he would bet on anything—the dangdest feller. Parson Walker's wife laid very sick once, for a good while, and it seemed as if they warn't going to save her; but one morning he come in, and Smiley asked how she was, and he said she was considerable better—thank the Lord for his inf'nit mercy—and coming on so smart that, with the blessing of Prov'dence, she'd get well yet; and Smiley, before he thought, says, "Well, I'll risk two-and-a-half that she don't, anyway."

Thish-yer Smiley had a mare—the boys called her the fifteen-minute nag, but that was only in fun, you know, because, of course, she was faster than that—and he used to win money on that horse, for all she was so slow and always had the asthma, or the distemper, or the consumption, or something of that kind. They used to give her two or three hundred yards start, and then pass her under way; but always at the ###### end of the race she'd get excited and desperate-like, and come cavorting and straddling up, and scattering her legs around limber, sometimes in the air, and sometimes out to one side amongst the fences, and kicking up m-o-r-e dust, and raising m-o-r-e racket with her coughing and sneezing and blowing her nose—and always fetch up at the stand just about a neck ahead, as near as you could cipher it down.

And he had a little small bull pup, that to look at him you'd think he wan't worth a cent, but to set around and look ornery, and lay for a chance to steal something. But as soon as money was up on him, he was a different dog; his underjaw'd begin to stick out like the fo-castle of a steamboat, and his teeth would uncover, and shine savage like the furnaces. And a dog might tackle him, and bullyrag him, and bite him, and throw him over his shoulder two or three times, and Andrew Jackson—which was the name of the pup—Andrew Jackson would never let on but what he was satisfied, and hadn't expected nothing else—and the bets being doubled and doubled on the other side all the time, till the money was all up; and then all of a sudden he would grab that other dog jest by the j'int of his hind leg and freeze to it—not chaw, you understand, but only jest grip and hang on till they throwed up the sponge, if it was a year. Smiley always come out winner on that pup, till he harnessed a dog once that didn't have no hind legs, because they'd been sawed off by a circular saw, and when the thing had gone along far enough, and the money was all up, and he come to make a snatch for his pet holt, he saw in a minute how he'd been imposed on, and how the other dog had him in the door, so to speak, and he 'peared surprised, and then he looked sorter discouraged-like, and didn't try no more to win the fight, and so he got shucked out bad. He give Smiley a look, as much as to say his heart was broke, and it was his fault for putting up a dog that hadn't no hind legs for him to take holt of, which was his main dependence in a fight, and then he limped off a piece and laid down and died. It was a good pup, was that Andrew Jackson, and would have made a name for hisself if he'd lived, for the stuff was in him, and he had genius—I know it, because he hadn't had no opportunities to speak of, and it don't stand to reason that a dog could make such a fight as he could under them circumstances, if he hadn't no talent. It always makes me feel sorry when I think of that last fight of his'n, and the way it turned out.

Well, thish-yer Smiley had rat-tarriers, and chicken cocks, and tomcats, and all them kind of things, till you couldn't rest, and you couldn't fetch nothing for him to bet on but he'd match you. He ketched a frog one day, and took him home, and said he cal'klated to edercate him; and so he never done nothing for three months but set in his back yard and learn that frog to jump. And you bet you he did learn him too. He'd give him a little punch behind, and the next minute you'd see that frog whirling in the air like a doughnut—see him turn one summerset, or may be a couple, if he got a good start, and come down flatfooted and all right, like a cat. He got him up so in the matter of catching flies, and kept him in practice so constant, that he'd nail a fly every time as far as he could see him. Smiley said all a frog wanted was education, and he could do most anything—and I believe him. Why, I've seen him set Dan'l Webster down here on this floor—Dan'l Webster was the name of the frog—and sing out, "Flies, Dan'l, flies!" and quicker'n you could wink, he'd spring straight up, and snake a fly off'n the counter there, and flop down on the floor again as solid as a gob of mud, and fall to scratching the side of his head with his hind foot as indifferent as if he hadn't no idea he'd been doin' any more'n any frog might do. You never see a frog so modest and straightfor'ard as he was, for all he was so gifted. And when it came to fair and square jumping on a dead level, he could get over more ground at one straddle than any animal of his breed you ever see. Jumping on a dead level was his strong suit, you understand; and when it come to that, Smiley would ante up money on him as long as he had a red. Smiley was monstrous proud of his frog, and well he might be, for fellers that had traveled and been everywheres, all said he laid over any frog that ever they see.

Well, Smiley kept the beast in a little lattice box, and he used to fetch him downtown sometimes and lay for a bet. One day a feller—a stranger in the camp, he was—come across him with his box, and says:

"What might it be that you've got in the box?"

And Smiley says, sorter indifferent like, "It might be a parrot, or it might be a canary, maybe, but it an't—it's only just a frog."

And the feller took it, and looked at it careful, and turned it round this way and that, and says, "H'm—so 'tis. Well, what's he good for?"

"Well," Smiley says, easy and careless, "he's good enough for one thing, I should judge—he can outjump ary frog in Calaveras county."

The feller took the box again, and took another long, particular look, and give it back to Smiley, and says, very deliberate, "Well, I don't see no p'ints about that frog that's any better'n any other frog."

"Maybe you don't," Smiley says. "Maybe you understand frogs, and maybe you don't understand 'em; maybe you've had experience, and maybe you an't only a amature, as it were. Anyways, I've got my opinion, and I'll risk forty dollars that he can outjump any frog in Calaveras county."

And the feller studied a minute, and then says, kinder sad like, "Well, I'm only a stranger here, and I an't got no frog; but if I had a frog, I'd bet you."

And then Smiley says, "That's all right—that's all right—if you'll hold my box a minute, I'll go and get you a frog." And so the feller took the box, and put up his forty dollars along with Smiley's and set down to wait.

So he set there a good while thinking and thinking to hisself, and then he got the frog out and prized his mouth open and took a teaspoon and filled him full of quail shot—filled him pretty near up to his chin—and set him on the floor. Smiley he went to the swamp and slopped around in the mud for a long time, and finally he ketched a frog, and fetched him in, and give him to this feller, and says:

"Now, if you're ready, set him alongside of Dan'l, with his fore-paws just even with Dan'l and I'll give the word." Then he says, "one—two—three—jump!" and him and the feller touched up the frogs from behind, and the new frog hopped off, but Dan'l give a heave, and hysted up his shoulders—so—like a French-man, but it wan't no use—he couldn't budge; he was planted as solid as an anvil, and he couldn't no more stir than if he was anchored out. Smiley was a good deal surprised, and he was disgusted too, but he didn't have no idea what the matter was, of course. Watch the latest videos on YouTube.com

The feller took the money and started away; and when he was going out at the door, he sorter jerked his thumb over his shoulders—this way—at Dan'l, and says again, very deliberate, "Well, I don't see no p'ints about that frog that's any better'n any other frog."

Smiley he stood scratching his head and looking down at Dan'l a long time, and at last he says, "I do wonder what in the nation that frog throw'd off for—I wonder if there an't something the matter with him—he 'pears to look might baggy, somehow." And he ketched Dan'l by the nap of the neck, and lifted him up and says, "Why, blame my cats, if he don't weigh five pound!" and turned him upside down, and he belched out a double handful of shot. And then he see how it was, and he was the maddest man—he set the frog down and took out after that feller, but he never ketched him. And—

[Here Simon Wheeler heard his name called from the front yard, and got up to see what was wanted.] And turning to me as he moved away, he said: "Just set where you are, stranger, and rest easy—I an't going to be gone a second."

But, by your leave, I did not think that a continuation of the history of the enterprising vagabond Jim Smiley would be likely to afford me much information concerning the Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, and so I started away.

At the door I met the sociable Wheeler returning, and he buttonholed me and recommenced:

Well, thish-yer Smiley had a yaller one-eyed cow that didn't have no tail, only jest a short stump like a bannanner, and—"

"Oh! hang Smiley and his afflicted cow!" I muttered, good-naturedly, and bidding the old gentleman good-day, I departed.

 

[thatguy]

Another makeup pick, this time a poem:

Because I could not stop for death by Emily Dickinson

Because I could not stop for Death,

He kindly stopped for me;

The carriage held but just ourselves

And Immortality.

We slowly drove, he knew no haste,

And I had put away

My labor, and my leisure too,

For his civility.

We passed the school, where children strove

At recess, in the ring;

We passed the fields of gazing grain,

We passed the setting sun.

Or rather, he passed us;

The dews grew quivering and chill,

For only gossamer my gown,

My tippet only tulle.

We paused before a house that seemed

A swelling of the ground;

The roof was scarcely visible,

The cornice but a mound.

Since then 'tis centuries, and yet each

Feels shorter than the day

I first surmised the horses' heads

Were toward eternity.

 

[Postradamus]

MisfitBlondes' Pick

42.07 Annabel Lee - Edgar Allan Poe (Poem)

love this

 

[Postradamus]

42.08 The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County - Mark Twain (Short Story)

love this too