|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 19, 2009 22:46:08 GMT -5
Yeah, but that also takes away the theory of relativity, if you're talking Einstein. Which sets science and chemistry back into the Dark Ages.
|
|
H-Fist
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by H-Fist on Nov 19, 2009 23:06:30 GMT -5
Yeah, but that also takes away the theory of relativity, if you're talking Einstein. Which sets science and chemistry back into the Dark Ages. Einstein's discovery that energy is equal to the product of mass and the square of the speed of light is so amazingly important to so much we have done. I understand the issue with the resultant creation of nuclear weapons. But (I'll skip the middle of the argument for the 1940s-80s politics of it) without the impetus of "Hacksaw" vs. "Volkoff" wink-wink, there would never have been the drive to explore space and send a man to the moon. So-called black swan events as the discovery of special and general relativity is one of those historical moments that is absolutely necessary to consider our own existence today. ... To Godz and the other Benoit people: If we can erase the body of work, couldn't we just erase the double murder/suicide instead? I don't mean to be flippant about it. But I think that either option should be on the table for us, and I'll flip Kamala Balboa's offer on its head and try to do it. ... Someone in the world of art whose body of work I'd undo? J.D. Salinger. I hate Catcher in the Rye. I can't get past page 15 of Franny and Zoe. The man wants to be left alone, and I say yes! His only positive influence was in W.P. Kinsella's Shoeless Joe, where the quest for the recluse author (James Earl Jones' Thomas Mann character in the film adaptation Field of Dreams) is so great. Salinger.
|
|
Brother Coyote
Samurai Cop
Has Clarity of Vision Is an engine of will
Posts: 2,124
|
Post by Brother Coyote on Nov 19, 2009 23:21:29 GMT -5
Yeah, but that also takes away the theory of relativity, if you're talking Einstein. Which sets science and chemistry back into the Dark Ages. Einstein's discovery that energy is equal to the product of mass and the square of the speed of light is so amazingly important to so much we have done. I understand the issue with the resultant creation of nuclear weapons. But (I'll skip the middle of the argument for the 1940s-80s politics of it) without the impetus of "Hacksaw" vs. "Volkoff" wink-wink, there would never have been the drive to explore space and send a man to the moon. So-called black swan events as the discovery of special and general relativity is one of those historical moments that is absolutely necessary to consider our own existence today.. Maybe if science didn't take such huge strides we may have been able to keep up as a people. Maybe at a slower pace we could have had some foresight and seen some of the problems our new toys would create. The human race survived a LONG time without the microwave or even the slightest idea what the hell stars actually were, these things aren't necessary for our existence only our comfort. It's all speculation but you can't deny that technological progress always outstrips societal progress. We're a society that defines itself by its gadgets.
|
|
|
Post by Sero on Nov 19, 2009 23:25:45 GMT -5
Britney Spears.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Nov 19, 2009 23:33:49 GMT -5
Agreed. The guy had flukes in both The Long Halloween and Superman For All Seasons, and even their quality is subjective. His Superman run was abysmal, only praised at the time because it brought back a multitude of silly Silver Age concepts that bitter fanboys were still clinging to. His Batman run was essentially copying Knightfall minus the "breaking and replacing" aspect. It was like an eight year old playing with his Batman toys (and now Joker, Riddler, Scarecrow, Killer Croc, and Poison Ivy team up!). Superman/Batman was absolute sugar-coated crap. All empty calories. It flushed away the only legitimately interesting story he brought to the table in his Superman run (Lex Luthor as president), and did it in a series of wildly out-of-character moments. The less said about his Marvel run, the better. Oh, and he also ruined the TV show Heroes and wrote for the worst season of Lost. The guy just sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Alucard on Nov 19, 2009 23:42:08 GMT -5
Yoko Ono
I'm not a Beatles fan.
I just don't want anyone to ever hear a Yoko Ono CD.
|
|
NerdyGerdy
Trap-Jaw
El Hombre Enmascarado
Posts: 492
|
Post by NerdyGerdy on Nov 20, 2009 0:18:08 GMT -5
Answering this question plunges the answerer in an endless paradox of what-if scenarios, in which someone else would've crafted the lost work.
That being said if "erase somebody's body of work" implies this would not happen and the work lost permanently, I'd pick...
Neil Young
|
|
|
Post by Nacho STAYS Hyped on Nov 20, 2009 0:25:16 GMT -5
Serious answer, Hitler.
Light-hearted answer, Jonas Brothers.
|
|
|
Post by Throwback on Nov 20, 2009 1:12:44 GMT -5
hitler
|
|
|
Post by Drillbit Taylor on Nov 20, 2009 1:21:28 GMT -5
No one. They made an impact on the world, either good or bad that changed things. They could have spurred others to do better. Even the people I can not stand, I can see where people do like them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2009 1:25:24 GMT -5
Answering this question plunges the answerer in an endless paradox of what-if scenarios, in which someone else would've crafted the lost work. There isn't a guarantee that some one else wouldn't find the answer or create the lost work or pen the idea, however.
|
|
|
Post by mrwednesdaynight on Nov 20, 2009 1:35:14 GMT -5
The world would be a better place if we could just blink Madonna out of exsistance. I never understood her appeal or how she has managed to stay popular for so long. I never liked any of her songs and her movies speak for themself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2009 2:20:23 GMT -5
U2, hands down.
|
|
|
Post by Drillbit Taylor on Nov 20, 2009 2:23:44 GMT -5
Answering this question plunges the answerer in an endless paradox of what-if scenarios, in which someone else would've crafted the lost work. There isn't a guarantee that some one else wouldn't find the answer or create the lost work or pen the idea, however. But what if they did not? Or What if it took decades/ centuries to catch up for someone else to figure those things out?
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,974
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 20, 2009 2:25:08 GMT -5
Answering this question plunges the answerer in an endless paradox of what-if scenarios, in which someone else would've crafted the lost work. There isn't a guarantee that some one else wouldn't find the answer or create the lost work or pen the idea, however. True. With so many people, there would likely be redundancies to be able to count on. I just have a hard time picking one for stuff like this because, say you disagree with Freud, and hate his body of work. If you deleted him, there'd be no Jung or other people you might agree with. If they did not have someone they wanted to go in an opposite direction from, they wouldn't of been pushed to do what they did.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Nov 20, 2009 4:13:15 GMT -5
Those turkeys behind the _____ Movies.
|
|
H-Fist
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by H-Fist on Nov 20, 2009 4:15:41 GMT -5
Maybe if science didn't take such huge strides we may have been able to keep up as a people. Maybe at a slower pace we could have had some foresight and seen some of the problems our new toys would create. The human race survived a LONG time without the microwave or even the slightest idea what the hell stars actually were, these things aren't necessary for our existence only our comfort. It's all speculation but you can't deny that technological progress always outstrips societal progress. We're a society that defines itself by its gadgets. I would counter that social progress is a function of technological and philosophical progress. Society pushes back against change because, no matter the status quo, it generally is perceived as a more favorable option compared to the unknown. There are watershed moments that tip the scales towards change, thus forcing years and years of discovery onto society's plate in one sitting. People ask questions. Sometimes, the questions require a big answer. Classical physics gave us equations that worked. But the late 19th and 20th centuries gave us sound theory to explain much of our prior knowledge. Hell, we still don't understand gravitational force: we can explain subatomic forces and electromagnetic forces, but gravity...it isn't a particle, and it isn't anything else we can "measure," so what the hell is it, besides an inverse square law? Gravity happens, and to our knowledge must happen. But why do two objects exert an attractive force on one another? Think of the fundamental changes to our understanding of the universe once we have solid theory behind gravitational force in the same way we do the electroweak force. Or once we have a solid way of reconciling the theoretical and calculable differences between the extremes of quantum mechanics and general relativity. I mean, what if physicists are able to include the strong force and, possibly, gravity? If the ToE becomes a legit theory as opposed to a hypothesized potential future discovery? We do need incredibly powerful supercomputers to allow these scientists to make their calculations in less than a lifetime per step. The cost we pay is Twitter. I am far from a Panglossian. In biology especially, a close look at most life calls to mind children turning a refrigerator box, some markers, and a roll of duct tape into a rocket ship to Mars. Life takes what it can and moves on. On geological and multigenerational timescales, those changes are noticeable. But day to day and year to year, nothing appears to change. It seems that our society is more Lamarckian, that human evolution is proceeding as a sociocultural rather than strictly biological endeavor along an evolutionary path that draws directly on the previous generations. Dos...Windows...Windows 2...Windows 3...3.1...95...98...ME...XP...Vista...and then 7 is rebuilt from the ground up, finally resembling and being described as a "new species," if you will, with the "old platform" being close to extinction. I am tempted to invoke Stephen Jay Gould's favorite line from Darwin, that "There is grandeur in this view of life," but in truth there is also a great deal of fear to be found. And wonder. I still look up in amazement when I walk the streets of downtown Chicago: look what we can do. Yet there is nothing so impressive as the power of nature to withstand us. Were we to cease anthropomorphizing concepts such as science, nature, the planet, society, culture, and the like; it would be much simpler for us to realize that one man came upon relativity much as another might find a dollar on the street: he was looking in the right direction in the right place at the right time. Things simply are, and just as in pro wrestling, the most successful of us are those who recognize that we are not actors, but reactors. ... And HotRod...I get where you're coming from completely with your no one argument. I was tempted to put that, as well. Who knows how many people were driven by the "great" American novel, Catcher in the Rye? Obviously, this is an absurd exercise, one that can't possibly happen. Hence the ability to ignore paradox, influence, and butterfly effect to our heart's content. If the input statement (if Salinger never wrote) returns a 100% "no" output, then we get to go to imagination land, full of gnomes and fairies and man-eating furniture.
|
|
|
Post by "Playboy" Don Douglas on Nov 20, 2009 4:54:22 GMT -5
Missy Elliot. Then I wouldn't feel like some part of my brain had died.
|
|
|
Post by Shiori C: WC Blue Moon Poster on Nov 20, 2009 7:43:45 GMT -5
Those turkeys behind the _____ Movies. See they're mainly the Zuckers, and they did Airplane, Naked Gun, Police Squad! and so on, so they didn't ALWAYS suck. And one of the Wayans Brothers was in 'Requiem for a Dream'. If you're talking about the collaboration between them all that led to the Scary/Epic/Date Movies, then yes, that meeting should never have happened. The author whose work I've most consistently abandoned is James Joyce, although yes I realise he's very influential, it's a slog to get through more than a page. Although their albums are OK, based on the butterfly effect of their influence creating a style of music I almost entirely hate, I'd go for The Clash musically. Or perhaps Oasis.
|
|
|
Post by Will Has 'Til Five, Ref on Nov 20, 2009 7:47:53 GMT -5
The hard rock bands radio shoved down our throats during the late 90's/early 2000's(Korn, Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park, Disturbed, Slipknot, Kid Rock, Godsmack, etc). What a terrible era.
|
|