Date: 4 Jan. 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion
Subject: Saga poetry

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion
Subject: viking boat
Date: 05 Jan 2009

Again, I appreciate your help with the naming of parts. It occurred it might be only a wee bit more trouble if you were to included else: If you happen to know (because somehow you seem to know these things) what some of the verbs are that the Vikings might have applied to the nouns, it would be most helpful. For example, the Vikings could raise a sail, unfurl a sail, hoist a sail, ... They could pull a rigging, tug a rigging, heave a rigging, yank, draw taught a rigging, cut loose a rigging, ... I have no clue where to find these things, except for the Sagas. Occasionally they talk about boats, but I haven't found very much material. Of course, if you don't know these words, or if you don't have a good guess, just skip it. I'm not asking for you to do research, I'm just talking about the words you may already be familiar with. And it doesn't necessarily have to be what the Vikings said. If it's something that, say, Columbus might have said, that's good enough (provided of course that the verb Columbus would have used applies to something that would have existed on a Viking ship 500 years earlier). Oh, but wait, Columbus spoke Portuguese. Oh well, maybe I can run it through babblefish. Come to think of it, the Vikings didn't speak English either, at least not before they settled and started intermarrying. And Babblefish doesn't even translate Icelandic and Old Norwegian. Hell, it doesn't even translate modern Norwegian! Oh dear, this is getting more and more complicated.

I have to pay a couple of hundred bills and then go back to work on the novel. One of these days I'll write you that handwritten. But typing is slo much faster!

Charlie, Verb Collector

Date: 05 Jan 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion
Subject: RE: viking boat

Yeah...I understand. They would not say "pull in the main sheet" meaning the rope tied to the part of the sail that would cause the sail to come toward the stern...they would say "sheet in the main."
The would use the term "hoist" and "weigh" though.

>Yes, exactly! This is demonstrated by the story of Galileo Galilei's (sounds like yodeling) recantation.

That's funny. I'd never thought of that. He escaped the inquisition by recanting, and he only (allegedly) mumbled "and yet it moves" as he was leaving the stage, so that the Inquisition guys couldn't hear him.

>Can anyone prove that he didn't say this?
I can.
He didn't speak English.

OK, that's true. But God spake English: "I am that I am. Tell them that I am hath sent thee."
I have to pay a couple of hundred bills and then go back to work on the novel.

>How can you pay bills? You don't have any money.

Of course I do. I saved tens of thousands of dollars when I was employed on good incomes and was socking money away. I'm now spending the last of it.

>I saw a cute French movie, "Amilee", or something.

I've heard of that, and I may even have seen it at a friend's house. If so, it must not have been terribly memorable.

>It was well done but I was so critical the first time, I couldn't appreciate it. I will see it again and knowing what happens, I will enjoy it more. It was so Frenchy!
There were a lot of voice overs and that was fine, too. It better tied the viewer into the film and story itself. "At exactly 12:14 p.m., January 14th, he came to a telephone booth on Market Street. He would not pass it." Then the public phone rang, he answered it and it was for him.
Like I say, "It was SO Frenchy!"

According to pop legend, French girls invented fellatio. I've always wanted to have a French girl give me fellatio. I wonder if they do it better than girls from Houston and Austin?

Back to bridging three continents and a millennium ...

Charlie, Savings-Spender and Dreamer of French Girls

Date: 07 Jan 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion
Subject: RE: viking boat

I love great writing --

"I, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, ..."

Thanks for sending me a copy of his recantation. I had not read that. You realize, of course, that he is not really recanting. Witness the:

"and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine was contrary to Holy Scripture -- I wrote and printed a book in which I discuss this new doctrine already condemned, and adduce arguments of great cogency in its favor, without presenting any solution of these ..."

But then, Galileo Galilei was a hypocrite and we know how we hate them! I want other people to have the courage of their conviction! <g>

>Yea, me to. If there's one thing I hate, it's a lilly-liver hypocrite.

New subject...
Ok, our archeologist friend finally called me. I had lost his e-mail account and he had been gone and his phone had been out of service...etc.
I told him about you and he remembered your name...and that you were real smart. I assured him he was thinking about someone else... <g>
He said that he would be happy to help you and though today is his first class he is teaching at the university since he retired, Saturday, he is taking some bigwigs to Costa Rica for some politico-archaeology business.
The perfect guy for you to talk to will be with him in Costa Rica.
He said that very recently, they have learned a good deal about the end of the Mayan and it isn't quite what they thought it was. They were fizzling out because they had so many living on so little good soil but they did it longer than anyone can do down there today.
Anyway, he can send you to some good links, papers, and contacts.

Thank you much. I guess since he's heading south on Saturday, I should e-mail him before then. I have some specific questions. I shan't burden him with a lot of frivolous stuff. If he chooses to give me more info, then that's well and good (whatever that means ... isn't 'well and good' redundant?)

I appreciate all the help you've given and are giving me in the pursuance of my quixotic project.

>French girls probably smell like goats.

Maybe the rural gypsy girls do. But I sincerely doubt that Juliette Binoche smells like a goat.

Charlie, Goat Smeller

Date: 27 Jan 2009
From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Recording in Picayune

I would like to come record with you and your instruments, if you would like to do it. I have lots and lots of musicians in my network, and I can use them, but I like the way you play and I like the instruments you have. But I would record with you only if you really wanted to do it for fun. I can ask favors of other people (for pay).

I have other musicians I want to use, but I cannot bring them to your house because Bettie and Bonnie won't let me bring jug-band gypsies and country-twang hillbillies into your house. You wouldn't care, of course; you used to hang out with Townes and Jerry Jeff, for Chrissakes. But these folks are available and willing to play with me, including the best fiddle player in the world (in my opinion) and three or four female vocalists and a whole bunch of others. I will lay their tracks down later, if I ever get around to doing it. I guess that's why I need to get a multi-track recorder, right?

These are just some thoughts. You seem to have fun doing this recording/playing stuff, so ... whatever.

First, I need to go back to novel things.

- Charlie

Date: 30 Jan 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: automobile volumetrics

I changed my mind. I will bore you with the itemization, because I need to think about it anyway, myself. Irrespective of whether you want to participate, I will have to find someone with some kind of vehicle, and I need to estimate how big the vehicle needs to be.

The list below is to the best of my recollection. If the list is somewhat incorrect, it would be because it is too short due to something I may have forgotten. But I think the list is reasonably close -- at least regarding the stuff that I really want to have, as opposed to the stuff I will just leave for junk. (I'll leave that other stuff as junk not because I wouldn't need it eventually, but because I have nowhere to put it if I were to take it out of storage.)

*** Things I would want to get out of storage now ***
- 2 fairly large hi-fi speakers (2.5' tall?)
- 2 studio monitors (~ 14" tall)
- 1 hi-fi amplifier
- 1 tube guitar amp, about 2' x 2' x 1'
- 2 mic stands, 4 mics
- 1 16-track digital recorder about 2.5'x 2' x 6"
- 1 4-track recorder about 2' x 1.5' x 6"
- 1 analog EQ with 2 channels, 8 bands each (small)- 1 compressor-limiter (small), 1 analog reverb (small), 1 MIDI sequencer (small)
- 1 bigass Sony Trinitron CRT TV (30" screen diagonal??)
- 4 or 5, boxes of vinyl albums
- ~4 boxes of books in Jackson, 2 or 3 boxes of books in Newnan, GA (which is directly between Jackson and Clarkston, where I live. It's about 1/2 mile off the Interstate to Jackson)
- 1 Korg synthesizer and collapsible stand (~ 3' wide)
- 1 Yamaha keyboard -- full 88-key keyboard (~4' x 2' x 8") with collapsible stand
- 2 or 3 boxes of stuff like cables and adapters and extension cords and harmonicas and harmonica holder, etc. etc.
- A box or two of other crap like old, touching photographs (no, wait, forget it ... I'll just burn those in the parking lot and leave the ashes there to be washed away by the rain)
- 1 big, sturdy butcher-block table with the legs removed. It's basically just a 4' x 5' x 3" flat, rectangular slab of wood with 4 detached legs.
- 1 small file cabinet (~2' tall)
- A couple of lamps -- I believe one table lamp and one floor lamp
- 3 paintings (or 4?) all framed, all delicate ... the biggest is ~4' x 3.5'. The others are smaller.

- I think that my turntable, my CD player/burner, and my cassette player were all destroyed in the fire.
- I think that all of my string instruments are gone. I know the banjo and the mandolin were destroyed in the fire, and the two acoustic guitars and the electric guitar were stolen and sold by that woman, and I don't know what happened to my electric bass and my third acoustic guitar, but I think they're both gone. So I think that there are no instruments to transport.

*** Things that I could leave on the side of the road if space doesn't allow transport ***
- 1 full-size chest of drawers in rather dilapidated condition
- 1 or 2 small tables (bed tables?)
- Whatever other odds and ends and crap I've forgotten about just now

I definitely will have to have a truck or a van. Again, I repeat: If you decide for whatever reason that you cannot or will not do this, I can find someone to do it. The main reason I am communicating with you about it is that the time we would spend together would be a lot of fun, I'm pretty sure. (Hey, I have an idea! I'll rent, ahead of time, an apartment in New Orleans and just mysteriously abandon Clarkston, and we drive to New Orleans and once I've unloaded the stuff, you and I can lie around drinking rum, or sitting in the park listening to jug bands and watching fire-eaters and getting our fortunes told, and we can take French Quarter girls home each night and sit with them on the second-floor balcony of my apartment and listen to the saxophone echoing up the alley to the accompanyment of the clip-clop of carriagehorse hovves on cobblestone ...) --

[Charlie slaps himself three times and pours a stale beer over his own head]

OK, never mind. I'm going to go do important things now. Later ...

- Charlie: Overloaded with Personal-Belongings Crap and Excess Words

Date: 30 Jan 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
Subject: Re: automobile volumetrics
To: Ken Cashion

I forgot two things (or two categories). The small one is a digital drum machine. The bigger one(s) are four wooden chairs that match the butcher-block table and which I would not want to loose, and I have another couple of miscellaneous chairs that I could live without. But there is one final chair (a small, light one) that I cherish. It was constructed and beautifully hand-painted (bright-coloured Mexican floral-like stuff) in Mexico (the Mexican side of Eagle Pass, TX) in the 1940s, and was bought by my mother there while she was teaching border kids in public school before she went to finish her music degree at UT Austin. I don't wanna leave that chair on the side of the road for junk.

>I can have my g'son over from Vicksburg to help and he will be in a pickup and some of the reject stuff he might want so at least it can stay alive and around, instead of in the dump.

If the reject stuff is not below his standards of non-decrepitness, and if he could actually use the items so that he's not just doing charity work, the I would be very happy with that. I really do hate to throw things away if there is somebody that could benefit from possessing said things. That's up to him.

Things I would want to get out of storage now that is very heavy...

- 1 bigass Sony Trinitron CRT TV (30" screen diagonal??)

>Whoa! I had to move one of these in Austin across the room and it took Bettie and me both. It was a handful. The CRT is heavier than all get out, and this means there must be enough structure in the set to support the CRT and keep it in the right place.

No, there is nothing heavy, insofar as you would be involved or concerned with. I have carried that Sony Trinitron TV before, including descending stairs with it in my arms. I can still do that shit. Admittedly, it is the heaviest and most unwieldy thing in storage, but once I have dealt with it, everything else is really rather easy.

- A box or two of other crap like old, touching photographs (no, wait, forget it ... I'll just burn those in the parking lot and leave the ashes there to be washed away by the rain)

Jerome K. Jerome would have written, "I will put them in a pile and set light to them and dance around the fire singing comic songs until they are but ashes and then I will kick that pile to and fro like autumn leaves still singing."

Yea, I would have said that, but I'm not J.K. Jerome. That's why he's famous and I'm not.

- 1 big, sturdy butcher-block table with the legs removed. It's basically just a 4' x 5' x 3" flat, rectangular slab of wood with 4 detached legs.

>I thought you were joking when you mentioned this...are we talking now that you will need a lift gate?

It's heavy, but not impracticabaly so. I could carry it alone with some difficulty, but with two people it's not an issue. Really, I'm not misleading you. I know you are as old as Methuselah's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandson, and that you have a challenged shoulder. But I would not allow you to do anything that might be harmful to you.

>While we are in the planning mood. We can do what I offered providing we have all the things arranged. I wouldn't want to get to Jackson and then find that the keys are lost,

The key is on the key ring in my pocket -- no, wait ... now it's in my hand. ... Now it's back in my pocket and it will take a court order to get in.
I'm totally paid up, the owner knows me, and the password to the gate is the first six digits of the decimal expansion of pi, if you drop the whole-number part at the beginning.

>I can do this if I know well enough in advance to plan for it. I have some dedicated dates on my calendar now.

You're just pulling my leg, right? You have dedicated dates on your calendar?? And to think that I thought that you just sat around and watched reruns of the Perry Como show and All My Children on black-and-white TV.
The main reason I am communicating with you about it is that the time we would spend together would be a lot of fun, I'm pretty sure.

>I am doing it because you need it done.

This is true ... I need it in the sense of "I want it so bad I would everntually crawl on my hands and knees to Jackson and become a male prostitute on Lynch Street if necessary to get it done", but I don't need it done in the sense that I might, say, need a liver transplant.

>This is also true, in all pretty much all senses and it is something good I can do easily.

Between my taking your word for the time part of it, and my assurance that I will not allow you to participate in any way that might be injurious to you, and my paying the bills ... then I suppose that the above would be true, too.

>Last night I finished up a 1.75 of Bacardi and when I looked, I saw that I still had a smaller bottle that friends had brought me when they came. It has a cute, little blue bow on it and I am leaving it on so I will enjoy it more.
Man! When I am eating so little, that stuff knocks me for a happy loop.

Charlie, A Nony Moose

Date: 4 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
Subject: space and time
To: Ken Cashion

>On another thought...now that you have a list of the stuff you would like xported to your place at some time...go by each thing and figure the cubic feet...you said it was voluminous -- so how voluminous. That would permit you to go to RyderTruck.com or something to see how big (expensive) a thing you might need.
This is all very do-able if we pick a date well ahead. Once you know what the details are, then you can sit on the information and kick it into gear when you are really ready.

There are several issues.
1) Not to belabor a point, but in all fairness to you I'm waiting to see if you'd really like to do this, or whether you were just being giddy at first.
2) You are the one with the schedule, not I, so you would have to suggest a well-ahead date (it could start with a tentative date, bartering time like Viking traders bartered goat silk or salt walrus tusks). The only thing on my calender right now for the rest of my entire lifetime is a) I have to substitute-teach for one day at the best private high school in Atlanta next Thursday, and b) I have to finish my novel, and c) at some time I have to die -- but that's up to the Reaper to schedule, not me.
3) I like the idea of your grandson with the truck maybe wanting some of the furniture stuff. I'm pretty sure there are at least a few things, if not more, that he could have.
4) As far as volume goes ... I think I need either the smallest truck (panel truck?) or just a cargo van. That gives a LOT more volume than a station wagon. If the things like the chest of drawers won't fit, they get chunked. The van would be better because the shock absorbers are less stiff, and thus kinder to the electronic equipment.

- More later

Date: 6 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: Jeez!

>I have been neglecting you but with good reason.

Thank God you have a good reason, other than being dead or that you don't like me any more. (Actually, I hadn't even noticed that I had been neglected, but if you say so ...)

>I had a busy day yesterday.

Good! That means you're not dead.

>I got that stupid cabinet into this study...

Can a cabinet be stupid? I thought that all cabinets were inherently inanimate. Hmm ...

>...and it is working out good and I am about through rearranging this study, so I was pleased with myself...

That's good. Be kind to your inner child.

>...but then Bettie said her monitor was doing funny. I went in and started copying a ton of her files to her external hard-drive.

Watch out; those external hard drives are notorious for failing rather early in their lifetimes. Do duplicate backups, to two different drives, or cut CDs. (If only I took my own advice.)

>I switched monitors with her and confirmed her monitor had crapped out. (I have never had a CRT fail in years of operation...but then, that was not a new technology like the LCDs are.

I know, you're a Luddite. So am I.

>I went to Wal-Mart and bought the only square one they had. I got home and it was a long skinny one...like the box said in small print but the big photo on both sides showed a square one.

God, I HATE that. I know people who cannot even be convinced that their long skinny TV screen has been set to the wrong aspect ratio. They cannot even see that the faces on the screen are all stretched 20 or 25 percent too wide. Idiots.

>Then I got a call from my car guy who had my Probe. When I got a tire leak fixed one place, I was told that a CV boot was torn and there was no lube but mud. I had replaced both CV shafts not long ago. So my car guy said that needed to be done. No problem...well...some problem...I don't want to pay for it.

>And it needs brakes...OK...that is general maintenance. But the rotors are bad and they had been turned once, and are too thin now so they will need to be replaced.

>The front end alignment that I was concerned about turned out being bushings and some ball joints worn (138,000 miles) and that should be done...OK...they will tell me about the exhaust system...it was getting noisy but I think between catalytic converter and muffler.
They also said the battery was really getting bad.

>Do you remember the allegory of the axe? The question is, if the axe handle breaks and you replace it, and then the axe head wears out and you replace it, then do you still have the original axe? Or is it a different axe? I would ask you, at what point do you no longer own your old Probe, but rather own a different car? Of course, the same thing could be asked about our bodies, because the cells all replace themselves every -- I don't remember ... every year or so?

>So with some finality, he said, "$1200."

>Then he asked what he always asks, "Are you sure you want to keep this 1989 car?"
I tell him what he has heard me say before, "I can buy any car I want, so this means I can fix any car I want. Fix it. But I will replace the battery."

Have you considered a motorized electric bicycle with a lithium-ion battery? The sight of you riding it in spandex would probably attract the Picayune chicks who are married to KKK members or Baptist Chruch deacons.

>To add to all this...I will now take a real loss on the market because I am repositioning everything for the current market...this has been no fun.

So your philosopy is not "Buy high, sell low," but rather "Buy low, sell low"? I'm not selling. I'm hoping to sit it out.

>Remember...the results of a decision do not qualify the decision. The quality of the decision is based on the prudent and intelligent use of the available, trusted data used at the time of the decision. Many things can influence there results over which you have little, to no, control. That is another one of those Great Cashonian Truths. I think it is number #254.

Wow. I just thought of something. What I am about to write is correct, believe it or not (actually, it's trivially correct -- it comes straight out of Logic 101 -- Aristotelian logic). This is very interesting. Watch this.

Let's word your Cashonian Truth #254 slightly more explicitly, thus:
Cashonian Truth #254 asserts that:
"The following statement is false:
[ (good results imply that the decision was a good decision)
and
(bad results imply that the decision was a bad decision) ]"

Your Cashonian Truth asserts that the above statement is false.

The interesting thing is to look at the logical contrapositive of this assertion. The contrapositive of a statement is logically equivalent to the statement. That is,
[A implies B]
is logically equivalent to its contrapositive
[not-B implies not-A]

For example, If I say: "If Bettie loves Ken, then she will marry him", this is logically equivalent to the contrapositive: "If Bettie does not marry Ken, then she does not love him."

You also have to be aware that
"not-(A and B)"
is logically equivalent to
"(not-A) or (not-B)"

In other words, to say, "It is not true that I will jump off this cliff and still be alive" is equivalent to saying "Either I will not jump off this cliff, or I will no longer be alive."

So the contrapositive of your assertion, which is identical to your assertion, is:

"At least one the following must be true: Either
[ (Bad decision) implies (bad results)
or
(good decision) implies (good results) ]"

So to assert that "The results of a decision do not qualify the decision" is identical to saying, "Either bad decisions result in bad results, or good decisions result in good results, or possibly both."

But you see, you cannot know which one is true. Either one or the other is true, or maybe both, but all you can know is that at least one must be true. (Unless you acquire further evidence.)

So there's some stuff for you to think about next time you're bored, depressed, or half-drunk on rum and coke.

>(Bettie just came in and said that her light switch is not turning her lights off in her office.)

I think your house is possessed of poltergeist.

I must now finish the long, long, long, long, tedious of applying to Valdesta State University for an MLIS degree (master of Library and Information Science). It's mostly on-line courses. I have a rather impressive background which is relevant to getting me into the program, and to get jobs in the field. (I'm just groping around for some kind of career/job thing, you know ... I didn't work for NASA for 30 years, so I am f-worded.)

Regards ...

- Charlie, Unemployed Logician and Novelist.

Date: 7 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
Subject: Re: I Still Owe You...
To: Ken Cashion

>...some nautical nouns and verbs but they are back up to number 2 now. Number
1 is finishing putting things up in the study...maybe by noon.

That's OK, because for the time being, my novel has been backed up to number 2. I have to get out an essay, a resume, four recommendation request forms, and requests for four official transcripts from four different colleges.
(This is for the MLIS at Valdosta State U.) Then it's back to the novel (and the research).
One of the things that superceded your list was Bettie's monitor crapping out.
Her problems had better supersede mine, or you would have a problem too. I remember a comedian -- I cannot remember which one -- who asked, "Which man is happier?
A married man in America or a bachelor in Communist China?" (Oh yea, I forgot ... You and Bettie are way out at the edge of the bell curve.)

>1. I made a decision to go to Wal-Mart and buy another one. (This was
already a bad decision. It was bad when I got in the car to go.)
2. I made a decision to go to Slidell and Office Depot. (Second bad
decision!)
3. I made a decision to go to Best-Buy. (Third bad decision!!)
4. I made another decision. This was a good one.

>Number 4 shows how bad the other three were.

>In all these cases, the results made no difference. I did NOT consider all the qualified data before Decision 1...I did not read the fine print on the monitor box.

So let me take another shot at understanding. Is this what you're saying? The goodness or badness of a decision depends upon how thoroughly and/or intelligently you consider all the qualified data. So this means that a good decision can have good results or bad results, and that a bad decision can have good results or bad results.

>I didn't consider all the qualified data before Decision 2, or 3...bad
decisions, all.
>When I DID consider all the qualified data, I finally made a good decision.

So, if you had called Dell, and you sat hold for 45 minutes, and finally you got a guy in India who were almost totally unable to understand because his accent was so heavy, and then you got cut off and had to call back and wait on hold for another 55 minutes, and you got another guy who you could not understand, had he told you that the warranty was invalid for some reason that made no sense at all, and he said curtly that Dell could not help you, and you demanded to speak to his supervisor, and while waiting for the supervisor you sat on hold for another 40 minutes, and then the supervisor didn't speak English either, and he told you the same thing that other guy had told you, and ...well, you get the drift. (By the way, I had exactly the above experience with Iomega and with HP.) If all the above had occurred, would you still say that calling Dell was a good decision?

If I have understand correctly what you mean, then your definition of a "good decision" is different from mine.

But it doesn't really matter, does it? Our respective definitions will not change what we do in practice. I probably would have done exactly what you did, even with a different definition of "good decision".

I think I'm eating rambling frogs again.

By the way, I was warned by a friend DO NOT BUY a Dell computer. I ignored his advice and bought a Dell laptop.

It is without question the worst computer purchase I ever made. The computer has, put simply, never worked correctly. And it took me two months with the help of a computer-genius friend to get it to work at all. I could not go to Dell, because the reason the computer was not working properly was that that was exactly how they had intended it to work. They were doing awful things to "help you" whether you wanted it done that way or not, and the result that the disk was fucked up, the computer was very slow ... and after two months of effort I never was able to install a second operating system (UNIX), which is supposed to be easy to do. (It
is easy to do on most computers.)

Also, I have always been unable to connect with about 20 percent of all web sites -- yahoo, compusa, nytimes, etc. I have only one guess as to why this MIGHT be the case, but I cannot address the issue because the operating system will not allow me to do anything unless I type in the "administrator password".

Of course, I do not have nor did I ever have an "administrator password". After extensive searching, I finally tracked down what you are supposed to do if you forget the "administrator password". You back up the entire disk (which is non-trivial) and then you reinstall the operating system, which wipes out everything on the disk, and then you try to copy the stuff you backed up back to the disk.

When this screws up (which it will), you then have to reinstall every piece of software you ever installed on the computer in the last four years. This will take many days to do. And the software installation CDs (or floppy disks) which you bought 12 years ago and now cannot find you must now go out and rebuy. (When you move five times in four years under chaotic conditions, and your possessions are stored in five different places, you do lose some things.)
Now you'll probably do the same thing I did. You'll go out and buy a Dell. Oh, well ... hmmm ... I wonder if that would be a good decision. No matter ... I have to
go back to getting out this info to Valdosta.

- Charlie

P.S. I haven't forgotten about the date you proposed for getting together with the truck. There are some issues I am dealing with. I'll let you know soon.

Date: 7 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: in case it interests you ...

Some of the things you just wrote are a) very funny, and b) very interesting. I will comment upon both, after I have done some more work on this stuff I'm doing. It's taking me a large part of the weekend. Not only do I have to send these people all this crap, but I have to attach individualized notes to each one explaining why I am sending them this stuff, and I have to e-mail them to say that: In case I sent this to an obsolete snail-mail address [insert snail-mail address here] please let me know because I am looking at a March 15 deadline for all this crap to be received. And so on and so on.

What a pain in the butt. I do this over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over -- applying for jobs or universities, or trying to figure out what to do about the fact that I cannot get a driver's license in all 50 states when I was legal for 10 year, and why the IRS thought in the 80's that I owed them $16,000 (I didn't) and it took me three years to resolve it, and many, many other cases I could recite but I will not. Sometimes I want either to be a hermit, or to be a person who has illegally erased himself from the public record and has had his fingerprints altered, and has acquired the social security of some dead man whose name is written on an 18th-century gravestone in southern Louisiana, and has gone underground living with a anarchist-terrorist group in a basement somewhere in South Philadelphia with lots of assault weapons lying around. I am an alien in my own civilization.

I am an anarchist and a Luddite -- A real Luddite, not a faux wannabe one. The anarchism is a bit more complicated. I'll leave that aside for now.

Back to my stuff. I'll comment on your e-mail soon. Don't get drunk yet ... you might miss some subtle and profoundly point I might make.

- Charlie

Date: 8 Feb 2009
From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: in case it interests you ...

>Nearly everyone who wears glasses, have bad eyes. So if you do not want bad eyes, don't wear glasses.

This is an example of "Affirming the consequent" where the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true. In other words,
"if A, then B" is incorrectly assumed to be equivalent to "if B, then A".

This a false assumption.

However, it is correct to say that "if A, then B" is equivalent to "if not-B, then not-A". In this case, your example, we could correctly conclude: "If you don't have bad eyes, then don't wear glasses."

These examples you give are very funny. I love 'em. But your examples are all examples of fallacious logic; they are examples of "incorrect logic". The examples such as the ones I sent to you, things like: "If 7 is an even number, then 6 is an odd number", or "If the moon is green cheese, then man never landed on the moon and man did land on the moon" -- these are not fallacious, they are perfectly correct logic. As I said, it points out some of the limitations of logic.

>Oh, yeah, the silly one...a man holds a grasshopper in his closed fist. On yelling "JUMP!" he opens his fist and the grass hopper jumps off his hand.
Then he gets another grasshopper and pulls off its legs.
He performs the same exercise as before, but this time when he yelled "JUMP!" and opened his fist, the grass hopper did not jump. This is how it was learned that a grass- hopper hears through its legs.

That's funny as all getout. I have to analyze this one ... one sec ...I'm bogged down. This is a good one, but I don't have time now.
If you want to see another very interesting (to me) list of fallacies, as opposed to valid logic, see:      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
I expect that your first impression will be "not interested", but truthfully, some of these things on the list are very similar to some of your Cashonisms -- I'm not saying the Cashonisms are fallacious,I'm just saying that they are related to what you think about. Maybe you should take a quick look at it.

>I am aware that time being in some equations is valid if it applies to both sides of the argument. There could be some debates about some issue and it can quickly bog down, but adding time to both sides can settle the basis of the argument. One that I am thinking about is when does life begin and all that stuff. The Jewish mother believes that an embryo becomes a viable human when he graduates from law school.

>But if you add time, you don't need to argue about this embryo/human thing nearly as meaning adulthood. First cell division defines the start and now do nothing...i.e. just add time and see what happens.

Well, I don't think I quite understand your argument from what you said, but as far as the embryo goes, it's living, and it's human. I don't need to inject time. The fertilized egg is a living human. The question becomes, is it "immoral" or "unethical" to terminate the life of a living human being?

>I'm always awed at the fact that the press almost always reports "... and 42 persons were killed, including 8 children." I always think, who cares how many children? A 32-year-old has had a lot more of parents' and society's money spent on him that a 4-year-old has. I say nip 'em when they're young. (Of course, I don't really advocate infanticide; I'm just making a futile point. No one is going to listen to me.)

>Now here is another little thought... Being a bigot is supposed to be bad.

>What is a bigot?

>He is someone who thinks he is correct and will not entertain any evidence to the contrary. This describes most religious church goers and many people with strong opinions.
>What is rarely addressed is whether or not the bigot is correct in his beliefs.
>This led me to the realization that a bigot is not necessarily wrong just because he doesn't know why he is correct. Or, being correct is not bad just because the person does not entertain arguments that he might be incorrect.

I think the general point that could be made is that, if you don't observe the available information, entertain various arguments, and then wrap all of this data and logical analysis into your personal sense of ethics, and come to a conclusion in that manner, then how do you know whether you're incorrect of correct? I am not comfortable with the thought that I might be taking a strong position (i.e., a bigot position) without even making some kind of effort to wonder about whether I'm right or wrong.
Otherwise, I'm just flipping a coin. "Should I blow up the government building in Oklahoma City, or not. Heads, blow up. Tails, I apply for a job at McDonalds." Flip coin. "Oh, it's heads. OK, blow up the building." So maybe McVey (sp?) was correct. Maybe he wasn't. Who knows? I don't like making decisions that way.

Back now to application crap.

- Charlie

Date: 9 Feb 2009
From: Charles Dillingham

To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: Monitors...Not the Lizards

>One time Julie did this button-pushing business and finally she got a real person and when they said, "Hello, I am Sandra. May I help you?" Julie said in a very flat voice, "If you would like to hear how very angry I am, push '1', if you want to avoid profanity, push '2'..." There might have been other options but the lady started laughing and said, "I know...me, too. We go through these same menus as you do."

Yea, that's funny. You told me that story before, but I didn't remember that it was Julie that had said that.

I've got other e-mails you've sent that I want to respond to, but I've spent this entire day sending e-mails and snail-mails and making phone calls and dealing with baffling, crazy computer problems.

But the reason I wrote this particular e-mail to you at this moment is that I am a bit surprised by something. It's a CD you sent me, and you have sent me a lot of them. I haven't had a chance to listen to all of them. But I picked this one up, and I got hooked and listened to the whole thing, and goddamnit I, will listen to it again.

Ironically (oddly??) you put on it the title "Bad, Bad Taste Music ... Mostly". Well guy, where's the bad? Who the fuck are these people? Some of the lyrics are kind of lame, I'll grant you, and some of them are good. But most of the music itself on most of the songs -- I mean the tunes, chords, arrangements, and instrumental executions, are damn good. You may have told me what this compilation is, but if you did so, my list of your descriptions has gotten separated from the CD itself, so I don't know who these people are. (I know they are various artists/bands.) The music is just really good.

As for lyrics -- as I said, some of them are better than others, but hey ... don't you gotta love a song that starts out:

      I cut off my finger so you could wear my ring
      On a chain between a pair of handcuffs

So, who am I listening to?

I promise more later in response to your other e-mails.

- Charlie

Date: 10 Feb 2009
From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: OK, I'm stupid.

>And...this is important...the other night, everything was perfect...it was time for Bettie and me to watch the "Lightness of Being" movie. We started. I thought it was going to be in French with English subtitles, but that was OK...English, I understand.
In brief-ish; what little eroticism there was soon degenerated into insulting soft porn. I am of the nature of wanting to see nothing or everything...no titillation for me. Close the Fellinnian door in my face, or put that steady cam right where the action is. I want the sounds of struggle and defeat.
>Bettie and I agreed that the first part of the movie, the stars were the dog, the pig, and the woman with the hat. Maybe not in that order. Bettie bailed out on me at the end of the first DVD.
>I watched the second.
>I have one really basic critique of it...it was from a grand novel and they made a grand movie...in scope only. I bet (with the exception of the jerk doctor) that the performers could have been any character the director wanted them to be. The movie had everything...at the story-board level. I simply don't think the director was up to the task. (Maybe they had a director for each production crew...this is a kiss of death.)

What you're saying is basically why I said, and have always said since I saw the movie the first seven times or so, that I don't know why I like the movie so much. Nothing happens, and the pig and the dog and the woman in the hat are the stars (although I might have to add the doctor's wife). Many other people loved this movie -- I mean, people that have watched a million movies and are picky smart loved this movie. But I still have reservations about recommending it, because I'm not at all sure why I like it so much.

>Everybody else did superbly (except the doctor) and I am talking about editing, sound, cinematography, and continuity...continuity was unbelievably well done.

I'll have to think about the continuity point. I'm not sure why you noticed the continuity, per se, and I did not. But I will say (to change the point) that the scene where, after she had returned to Prague alone, and he followed her and gave up his passport and appeared at her door unexpectedly, shocking and astonishing her with his appearance -- that was one of the most moving expressions of love I've ever seen in any movie.

>The main guy had a one-dimensional role...no character change in a world-changing, historical epic. I think he was that dim. Or the director wished he was like that and didn't want to change it. Who knows? She changed...everyone grew some direction. Even the dog changed at the proper rate from pup to old dog...as the pig went from piglet to sow.
The ending was very strangely done and I think I like it a lot. I am still thinking about it.

Yes, I agree about the ending. You couldn't put it better: "Very strangely done". And I liked it a lot, too. But gee, shucks, it sure was sad.Kc In conclusion...I am glad the hat girl was doing well...and hopefully had someone to play hat games with.

If you looked like her, you would have no shortage of people to play hat games with.

>At the end of the movie, I could sum it up, "Sad story about a dog -- and at the end we hoped the pig and pig guy survived the crash...or at least the pig did"

You probably didn't watch the additional 1.5 hours of stuff about the making of the movie. That scene where the farmer was carrying the pig in his arms through the door of the bar where everybody was dancing (their last night alive) -- that scene had to be re-filmed about 12 times, because EVERY time the guy would pass through the door with the pig in his arms, the pig would crap on the floor. Plop! Plop! Plop! OVER AND OVER this happened. Finally, they got a crap-free shoot.

>Did you say that you had this movie?

Yes, I'm I do ... Hmm, wait a sec ... OK ... I could have sworn I had it, but I just checked and I cannot find it. But my life is so disorganized right now that I cannot find anything. So I don't know. Doesn't matter. Once I have a real job again, if that happens before I'm dead or a homeless panhandler, I'll buy whatever I want.

- Charlie

Date: 14 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Hello

Are you mad at me, or just very busy? You've been very quiet lately. I thought your guitar group thingie was in March.

I have almost finished the application process to Valdosta State University for the MLIS program. I think they'll find me completely irresistible. My essay is pure Johnson, Jefferson, and Woodhouse (with maybe a bit of Will Rogers and Harpo Marx mixed in: UNN-AH! UNN-AH!) Now I have to look into applying for college tuition loans.

Isn't it pathetic?

A 54-year-old man going back to college. Or, maybe not. Maybe it's noble. Maybe it's even heroic. Or heroically tragicomic.

Who knows?

I've been writing at my novel all day. There's a lot to do, but it IS moving forward, and I almost see the light at the end of the tunnel. I now can impose on myself a deadline: approximately September 1. That's when school starts. That gives me (chuckka, chukka, chukka ...) about six-and-a-half months. If I cannot finish it in that amount of time, then I don't deserve to have a novel published. I don't deserve to eat. I'll just do what Mark Twain did in that story about the burglar alarm. I'll take my computer, on whose disk the entire novel resides, and I'll sell it on E-Bay and buy a dog with the money, and shoot the dog.

And yes, I do need the Viking nautical verbs. Of course, I could find e-bulletin boards on which to post questions, but I don't know how much response I would get. I have--as I have told you--found reams of info about Viking nautical nouns, but what the heck are the proper verbs? I feel stupid. Somebody must know these things. (And apparently you do.)

Back to work now ...

- Charlie

Date: 25 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: Affectatious Singing

>I commented about people who are singing and make no effort to get the lyrics understood.
>And your response was to send me a Tom Wait's youtube.
>Maybe that was all just a coincidence? <g>

No. Fact of the matter, I understand every word in the Tom Waits song without difficulty, and I sent it to you because I think it is a very beautiful song. There was no coincidence involved, it was an express intent on my part to share the song with you. But we both know that you don't like Tom Waits and I don't like crooners, so let's just talk about Iris Dement and Spike Jones and all the folks we both like. Then we won't have to eat frogs.

Oh, I just thought of this. Here's one I think you'll be able to understand the words to, and if not, I'll paste a url for the lyrics below just to be sure. This is the woman who, in my opinion, has the most beautiful voice of any woman on Earth. And there is no affectation in her singing.

Oh shit, I forgot .... It's a sad song, so you won't like it. Oh well, it's too much trouble to fix the e-mail now. I've gotta go back to work. Maybe you'll enjoy the song anyway. If it makes you sad, you can always pour a rum and coke.

Oh, I forgot, I drank all your rum. Oh well ... do you have any English ale left?

>I need to find you an mp3 of one of the guys in our singing group in TX.

Well, I bet I'll at least be able to understand the lyrics.

Regards, Charlie

Date: 25 Feb 2009

From: Charles Dillingham
To: Ken Cashion

Subject: Re: Affectatious

The first youtube I sent you had quite annoying camera work. You'll see what I mean.

This one just sets the camera on her face and doesn't move and flash and fade and pan across candles and ... and bullshit and bullshit ...

The first time I ever heard this song on my car radio, I was driving on a county road in Madison, Mississippi. I literally had to pull the car off the side of the road and sit in the ditch. I was unable to drive. It is, obviously, a schmaltzy song, but the voice is so beautiful I could not drive.

Again, listen or not. Doesn't matter.

Charlie