posted
I just read "Its Been a Good Life" by Issac and Janet Asimov and was completely shocked to learn that he had contracted AIDS as a result of his bypass surgery before the blood screening started, or really before it was recognized as a threat.
Humanist, Rationalist, Liberal and Died of Aids puts him pretty far over on the poster child for the Left, yet I wept when I heard he died and I feel that he had a hand in shaping me as a child. I remembered fondly every book he mentioned as he listed his career chronologically. I think it is strange that he never dreamed of a better heaven then the orthodox one he rejected. He made so many other worlds... Humility that is what I think makes him so endearing, just because he knew so much more he never thought of himself as better then others.
I was surprised to have the story of his death and last year so drastically revised when all I was looking for was another chance to reminisce, I am glad I let the whim to buy the book carry me, it was important to know the truth.
posted
I remember reading of his death in my dorm room my freshman year at WVU and crying a bit myself. It didn’t help any that I was in the middle of one of his books.
posted
So, if I were to contract AIDS because of some sloppy sterylization work while in a hospital, I'd suddenly become some kind of leftist, Democrat, fascist, Anti-American nut job?
posted
Mentioning information contained an author's autobiography and mourning his loss is scummy, I suppose. Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bean Counter threads are always a little wierd- like somebody reaching out an arm, and you can't tell if he is trying to give you 5, or slap your face.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: Mentioning information contained an author's autobiography and mourning his loss is scummy, I suppose.
I may have reacted strongly, but the feeling that I got was that because of AIDS, his opinion of Asimov has changed when that should have no effect at all. Additionally, he also displayed the attitude that people who hold ideas that can be construed as "leftist" have lived a life that is not worth caring about upon their passing.
Or maybe it's too late and my mind is muddled at this hour.
Posts: 291 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, you were right on. There is just something about even having this topic, and then starting it off with that sort of back-handed ad-hominem, "and yet," that is just creepy.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Humanist, Rationalist, Liberal and Died of Aids puts him pretty far over on the poster child for the Left
Such a deep and personal post, except for how that one line came out. Obviously his getting AIDS was not part of Asimov's Humanist agenda. It was the result of something that he would have despised--sloppy science.
Was he someone those on the Christian Right would have condemned? Yes. His book debunking Creationism with science and logic is fantastic. The fact is that many of his readers, like BC were deeply moved by his stories despite his Humanist, Rationalist, and occasionally liberal views.
(If being a Humanist, Rationalist, Liberal makes you a far left poster child, what is a far right poster child? An Inhuman Irrational Conservative?)
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you guys are being rather uncharitable towards BC on this one... and it makes you look rather spiteful.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is the first time I've ever heard Isaac Asimov described as humble.
He was a great man in many ways, but I don't think he was famous for sublimating his ego.
I was gonna say...Asimov was a brilliant, prolific author and he knew it, and made mention of that fact all the freakin' time.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
He was self assured to a fault, even to the point of glorying in public speaking, but he was humble in that he never for a second considered doing anything but serving his fellow man with his gifts.
In his honor, I am going to take the temporary position of a left wing liberal anti-war atheist for three days.
quote:I think you guys are being rather uncharitable towards BC on this one... and it makes you look rather spiteful.
Perhaps you should read this sentence again.
quote:Humanist, Rationalist, Liberal and Died of Aids puts him pretty far over on the poster child for the Left, yet I wept when I heard he died and I feel that he had a hand in shaping me as a child.
There are two major offenses here. One is implying that dying of AIDS puts you on the "left" side of the political spectrum. This is either a very strange non-sequitur, or it's associating AIDS with homosexuality, and associating homosexuality with "the Left".
(Edit - to clarify for BC, this is the second offence:) Within the same sentance, he implies that he wouldn't, under normal circumstances, mourn the death of a liberal.
Its enough to stop us from giving the rest of the post the benefit of the doubt, no matter who posted it. The fact that its Bean Counter means that for a lot of us, he is less deserving of the benefit of the doubt than most.
posted
I think that you failed to read it, AIDS is the big cause for the Left (leaving out on-demand abortion) and while it does not change your politics to be infected, it surely does make you a "Poster Child" for those that use it as a political rally point.
As for two offenses I must have missed the second unless it is associating AIDS with high risk behavior, in which case I am being as true to Asmovian Rationalism as possible, since the statistical correllation between the two has never vanished as has long been promised by irrational mouthpieces with political agendas.
quote:I think that you failed to read it, AIDS is the big cause for the Left (leaving out on-demand abortion) and while it does not change your politics to be infected, it surely does make you a "Poster Child" for those that use it as a political rally point.
When you say that "AIDS is a big cause" for the left, I'll assume you mean AIDS education, research, and treatment.
First of all, I honestly never knew that this was an issue which was divided along liberal versus conservative lines.
Are you saying that "the Right" is against AIDS education, research, and treatment?
Note: I edited my previous post to point out your "second offense".
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Within the same sentance, he implies that he wouldn't, under normal circumstances, mourn the death of a liberal.
I don't think he is. I think he's saying usually someone who could be a poster child for the Left wouldn't touch his life like Asmimov did.
quote:Are you saying that "the Right" is against AIDS education, research, and treatment?
AIDS education and research have had more support from the left than the right for decades. The Right has had problems with it early because of its association with homosexuality, and later because of its association with drug use and promiscuity.
Sex education and free and easy distribution of condoms (arguably the most important things that can be done to prevent the spread of AIDS) are opposed by many conservatives on moral grounds.
It's not completely on one side or the other, but it is pretty reasonable to say that AIDS awareness and prevention is more of a Leftist than a Rightist cause here in America.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Still, in my seven years at hatrack, I don't remember seeing anyone argue against combating AIDS. And we have a lot of conservatives here, including a few fanatics, both now and in the past.
I don't recall hearing any debates in the media about the issue either.
Perhaps I simply missed it, or perhaps I just don't remember it.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not to derail, but did you say you went to WVU, Jay? As in, West Virginia University? I wonder because I'm going there now.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is it that merely identifying someone as a political opponent is mean? What is insulting about saying someone is a "poster boy for the left"? As Dan_Raven points out, BC was actually insulting the right wing by his comments (insert digression about groups naming themselves and how it influences thought).
I read the sentence repeatedly, and I can think of few compliments I'd appreciate more than "this guy stood for a lot of things I don't believe in, but he was a great man whose loss I mourn and whose thoughts have influenced my own". The only essential difference between what I posted and what BC said was that he identified which things he disagreed with and mentioned that AIDS is a cause championed by the left. While I think pretty much everyone agrees that stopping AIDS is a good thing, I should think that there is little question that those on the political left have generally made it a bigger priority issue than those on the right.
But by all means continue roasting the guy for trying to toast one of his heroes from across the aisle (and please, let's not pretend Asimov is anything but "to the left" of Bean Counter...) because, after all, that's a tremendously graceful response.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Still, in my seven years at hatrack, I don't remember seeing anyone argue against combating AIDS. And we have a lot of conservatives here, including a few fanatics, both now and in the past.
I don't remember the particulars, but a couple of years ago Bush opposed a big African aid program because it included giving away condoms.
There is a lot of conservative opposition to sex education in high school, especially in the South or the Midwest.
There have also been conservative-backed movements for "absitenence only" sex education.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
None of those things equate to being "against combating AIDS". I don't know anyone who doesn't want to combat AIDS, but people do disagree on the methods that would combat it best.
I know that "abstinence only" sex education is seen as unrealistic by many ... but remember that a person's abstinence from sex and drug use is the best way to prevent AIDS. I don't want to start an argument on this particular issue; I will grant that more money and support has come from the left ... but to imply that people on the right don't want to combat AIDS, just because their methods would be different, is unfair.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Asimov did great things for the genre, but I wouldn't exactly call him a great writer. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your ignorance is showing...
BC
So which of Asimov's works have touched you in particular?
I've enjoyed some of his writing, but he never wrote a book that really made me feel -- or even one that really made me think that hard. Even Clarke, who was a terrible writer overall, had one touching masterwork (Childhood's End).
The closest Asimov came was probably The Gods Themselves. But while 1/3 of that book was awesome, 2/3 were really trite.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Asimov's books on the history of science, his explanations of various scientific subjects, his explanation on the use of the slide rule.
It was the way he made science accessible to a child, and the way he thought it was important to do so.
His anthologies and introductions to old science fiction stories, I think I even read "Ender's Game" the short story in an anthology put together by Asimov.
Asimov Science Fiction Magazine had such wonderful editorials from Isaac, and for the books that where truly touching, well it depends on what you mean by touched, Caves of Steel, Naked Sun, Pebble in the Sky, The Robot Novels, The third of the Foundation Novels (The Mule in particular) all had deep issues, compassion, love, and human solutions instead of some tricky scientific solution. His Black Widower stories where always fun, and while I always sympathized with his attempts at humor, I found that he was a bit "Slap Stick" as in slapping someone with a stick, for my taste, I generally felt too bad for his victims of humor to laugh at them. However, that is not to say that he was not funny, it was just that I was a bit too sympathetic.
This is an overview of how his writing touched me, I feel sure this is a pretty common list...
quote:Originally posted by Bean Counter: I think that you failed to read it, AIDS is the big cause for the Left (leaving out on-demand abortion) and while it does not change your politics to be infected, it surely does make you a "Poster Child" for those that use it as a political rally point.
BC
What? AIDS is a big cause for liberals? Do we support AIDS? AIDS is a disease, dude, anyone can get it, it isn't political. The fact that alot of homosexuals have gotten and died of aids is really not apros pos to anything, except that it means (perhaps, though it doesn't signify) that a few more liberals than cons have died from it.
Just what on Earth are you trying to accomplish with this? Gah! Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
There is a lot of conservative opposition to sex education in high school, especially in the South or the Midwest.
There have also been conservative-backed movements for "absitenence only" sex education.
MPH, even in your defense of BC's position, you are pointing out that it is pretty tangential to start with. The "issue" surrounding aids, if it is at all political, is one about sex education, which predates aids in every way that is even remotely important. This is why HPV, Ghoneria (sp?), and syphillis are not political issues, even thought they are sexually transmitted. We all know that Asimov was not noted foremost for his opinions on this issue.
The connection between gay rights and Aids is also tangential, (not to mention meaningless in a discussion of Asimov), because AIDS is not a "gay disease," after all. Saying that Asimov is a poster child for the left because he died of AIDS is stringing a bunch of rather weak associations together and coming up with a way of back-handing it to us liberals.
Asimov's having aids does not signify, IN THE LEAST. It is not in connection with his personal practices, his beliefs or his actions. The fact that aids is even a politically involved problem at all is not apros pos to anything having to do with Asimov. Please. He could have been hit by a meteor.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just think how it would have played at the time though, "God's Grim Judgement on the Homosexuals finds its way to the President of the Association of Humanist..."
posted
When I was in college, I car pooled to campus with my hard working parents. I dropped them off at 7am at thier works, and picked them up at 4:30pm. Between that time I was at the campus.
Studying did not take all my time, so I roamed the library. There I stumbled across some of Asimov's short story collections. I don't mean collections of his short stories, but collections that he edited, and more importantly, that he prefaced.
It was there that I truly yearned to be a writer.
Asimov is no Shakespeare. Even the best Asimov fall short of the character development and emotional depth of, say, Serenity.
But there is more to Asimov than Foundations and Robots.
His mysteries were not Agatha Christie, but they were nice puzzles. "Murder at the ABBA" is a wonderful fluffy treat, where one of the secondary characters is the writer Isaac Asimov. Is it conceited to have a character you create discuss how concieted you are?
However I think his best work, aside from editing collections of others, was his mastery of scientific theory into terms of wonderment that the common person can understand. I found his "Atom" at a book sale. It is a bit dated, but does a great job in explaining Atomic physics, down to the Quark, Muon and Gluon level. He also takes time to let us discover the genius of Franklin (The three physics superstars so far in time would be Newton, Franklin and Einstien. Aristotle, Tesla and Hawking are fighting for 4th, but I digress).
So I must agree with BC. Asimov was a writer who truly touched me.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
It's sad that an illness a cause for any "side", or is perceived that way .
I think Isaac Asimov did lead a good life, and did some really cool thing, but I wouldn't describe him as a favoured writer of mine. Although I did just (finally) read "I, Robot" and was very impressed. Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I generaly prefer his non-fiction, Ends of the Earth is a particularly good survey of two very different regions and their histories.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's funny, I just happened to read his cause of death on wikipedia yesterday... I had no idea before then. I also didn't know that he was terrified of flying.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Aristotle, Tesla and Hawking are fighting for 4th, but I digress
Aristotle? Please. Tesla goes way up there, he doesn't get credit for a lot of stuff he did becuase he did it before the world was ready. He was more inventor (engineer) than physist though. You really have to make two categories for physics: engineer and theoriest. Aristotle? Great man, great early phylosopher, but no physist. I'd probably do this:
quote:Originally posted by Bean Counter: Just think how it would have played at the time though, "God's Grim Judgement on the Homosexuals finds its way to the President of the Association of Humanist..."
There is an Irony in there someplace.
BC
You no longer deserve a response at all. I give this one to you free. I will not read any more of your posts.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Probably because I was snarky about it so everyone ignored it. And, of course, BC thrives on the attention of being a gadfly so he's responding (perhaps reflexively) to the people who have taken offense at what he says.
Alcon, you should be made aware that Aristotle was pretty much the first western person to even *attempt* to bring reason to bear on the physical world. In fact, I'm not sure he didn't coin the word "physics". His cosmology and thoughts on physical processes dominated the western world for close to 2000 years, until Galileo proved conclusively that he was wrong about a few things.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
