Christmas Day 2010
December 25th, 2020 04:52 pm
On Armistice Day
November 11th, 2020 01:43 pmThe Bohemians
Certain people would not clean their buttons,
Nor polish buckles after latest fashions,
Preferred their hair long, putties comfortable,
Barely escaping hanging, indeed hardly able,
In Bridge and smoking without army cautions
Spending hours that sped like evil for quickness,
(While others burnished brasses, earned promotions).
These were those ones who jested in the trench,
While others argued of army ways, and wrenched
What little soul they had still further from shape,
And died off one by one, or became officers
Without the first of dream, the ghost of notions
Of ever becoming soldiers, or smart and neat,
Surprised as ever to find the army capable
Of sounding 'Lights out' to break a game of Bridge,
As to fear candles would set a barn alight.
In Artois or Picardy they lie – free of useless fashions.
Ivor Gurney (1890–1937)
Certain people would not clean their buttons,
Nor polish buckles after latest fashions,
Preferred their hair long, putties comfortable,
Barely escaping hanging, indeed hardly able,
In Bridge and smoking without army cautions
Spending hours that sped like evil for quickness,
(While others burnished brasses, earned promotions).
These were those ones who jested in the trench,
While others argued of army ways, and wrenched
What little soul they had still further from shape,
And died off one by one, or became officers
Without the first of dream, the ghost of notions
Of ever becoming soldiers, or smart and neat,
Surprised as ever to find the army capable
Of sounding 'Lights out' to break a game of Bridge,
As to fear candles would set a barn alight.
In Artois or Picardy they lie – free of useless fashions.
Ivor Gurney (1890–1937)
When the master's away...
April 5th, 2020 12:28 amThe Year 1625 now comes on, and the Plague exceeding violent ... the Visitation increasing, and my Master having a great Charge of Money and Plate, some of his own, some other Men's, left me and a Fellow-Servant to keep the House, and himself in June went into Leicestershire. He was in that Year Feoffee Collector for twelve poor Alms-people living in Clement Danes Church-yard; whose Pensions I in his Absence paid weekly, to his and the Parish's great Satisfaction. My Master was no sooner gone down, but I bought a Base-viol, and got a Master to instruct me; the intervals of Time I spent in Bowling in Lincoln's-Inn-Fields, with Wat the Cobler, Dick the Blacksmith, and such like Companions: we have sometimes been at our Work at six in the Morning, and so continued till three or four in the Afternoon, many times without Bread or Drink all that while. Sometimes I went to Church and heard Funeral-Sermons, of which there was then great Plenty. At other times I went early to St. Antholine's in London, where there was every Morning a Sermon.
from History of His Life and Times (2nd edn, 1715) by William Lilly (1602–1681)
from History of His Life and Times (2nd edn, 1715) by William Lilly (1602–1681)
'One of the last of the fairies'
February 9th, 2019 11:48 pmAnother day I went with one of my brothers over to Llanbedr to take a message to Llandeviron Farm, about seed wheat. On our way back we went bird-nesting, and at last found ourselves among the rocks of Blaencwm – a famous place for fairies. We poked about among the rocks till we came to a place where two crags made an arch, and on looking through the arch, I saw a sight I shall never forget. There were docks growing about among the stones, and on a large dock leaf sat a very little old woman. I knew at once she was a fairy. She was dressed in a tall black hat, a white cap, white apron, and black gown with very short petticoats, and she had buckles on her shoes. She did not move or say anything, but sat and looked at us. Then my brother poked his stick through the arch to make her move; she did not get up, but drew up her lip and grinned at us most horribly. I saw she had very long teeth. She looked so savage that we were frightened and ran away – we were afraid to go back afterwards, and never saw the fairy or anything like her again. People told us afterwards that passing by the Blaencwm Rocks at night they often heard sweet music and saw lights twinkling up among the crags where it was most unlikely people would be. Other persons tried to make me believe I had seen a rabbit, but when my impressions were fresh, and therefore most to be trusted, I was fully convinced that on that day I saw one of the last of the fairies.
---------------------------
As told by an old woman to Francis Kilvert, the diarist, at some point between 1865 and 1872 while he was curate of Clyro, Radnorshire. The manuscript in which Kilvert recorded his folklore collections is lost, apparently, but selections were quoted by his niece Essex Smith in a couple of articles published in The Occult Review. This story comes from 'Fairies and Witches in Old Radnorshire', Occult Review, vol 33, June 1921, pp. 352–359.
---------------------------
As told by an old woman to Francis Kilvert, the diarist, at some point between 1865 and 1872 while he was curate of Clyro, Radnorshire. The manuscript in which Kilvert recorded his folklore collections is lost, apparently, but selections were quoted by his niece Essex Smith in a couple of articles published in The Occult Review. This story comes from 'Fairies and Witches in Old Radnorshire', Occult Review, vol 33, June 1921, pp. 352–359.
Booklist on Tor.com
December 29th, 2018 10:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
morgan_dhu, oursin and arkessian have all flagged up this list by James Davis Nicoll on tor.com: 100 SF/F Books You Should Consider Reading in the New YearI have read 41 of these books, own 34 of them.
One book, The Handmaid's Tale, I started and gave up. My parents were biblical literalists. Twisted fundie dystopias are - not my cup of tea.
Long ago I read Zenna Henderson's first volume of stories about 'the People', but haven't read the complete collection.
In some cases I have read a number of books by the author, but not the title listed:
- Lois McMaster Bujold: I have read some of the Vorkosigan books but much prefer her fantasy fiction.
- Barbara Hambly: I like her books but don't read the vampire series; I do not like vampire stories, on the whole (though make an exception for Lefanu's Carmilla).
- Andre Norton: I began reading her books in the early sixties, borrowing them from the children's section in the public library. I have read a good many of them and own a fair few, but I don't think I have ever read Galactic Derelict.
- Melissa Scott: I like the books she wrote with Lisa Barnett - The Armor of Light, an alternate history fantasy set in Elizabethan England, and the two Astreiant novels, Point of Hopes and Point of Dreams. Lisa Barnett, sadly, died in 2006. But hey: I see from Goodreads that over the last six years Melissa Scott has published three more novels in the Astreiant series. (Dashes off to place an order.)
Underlined = I have read something by the same author.
Italic and underlined = I have read part of the book, in a previous, less complete edition
Strikethrough = I started it, but gave up.
The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison (2014)*
The Stolen Lake by Joan Aiken (1981)*
Fullmetal Alchemist by Hiromu Arakawa (2001-2010)
Yokohama Kaidashi Kikō by Hitoshi Ashinano (1994-2006)
Stinz: Charger: The War Stories by Donna Barr (1987)
The Sword and the Satchel by Elizabeth Boyer (1980)
Galactic Sibyl Sue Blue by Rosel George Brown (1968)
The Mountains of Mourning by Lois McMaster Bujold (1989)
War for the Oaks by Emma Bull (1987)
Wild Seed by Octavia E. Butler (1980)
Naamah’s Curse by Jacqueline Carey (2010)
The Fortunate Fall by Raphael Carter (1996)
The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet by Becky Chambers (2015)
Red Moon and Black Mountain by Joy Chant (1970)*
The Vampire Tapestry by Suzy McKee Charnas (1980)*
Gate of Ivrel by C.J. Cherryh (1976)*
Sorcerer to the Crown by Zen Cho (2015)*
Diadem from the Stars by Jo Clayton (1977)
The Dark is Rising by Susan Cooper (1973)
Genpei by Kara Dalkey (2000)
Servant of the Underworld by Aliette de Bodard (2010)
The Secret Country by Pamela Dean (1985)
Dhalgren by Samuel R. Delany (1975)
The Door into Fire by Diane Duane (1979)*
On the Edge of Gone by Corinne Duyvis (2016)
Spirit Gate by Kate Elliott (2006)
Enchantress From the Stars by Sylvia Louise Engdahl (1970)
Golden Witchbreed by Mary Gentle (1983)*
The Dazzle of Day by Molly Gloss (1997)*
A Mask for the General by Lisa Goldstein (1987)*
Slow River by Nicola Griffith (1995)*
Those Who Hunt the Night by Barbara Hambly (1988)
Winterlong by Elizabeth Hand (1990)
Ingathering by Zenna Henderson (1995) (possibly not under this title)
The Interior Life by Dorothy Heydt (writing as Katherine Blake, 1990)
God Stalk by P. C. Hodgell (1982)
Brown Girl in the Ring by Nalo Hopkinson (1998)
Zero Sum Game by S.L. Huang (2014)
Blood Price by Tanya Huff (1991)
The Keeper of the Isis Light by Monica Hughes (1980)
God’s War by Kameron Hurley (2011)
Memory of Water by Emmi Itäranta (2014)
The Fifth Season by N. K. Jemisin (2015)
Cart and Cwidder by Diane Wynne Jones (1975)*
Daughter of Mystery by Heather Rose Jones (2014)
Hellspark by Janet Kagan (1988)
A Voice Out of Ramah by Lee Killough (1979)
St Ailbe’s Hall by Naomi Kritzer (2004)
Deryni Rising by Katherine Kurtz (1970)
Swordspoint by Ellen Kushner (1987)*
A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle (1962)*
Magic or Madness by Justine Larbalestier (2005)
The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin (1974)*
Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie (2013)*
Biting the Sun by Tanith Lee (Also titled Drinking Sapphire Wine, 1979)*
Ninefox Gambit by Yoon Ha Lee (2016)
Wizard of the Pigeons by Megan Lindholm (1986)*
Adaptation by Malinda Lo (2012)
Watchtower by Elizabeth A. Lynn (1979)*
Tea with the Black Dragon by R. A. MacAvoy (1983)*
The Outback Stars by Sandra McDonald (2007)
China Mountain Zhang by Maureen McHugh (1992)
Dreamsnake by Vonda N. McIntyre (1978)*
The Riddle-Master of Hed by Patricia A. McKillip (1976)*
Lud-in-the-Mist by Hope Mirrlees (1926)*
Pennterra by Judith Moffett (1987)
The ArchAndroid by Janelle Monáe (2010)
Jirel of Joiry by C. L. Moore (1969)*
Certain Dark Things by Silvia Moreno-Garcia (2016)
The City, Not Long After by Pat Murphy (1989)*
Vast by Linda Nagata (1998)
Galactic Derelict by Andre Norton (1959)
His Majesty’s Dragon by Naomi Novik (2006)
Dragon Sword and Wind Child by Noriko Ogiwara (1993)
Outlaw School by Rebecca Ore (2000)
Lagoon by Nnedi Okorafor (2014)
Alanna: The First Adventure by Tamora Pierce (1983)
Woman on the Edge of Time by Marge Piercy (1976)*
Godmother Night by Rachel Pollack (1996)*
Goblin Market by Christina Rossetti (1859)*
My Life as a White Trash Zombie by Diana Rowland (2011)
The Female Man by Joanna Russ (1975)*
Stay Crazy by Erika L. Satifka (2016)
The Healer’s War by Elizabeth Ann Scarborough (1988)
Five-Twelfths of Heaven by Melissa Scott (1985)
Everfair by Nisi Shawl (2016)
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (1818)*
A Door Into Ocean by Joan Slonczewski (1986)*
The Crystal Cave by Mary Stewart (1970)*
Up the Walls of the World by James Tiptree, Jr. (1978)*
The Thief by Megan Whalen Turner (1996)
The Snow Queen by Joan D. Vinge (1980)*
All Systems Red by Martha Wells (2017)
The Well-Favored Man by Elizabeth Willey (1993)
Banner of Souls by Liz Williams (2004)
Alif the Unseen by G. Willow Wilson (2012)
Ariosto by Chelsea Quinn Yarbro (1980)
Ooku by Fumi Yoshinaga (2005-present)
On the island, it is said, there is a magnificent precinct of Apollo, with a noteworthy temple, circular in shape and adorned with many votive offerings. There is also a city sacred to this god; most of those who live there are cithara players, and they play continually in the temple on the cithara, singing hymns to the god and glorifying his deeds.
from About the Hyperboreans by Hecataeus of Abdera (c. 300 BC) cited by Diodorus of Sicily (c. 60–30 BC) [Book II, 47]
translation © Gillian Spraggs 2018
Click on the image for a larger version.
from About the Hyperboreans by Hecataeus of Abdera (c. 300 BC) cited by Diodorus of Sicily (c. 60–30 BC) [Book II, 47]
translation © Gillian Spraggs 2018
Click on the image for a larger version.
The Wisdom of Parliament
October 1st, 2018 11:30 pmMr. Gryll. While we are on the subject of misnomers, what say you to the wisdom of Parliament?
The Rev. Dr. Opimian. Why, sir, I do not call that a misnomer. The term wisdom is used in a parliamentary sense. The wisdom of Parliament is a wisdom sui generis.* It is not like any other wisdom. It is not the wisdom of Socrates, nor the wisdom of Solomon. It is the wisdom of Parliament. It is not easily analysed or defined; but it is very easily understood. It has achieved wonderful things by itself, and still more when Science has come to its aid. Between them they have poisoned the Thames, and killed the fish in the river. A little further development of the same wisdom and science will complete the poisoning of the air, and kill the dwellers on the banks. It is pleasant that the precious effluvium has been brought so efficiently under the Wisdom's own wise nose. Thereat the nose, like Trinculo's, has been in great indignation. The Wisdom has ordered the Science to do something. The Wisdom does not know what, nor the Science either. But the Wisdom has empowered the Science to spend some millions of money; and this, no doubt, the Science will do. When the money has been spent, it will be found that the something has been worse than nothing. The Science will want more money to do some other something, and the Wisdom will grant it.
*sui generis: of its own kind
from Gryll Grange (1860) by Thomas Love Peacock (1785—1866)
Text of Gryll Grange on Project Gutenberg
The Rev. Dr. Opimian. Why, sir, I do not call that a misnomer. The term wisdom is used in a parliamentary sense. The wisdom of Parliament is a wisdom sui generis.* It is not like any other wisdom. It is not the wisdom of Socrates, nor the wisdom of Solomon. It is the wisdom of Parliament. It is not easily analysed or defined; but it is very easily understood. It has achieved wonderful things by itself, and still more when Science has come to its aid. Between them they have poisoned the Thames, and killed the fish in the river. A little further development of the same wisdom and science will complete the poisoning of the air, and kill the dwellers on the banks. It is pleasant that the precious effluvium has been brought so efficiently under the Wisdom's own wise nose. Thereat the nose, like Trinculo's, has been in great indignation. The Wisdom has ordered the Science to do something. The Wisdom does not know what, nor the Science either. But the Wisdom has empowered the Science to spend some millions of money; and this, no doubt, the Science will do. When the money has been spent, it will be found that the something has been worse than nothing. The Science will want more money to do some other something, and the Wisdom will grant it.
*sui generis: of its own kind
from Gryll Grange (1860) by Thomas Love Peacock (1785—1866)
Text of Gryll Grange on Project Gutenberg
Translation of a Latin riddle from a 10th century German MS
A bird without feathers came flying,
and perched in a tree without leaves.
There came a man who had no hands;
he climbed the tree with no feet,
roasted the bird without a fire,
devoured it without a mouth.
translation © Gillian Spraggs 2018
***
I found the Latin original in The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes, ed. Iona and Peter Opie, in the notes to this well-known English riddle, first recorded in the mid-nineteenth century:
White bird featherless
Flew from Paradise,
Pitched on the castle wall;
Along came Lord Landless,
Took it up handless,
And rode away horseless to the King's white hall.
***
Volavit volucer sine plumis,
sedit in arbore sine foliis,
venit homo absque manibus,
conscendit illam sine pedibus,
assavit illum sine igne,
comedit illum sine ore.
(Note: The text supplied by the Opies has a typo, 'illum' for 'illam'.)
A bird without feathers came flying,
and perched in a tree without leaves.
There came a man who had no hands;
he climbed the tree with no feet,
roasted the bird without a fire,
devoured it without a mouth.
translation © Gillian Spraggs 2018
***
I found the Latin original in The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes, ed. Iona and Peter Opie, in the notes to this well-known English riddle, first recorded in the mid-nineteenth century:
White bird featherless
Flew from Paradise,
Pitched on the castle wall;
Along came Lord Landless,
Took it up handless,
And rode away horseless to the King's white hall.
***
Volavit volucer sine plumis,
sedit in arbore sine foliis,
venit homo absque manibus,
conscendit illam sine pedibus,
assavit illum sine igne,
comedit illum sine ore.
(Note: The text supplied by the Opies has a typo, 'illum' for 'illam'.)
Where ignorant armies clash by night
July 7th, 2017 11:43 amMatthew Arnold anticipates Twitter:
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
Matthew Arnold (1822–1888)
from ‘Dover Beach’ (1851)
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
Matthew Arnold (1822–1888)
from ‘Dover Beach’ (1851)
From Plagiarism Today, 11 April 2017:
'Alison Frankel at Reuters reports that the 9th Circuit has ruled against the blogging platform LiveJournal and exposed the company to liability for copyright infringement despite Digital Millennium Copyright Act safe harbors that, according to LiveJournal, should protect it.
At issue is the site Oh No They Didn’t! (ONTD), a gossip site hosted on LiveJournal. Originally managed by volunteer moderators. LiveJournal hired one of those moderators to take more direct control so they could better sell ads. When the celebrity photo agency Mavrix sued the site for hosting copyright infringing photos, they also argued that this relationship made LiveJournal an editor of the site and, thus, it wasn’t simply content uploaded by third parties.
The 9th Circuit agreed...'
Here is the full judgement issued by the appeals court.
The case will now go back to the district court which must decide whether or not the moderators were acting as LJ's "agents":
The DMCA safe harbour applies only "if the photographs were posted at the direction of users". In this case the photos were posted "after a team of volunteer moderators, led by an employee of the defendant, reviewed and approved them".If the court finds that the moderators were not acting as LJ's agents, it must still decide whether LJ "lacked actual ... knowledge of the infringements":
"Actual knowledge refers to whether the service provider had subjective knowledge while red flag knowledge turns on whether a reasonable person would objectively know of the infringements." Previously "the district court held that LiveJournal lacked actual knowledge of the infringing nature of Mavrix's photographs solely on the basis of Mavrix's failure to notify LiveJournal of the infringements." The appeal court says that this was not a complete assessment, and that the court must "determine whether LiveJournal, through its agents, had actual knowledge of the infringing nature of the posts".If the court finds that LJ lacked actual knowledge, it has still to determine whether LJ lacked "red flag" knowledge:
"Red flag knowledge arises when a service provider is 'aware of facts that would have made the specific infringement "objectively" obvious to a reasonable person.' ... The infringement must be immediately apparent to a non-expert. ... Some of the photographs at issue in this case contained either a generic watermark ... or a watermark containing Mavrix's website, “Mavrixonline.com.”... To determine whether LiveJournal had red flag knowledge, the fact finder should assess if it would be objectively obvious to a reasonable person that material bearing a generic watermark or a watermark referring to a service provider's website was infringing."If LJ clears the hurdles above, then finally the court must "determine whether LiveJournal showed that it did not financially benefit from infringements that it had the right and ability to control":
"LiveJournal's rules instruct users on the substance and infringement of their posts. The moderators screen for content and other guidelines such as infringement. Nearly two-thirds of submitted posts are rejected, including on substantive grounds. ONTD maintains a list of sources that have complained about infringement from which users should not submit posts. LiveJournal went so far as to use a tool to automatically block any posts from one source. ... LiveJournal derives revenue from advertising based on the number of views ONTD receives. Mavrix presented evidence showing that approximately 84% of posts on ONTD contain infringing material, although LiveJournal contested the validity of this evidence."Fortune: "The ruling is not a final defeat for LiveJournal since it simply asks the lower court to reconsider its original decision. But the structure and tone of the ruling strongly nudges the court towards only one conclusion: copyright infringement."
There are 20 photos at issue in the case. If LJ loses and Mavrix seeks maximum damages, that might be as much as $150,000 per image, if I understand US law correctly.
Some reports of the case online
Note: I am not a lawyer and nothing in this post is legal advice. I do not guarantee the accuracy of the summary above and refer anyone interested to the original sources.I am grateful to the person who pointed out that Semagic can be used to post to Dreamwidth:
File [on the login screen] > Server settings, then enter www.dreamwidth.org in the Server box and change the password (and username if necessary). I have left the API as LiveJournal, since Dreamwidth is an LJ clone, and that seems to be working just fine.
I have added a couple of new feeds: Diary of Samuel Pepys and You're All Just Jealous of my Jetpack (Tom Gauld's cartoons).
File [on the login screen] > Server settings, then enter www.dreamwidth.org in the Server box and change the password (and username if necessary). I have left the API as LiveJournal, since Dreamwidth is an LJ clone, and that seems to be working just fine.
I have added a couple of new feeds: Diary of Samuel Pepys and You're All Just Jealous of my Jetpack (Tom Gauld's cartoons).
Initially I assumed that the new LJ ToS were being applied only to free accounts. It is clear now that I was misled by some of the wording in the ToS (and I think I wasn't the only person to end up confused on that point).
rosefox, who has a permanent LJ account, contacted LJ staff over this. She has posted the reply she received on her Dreamwidth journal.
The key part is this: "According to User Agreement, user unconditionally accepts the Agreement in its entirety just by using LiveJournal, regardless of any packages bought for account."
So there it is laid out for us: regardless of the kind of account you have, if you continue to use LJ, the new User Agreement will be applied.
This means:
* Sup Media can send you third-party spam via your LiveJournal email account [ToS 12.5]
* They can profile you to send you targeted ads [ToS 5.1]
* They can sell your profile data to third parties [ToS 5.1]
* You must not post " political solicitation materials" (a term that is not defined) without making a separate agreement with LJ. Sure, this is no doubt aimed primarily at Russian bloggers on LJ, but that doesn't mean they will not use it against Westerners if it suits them. If they deem you to have broken that rule, then they can terminate your access to your account or delete it. [ToS 9.2.7]
* You must "mark content" that "Russian legislation" deems "inappropriate for children" (that is, persons under 18) as "adult material". Again, if Sup Media deem you to have broken that rule, then your access to your account may be terminated or your account may be deleted. [ToS 9.1.3]
* If another user posts a comment in your journal that infringes the rules about "political solicitation materials" or content deemed "inappropriate for children", you will be "jointly and severally liable in respect of such comments". (That will teach you to keep bad company.) [ToS 7.5]
* Sup Media can "modify, shorten and amend" your content, "add images, a preamble, comments or any clarifications" to it, and even use it anonymously, in "editorial projects" - a term that is not defined - delivered via the LJ service. [ToS 9.1.2]
rosefox, who has a permanent LJ account, contacted LJ staff over this. She has posted the reply she received on her Dreamwidth journal. The key part is this: "According to User Agreement, user unconditionally accepts the Agreement in its entirety just by using LiveJournal, regardless of any packages bought for account."
So there it is laid out for us: regardless of the kind of account you have, if you continue to use LJ, the new User Agreement will be applied.
This means:
* Sup Media can send you third-party spam via your LiveJournal email account [ToS 12.5]
* They can profile you to send you targeted ads [ToS 5.1]
* They can sell your profile data to third parties [ToS 5.1]
* You must not post " political solicitation materials" (a term that is not defined) without making a separate agreement with LJ. Sure, this is no doubt aimed primarily at Russian bloggers on LJ, but that doesn't mean they will not use it against Westerners if it suits them. If they deem you to have broken that rule, then they can terminate your access to your account or delete it. [ToS 9.2.7]
* You must "mark content" that "Russian legislation" deems "inappropriate for children" (that is, persons under 18) as "adult material". Again, if Sup Media deem you to have broken that rule, then your access to your account may be terminated or your account may be deleted. [ToS 9.1.3]
Note:applicable Russian law prohibits "denying family values", "promotion of non-traditional sexual relations ... [and] the social equivalence of traditional and non-traditional sexual relations", etc, etc.
* If another user posts a comment in your journal that infringes the rules about "political solicitation materials" or content deemed "inappropriate for children", you will be "jointly and severally liable in respect of such comments". (That will teach you to keep bad company.) [ToS 7.5]
* Sup Media can "modify, shorten and amend" your content, "add images, a preamble, comments or any clarifications" to it, and even use it anonymously, in "editorial projects" - a term that is not defined - delivered via the LJ service. [ToS 9.1.2]
Leaving LiveJournal
April 5th, 2017 07:53 pmWell, I have deleted my LiveJournal, after nearly 13 years.
I was grateful for a tip that I found ondragonyphoenix's journal: the iniquitous new "User agreement" form can be bypassed by turning off javascript.
(Ways of doing that: turn it off temporarily in the browser, or use the NoScript add-on and forbid livejournal.com to run programs.)
Fortunately I imported my LJ account to Dreamwidth around the start of this year, when there was a lot of concern expressed about LiveJournal's having been moved on to servers in Russia. So I didn't have to worry about that bit. (I set up my Dreamwidth account years ago, but until then I had never got around to importing my old posts.)
Before I deleted my account, I manually deleted as much of the data on it as possible. I was irritated to find that there was apparently no way to delete each post individually without enabling javascript, so I had to give up on that.
I don't think that click-wrap agreement can carry much, if any, weight in respect of an account that is promptly deleted, but all the same I didn't wish to give it my assent.
I downloaded all my userpics (I know I must have them saved on my hard disc somewhere, but damned if I know where, at this point) and deleted them from LJ. That can be done directly from this page or via a link on the settings page.
I saved the text on my LJ profile page so that I have a record. Then I deleted my bio and interests, which can be done from this page.
I deleted all my LJ mail.
I went to the log-in page and unticked "Remember me" and saved it.
Finally I went to the account status page and deactivated the account. I ticked the boxes for deleting comments and community entries.
I declined to tick any of the boxes on the "why are you deleting?" questionnaire that was presented immediated afterwards. Damned if I owe Sup Media an explanation. They must know perfectly well why so many people are deleting their accounts right now.
I was grateful for a tip that I found on
dragonyphoenix's journal: the iniquitous new "User agreement" form can be bypassed by turning off javascript. (Ways of doing that: turn it off temporarily in the browser, or use the NoScript add-on and forbid livejournal.com to run programs.)
Fortunately I imported my LJ account to Dreamwidth around the start of this year, when there was a lot of concern expressed about LiveJournal's having been moved on to servers in Russia. So I didn't have to worry about that bit. (I set up my Dreamwidth account years ago, but until then I had never got around to importing my old posts.)
Before I deleted my account, I manually deleted as much of the data on it as possible. I was irritated to find that there was apparently no way to delete each post individually without enabling javascript, so I had to give up on that.
I don't think that click-wrap agreement can carry much, if any, weight in respect of an account that is promptly deleted, but all the same I didn't wish to give it my assent.
I downloaded all my userpics (I know I must have them saved on my hard disc somewhere, but damned if I know where, at this point) and deleted them from LJ. That can be done directly from this page or via a link on the settings page.
I saved the text on my LJ profile page so that I have a record. Then I deleted my bio and interests, which can be done from this page.
I deleted all my LJ mail.
I went to the log-in page and unticked "Remember me" and saved it.
Finally I went to the account status page and deactivated the account. I ticked the boxes for deleting comments and community entries.
I declined to tick any of the boxes on the "why are you deleting?" questionnaire that was presented immediated afterwards. Damned if I owe Sup Media an explanation. They must know perfectly well why so many people are deleting their accounts right now.
LJ New ToS
April 4th, 2017 05:54 pmI have been chewing over the new LJ Terms of Service/User Agreement now being imposed on users with free accounts. Here are some passages of note:
Copyright
a) "3. Terms ...
Content means User`s information within the Service, including any information published during the process of Registration, in Blogs and Communities as a note or comment as well as sent by User in private messages using the Service."
b) "9. Content ...
9.1.2. In respect of any Content which constitutes intellectual property, User provides to the Administration a non-exclusive (simple) license to use his/her Content in order to provide the Service by reproducing his/her Content as well as by making it public for the entire period the Content is posted on the Service. If User participates in any rankings or if User’s Content is used in any editorial projects of the Service, User provides to the Administration an additional authorisation to modify, shorten and amend his/her Content, to add images, a preamble, comments or any clarifications to his/her Content while using it, and in certain cases based on the Service functions, an authorisation to use User’s Content anonymously."
Contrast the old Terms of Service, as retrieved today from the Google cache:
"No Control or Liability for User-Generated Content on the Service: LiveJournal claims no ownership or control over any Content posted by its users. The author retains all patent, trademarks, and copyrights to all posted Content ..."
It is, among other things, noteworthy that the new ToS seem to imply that Sup Media, the owners of LiveJournal, can make content public at will - including, presumably, locked posts, and even private emails. This may just be very clunky drafting, but I don't want to take that for granted.
Applicable laws
"9.2. The User may not: ...
9.2.8. perform any other actions contradictory to the laws of the Russian Federation and/or any other applicable laws, including those applicable in the jurisdiction of User’s residence."
Under the Russian Federal law entitled "The protection of children from information harmful to their health and development" there are prohibitions on disseminating information "that promotes unconventional sexual relationships", understood to mean lesbian and gay relationships, where it might be seen by children: that is, anyone under the age of 18.
(There is an English translation of that law, plus amendments, here. The English is a bit wonky in places, but it was the best I could find.)
Advertising
a) "5. User Details
5.1. The technical data transmitted to the Service by the User’s software as well as any other information transmitted by the User to the Service shall be available to the Administration and may be used at its own discretion legally, including targeting the advertising to User."
b) "12. Advertising ...
12.5. The Administration may send to User information related to the Service as well as third-party advertising using the email address provided by User."
They are going to:
i) profile us to serve us targeted ads
ii) probably sell our data to third parties - I imagine the wording would cover that
iii) use the LJ email service to send us spam emails from third parties.
----------------------
At the moment I am locked out of my account until I tick the box to 'accept' their click-wrap agreement. I didn't want to do that until I had researched it and thought about it.
It is a Catch22 situation: in order to gain access to delete one's journal/posts, one has first to agree to grant Sup Media, the Russian owners of LiveJournal, rights that I, certainly, have absolutely no wish to grant them.
It is an interesting question why Sup Media feels the need to freeze users out of their accounts until they expressly agree to the terms of the new ToS.
The old ToS, dated December 12, 2010 and still accessible in the Google cache, state at the end:
"LiveJournal may revise the TOS found at this URL, in whole or in part, without notice. By using this Site, you hereby acknowledge and agree to be bound by any such revisions and should therefore periodically visit this page to determine the current Terms of Service to which you are bound."
But those ToS are in the name of LiveJournal, Inc; the new agreement is with Sup Media. I am guessing that makes some kind of difference.
It may also be the case that the aggressive insistence that users signify their acceptance of the changes in the ToS is because they represent a drastic departure from what we have been used to. Moreover, I take this to be a signal that Sup has every intention of taking advantage of them.
I am not leaving my posts on LJ. I shall have to tick that bloody box, but then I shall immediately delete them all individually. Mercifully I have never been a really prolific poster. And they are all archived over here.
Apparently I can use Semagic, which I have installed, to speed up the deletion process.
I need to delete my LJ emails from the server.
After that I shall decide whether I am going to keep the account on LJ as a reading account or delete it completely. There are still people over there I have been following for years.
On the other hand, I realy don't fancy the idea of getting spammed by Sup.
Copyright
a) "3. Terms ...
Content means User`s information within the Service, including any information published during the process of Registration, in Blogs and Communities as a note or comment as well as sent by User in private messages using the Service."
b) "9. Content ...
9.1.2. In respect of any Content which constitutes intellectual property, User provides to the Administration a non-exclusive (simple) license to use his/her Content in order to provide the Service by reproducing his/her Content as well as by making it public for the entire period the Content is posted on the Service. If User participates in any rankings or if User’s Content is used in any editorial projects of the Service, User provides to the Administration an additional authorisation to modify, shorten and amend his/her Content, to add images, a preamble, comments or any clarifications to his/her Content while using it, and in certain cases based on the Service functions, an authorisation to use User’s Content anonymously."
Contrast the old Terms of Service, as retrieved today from the Google cache:
"No Control or Liability for User-Generated Content on the Service: LiveJournal claims no ownership or control over any Content posted by its users. The author retains all patent, trademarks, and copyrights to all posted Content ..."
It is, among other things, noteworthy that the new ToS seem to imply that Sup Media, the owners of LiveJournal, can make content public at will - including, presumably, locked posts, and even private emails. This may just be very clunky drafting, but I don't want to take that for granted.
Applicable laws
"9.2. The User may not: ...
9.2.8. perform any other actions contradictory to the laws of the Russian Federation and/or any other applicable laws, including those applicable in the jurisdiction of User’s residence."
Under the Russian Federal law entitled "The protection of children from information harmful to their health and development" there are prohibitions on disseminating information "that promotes unconventional sexual relationships", understood to mean lesbian and gay relationships, where it might be seen by children: that is, anyone under the age of 18.
(There is an English translation of that law, plus amendments, here. The English is a bit wonky in places, but it was the best I could find.)
Advertising
a) "5. User Details
5.1. The technical data transmitted to the Service by the User’s software as well as any other information transmitted by the User to the Service shall be available to the Administration and may be used at its own discretion legally, including targeting the advertising to User."
b) "12. Advertising ...
12.5. The Administration may send to User information related to the Service as well as third-party advertising using the email address provided by User."
They are going to:
i) profile us to serve us targeted ads
ii) probably sell our data to third parties - I imagine the wording would cover that
iii) use the LJ email service to send us spam emails from third parties.
----------------------
At the moment I am locked out of my account until I tick the box to 'accept' their click-wrap agreement. I didn't want to do that until I had researched it and thought about it.
It is a Catch22 situation: in order to gain access to delete one's journal/posts, one has first to agree to grant Sup Media, the Russian owners of LiveJournal, rights that I, certainly, have absolutely no wish to grant them.
It is an interesting question why Sup Media feels the need to freeze users out of their accounts until they expressly agree to the terms of the new ToS.
The old ToS, dated December 12, 2010 and still accessible in the Google cache, state at the end:
"LiveJournal may revise the TOS found at this URL, in whole or in part, without notice. By using this Site, you hereby acknowledge and agree to be bound by any such revisions and should therefore periodically visit this page to determine the current Terms of Service to which you are bound."
But those ToS are in the name of LiveJournal, Inc; the new agreement is with Sup Media. I am guessing that makes some kind of difference.
It may also be the case that the aggressive insistence that users signify their acceptance of the changes in the ToS is because they represent a drastic departure from what we have been used to. Moreover, I take this to be a signal that Sup has every intention of taking advantage of them.
I am not leaving my posts on LJ. I shall have to tick that bloody box, but then I shall immediately delete them all individually. Mercifully I have never been a really prolific poster. And they are all archived over here.
Apparently I can use Semagic, which I have installed, to speed up the deletion process.
I need to delete my LJ emails from the server.
After that I shall decide whether I am going to keep the account on LJ as a reading account or delete it completely. There are still people over there I have been following for years.
On the other hand, I realy don't fancy the idea of getting spammed by Sup.
Come, O Rising Sun
December 27th, 2016 11:58 pm
Come, come, O Rising Sun, comfort us with your coming. Dispel the shadows of night and the fearful darkness of night.
from 'Veni, veni Emmanuel' (Cologne, 1710)
Belated greetings to my friends online.
Click on the image to see a larger version.
Things fall apart
June 29th, 2016 03:50 pmThe Second Coming
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
William Butler Yeats (1865–1939)
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
William Butler Yeats (1865–1939)
(no subject)
January 2nd, 2016 08:06 pmHappy New Year!
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1945 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
For several years I have marked the New Year by posting details of some of the authors whose works are coming out of copyright. This year I plan to make two such posts, one today, and another in a day or so.
In this post I shall focus on three British authors of speculative fiction: David Lindsay (b. 1876), E.R. Eddison (b. 1882) and Charles Williams (b. 1886).
Williams, who worked for Oxford University Press, was a close friend of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien and a core member of the informal reading and discussion group known as the Inklings. Eddison was an occasional visitor at meetings of the group. Lewis and Tolkien admired his books. They also greatly admired David Lindsay's science fiction novel A Voyage to Arcturus (1920).
( More )
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1945 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
For several years I have marked the New Year by posting details of some of the authors whose works are coming out of copyright. This year I plan to make two such posts, one today, and another in a day or so.
In this post I shall focus on three British authors of speculative fiction: David Lindsay (b. 1876), E.R. Eddison (b. 1882) and Charles Williams (b. 1886).
Williams, who worked for Oxford University Press, was a close friend of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien and a core member of the informal reading and discussion group known as the Inklings. Eddison was an occasional visitor at meetings of the group. Lewis and Tolkien admired his books. They also greatly admired David Lindsay's science fiction novel A Voyage to Arcturus (1920).
( More )
Coming Out of Copyright
January 2nd, 2016 06:08 pmHappy New Year!
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1945 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
For several years I have marked the New Year by posting details of some of the authors whose works are coming out of copyright. This year I plan to make two such posts, one today, and another in a day or so.
In this post I shall focus on three British authors of speculative fiction: David Lindsay (b. 1876), E.R. Eddison (b. 1882) and Charles Williams (b. 1886).
Williams, who worked for Oxford University Press, was a close friend of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien and a core member of the informal reading and discussion group known as the Inklings. Eddison was an occasional visitor at meetings of the group. Lewis and Tolkien admired his books. They also greatly admired David Lindsay's science fiction novel A Voyage to Arcturus (1920).
( More )
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1945 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
For several years I have marked the New Year by posting details of some of the authors whose works are coming out of copyright. This year I plan to make two such posts, one today, and another in a day or so.
In this post I shall focus on three British authors of speculative fiction: David Lindsay (b. 1876), E.R. Eddison (b. 1882) and Charles Williams (b. 1886).
Williams, who worked for Oxford University Press, was a close friend of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien and a core member of the informal reading and discussion group known as the Inklings. Eddison was an occasional visitor at meetings of the group. Lewis and Tolkien admired his books. They also greatly admired David Lindsay's science fiction novel A Voyage to Arcturus (1920).
( More )
Oh the fine old English Tory times
May 17th, 2015 11:34 pmThe following verses, a parody of a popular song, were published in the Examiner, the radical journal founded by Leigh Hunt, on 7 August 1841. The Conservatives had won a huge election victory in July.
The Fine Old English Gentleman
New Version
(To be said or sung at all Conservative Dinners.)
I'll sing you a new ballad, and I'll warrant it first-rate,
Of the days of that old gentleman who had that old estate;
When they spent the public money at a bountiful old rate
On ev'ry mistress, pimp, and scamp, at ev'ry noble gate,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
The good old laws were garnished well with gibbets, whips, and chains,
With fine old English penalties, and fine old English pains,
With rebel heads, and seas of blood once hot in rebel veins;
For all these things were requisite to guard the rich old gains
Of the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
This brave old code, like Argus, had a hundred watchful eyes,
And ev'ry English peasant had his good old English spies,
To tempt his starving discontent with fine old English lies,
Then call the good old Yeomanry to stop his peevish cries,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
( More verses )
The bright old day now dawns again; the cry runs through the land,
In England there shall be dear bread—in Ireland, sword and brand;
And poverty, and ignorance, shall swell the rich and grand—
So, rally round the rulers with the gentle iron hand,
Of the fine old English Tory days;
Hail to the coming time!
Charles Dickens (1812–1870)
The Fine Old English Gentleman
New Version
(To be said or sung at all Conservative Dinners.)
I'll sing you a new ballad, and I'll warrant it first-rate,
Of the days of that old gentleman who had that old estate;
When they spent the public money at a bountiful old rate
On ev'ry mistress, pimp, and scamp, at ev'ry noble gate,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
The good old laws were garnished well with gibbets, whips, and chains,
With fine old English penalties, and fine old English pains,
With rebel heads, and seas of blood once hot in rebel veins;
For all these things were requisite to guard the rich old gains
Of the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
This brave old code, like Argus, had a hundred watchful eyes,
And ev'ry English peasant had his good old English spies,
To tempt his starving discontent with fine old English lies,
Then call the good old Yeomanry to stop his peevish cries,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!
( More verses )
The bright old day now dawns again; the cry runs through the land,
In England there shall be dear bread—in Ireland, sword and brand;
And poverty, and ignorance, shall swell the rich and grand—
So, rally round the rulers with the gentle iron hand,
Of the fine old English Tory days;
Hail to the coming time!
Charles Dickens (1812–1870)
Coming out of copyright
January 2nd, 2015 02:13 amHappy New Year!
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1944 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch (b. 1863) was King Edward VII Professor of English Literature at Cambridge. He was a prolific author of fiction, poetry and literary criticism; he also compiled a number of anthologies. His Oxford Book of English Verse and Oxford Book of Ballads were both in the library of my grammar school in the sixties, and I devoured them like I devoured every other volume of poetry I laid hands on. From a scholarly point of view his Oxford Book of Ballads is deplorable; he did not hesitate to 'improve' texts, to merge different versions of the same ballad, and even to bowdlerize them. But I owe him a debt, nonetheless, for making such a substantial selection of ballads available and accessible. I read the book from end to end, over and over again.
( More )
Coming out of copyright
January 2nd, 2015 02:10 amHappy New Year!
Yesterday the writings and visual art works of creators who died in the course of 1944 came out of copyright in Britain and the other EC countries. (This does not apply to any of their works that were first published posthumously, nor to translations that were published more recently, or were made by translators who are still alive, or who died less than 70 years ago.)
Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch (b. 1863) was King Edward VII Professor of English Literature at Cambridge. He was a prolific author of fiction, poetry and literary criticism; he also compiled a number of anthologies. His Oxford Book of English Verse and Oxford Book of Ballads were both in the library of my grammar school in the sixties, and I devoured them like I devoured every other volume of poetry I laid hands on. From a scholarly point of view his Oxford Book of Ballads is deplorable; he did not hesitate to 'improve' texts, to merge different versions of the same ballad, and even to bowdlerize them. But I owe him a debt, nonetheless, for making such a substantial selection of ballads available and accessible. I read the book from end to end, over and over again.
( More )
O rising sun
December 24th, 2014 11:25 pmGreetings of the season to my friends online.
O rising sun, splendour of light, come and shed your radiance on those who wait in darkness.
from an antiphon for Advent, sixth century AD
Click on the image to see a larger version.
O rising sun
December 24th, 2014 11:22 pmGreetings of the season to my friends online.
O rising sun, splendour of light, come and shed your radiance on those who wait in darkness.
from an antiphon for Advent, sixth century AD
Click on the image to see a larger version.
The Poodle Vulnerability
October 18th, 2014 09:19 pmAttack of the week: POODLE:
Believe it or not, there's a new attack on SSL. …
The attack is called POODLE …
The rough summary of POODLE is this: it allows a clever attacker who can (a) control the Internet connection between your browser and the server, and (b) run some code (e.g., script) in your browser to potentially decrypt authentication cookies for sites such as Google, Yahoo and your bank. This is obviously not a good thing, and unfortunately the attack is more practical than you might think. You should probably disable SSLv3 everywhere you can. – Matthew Green, cryptographic engineer
Unfortunately, some sites, including a few banking sites, still do not support TLS. There is a list of such sites here: https://zmap.io/sslv3/ [Scroll down to the section 'Alexa HTTPS Sites Without TLS Support'.] If you use Firefox, you can install an addon which would disable SSL 3.0 but allow you to change the setting from a menu to access a particular site. See below, under Firefox.
Internet Explorer
To disable SSLv3 in Internet Explorer, versions 7--11, you can follow this procedure:
1. Click on the Tools menu and select Internet Options. (If the tools menu isn't visible, press ALT+ T in Internet Explorer 8 and ALT+ X in Internet Explorer 9--11.)
2. Select the Advanced tab.
3. Scroll down to foot.
4. Uncheck Use SSL 3.0.
5. Make sure Use TLS 1.0 is checked, and any other Use TLS setting as well (if there are others).
6. Click on OK.
If you are still using IE 6 you have a problem, since IE 6 can't use TLS. (But who is still using IE 6?)
Firefox
To disable SSLv3 in Firefox you can install the addon on this page: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ssl-version-control/
This will disable SSL 3.0 but allow you to change the setting from a menu if you find you need to use a site that lacks TLS support.
If for any reason you don't wish to install the addon you can follow this procedure:
1. Type about:config in the URL bar.
2. Disregard the warning.
3. Type security.tls.version.min in the search box. The settings for this preference will immediately appear at the top of the window below.
4. If Value = 0 double-click on the 0, type 1 into the box that appears, and click OK.
5. Close tab.
Chrome
This page has a section on how to fix Chrome and related browsers: https://www.winhelp.us/news/144/207/How-to-protect-browsers-from-SSL-3-POODLE-attacks.html [Scroll down to 'How to disable SSL 3 in Google Chrome and other Chromium-based browsers']
Apple
Apple have issued an update that is supposed to fix OS X (Mavericks and Mountain Lion only): http://www.computerworld.com/article/2835654/apple-patches-os-x-to-protect-against-poodle.html [Scroll down to end of article for information on how to install it.]
No fix for IOS yet.
The dragon harpist (ii)
October 12th, 2014 08:56 pmContemplating the dragon harpist, I asked 'What songs do dragons sing?'
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
papersky, wise in the ways of dragons, knows the answer.The dragon harpist (ii)
October 12th, 2014 08:56 pmContemplating the dragon harpist, I asked 'What songs do dragons sing?' ![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
papersky.livejournal.com, wise in the ways of dragons, knows the answer.
papersky.livejournal.com, wise in the ways of dragons, knows the answer.The dragon harpist
October 9th, 2014 03:41 pm
This is a fifteenth-century roof boss in the cloisters at Lacock Abbey. By the looks of it the dragon is singing as well as playing a seven-string harp. What songs do dragons sing? Fierce, wild songs, I imagine. There are sharp teeth in those jaws. This is not a tame creature.
The carvings at Lacock include two mermaids, a manticore, Reynard the Fox making off with a goose, and a bowman who is possibly meant for Robin Hood. I have put all my photos of the Lacock roof bosses in a Flickr set.
The dragon harpist
October 8th, 2014 11:13 pmThis is a fifteenth-century roof boss in the cloisters at Lacock Abbey. By the looks of it the dragon is singing as well as playing a seven-string harp. What songs do dragons sing? Fierce, wild songs, I imagine. There are sharp teeth in those jaws. This is not a tame creature.
The carvings at Lacock include two mermaids, a manticore, Reynard the Fox making off with a goose, and a bowman who is possibly meant for Robin Hood. I have put all my photos of the Lacock roof bosses in a Flickr set.
