. . . in an unsentimental and practical way

Yeah, he's quick on his feet for an old git, isn't he?

dj, did that old blowhard dyslexia post something about me? I can't tell as I have him on 'ignore.'

you've been saintified

I think she's trying to take the passion out of loving each other, and even though that might be a safer way for human beings to be, I don't think it's ever going to happen.

He called you a crusty old Lithuanian.

Thx, LionTamer. That means I'd better get my .44 magnum cleaned and loaded and book a ticket to Albequerque. Lithuanian, indeed. Nobody dises me like that and gets away with it.

Uh oh. I just checked out two of her books on these current reccomendations. Does she preach? Am I going to be sorry?

I never heard of her before Set mentioned her. Good luck.

I've read a couple of her Adam Dalgleish mysteries - which I like.

No noticable preaching - or perhaps I just don't notice.

The premise is fatally flawed because the selfish gene trumps the altruistic gene.

Hug a mutant today, play cards and dominoes while god plays dice.

the shellfish gene only applies to mollusks and crustaceans

Never preaches. One of the finest mystery writers in the history of the genre. She has a knack for endowing even a minor character of no consequence to the story with a complete believable personality. No mean writing feat, that.

not a big mystery fan, but i did read, and quite enjoyed the children of men

Typically shellfish of them.

And what of there being more stars in the sky than grains of shellfish and sand on every beach in the whirled?

A nice, if a bit ambiguous, turn of phrase, but I don't buy it.

The history of mankind is one of struggle and competition between individuals, families, tribes and ever larger agglomerations of people. Very little "unsentimental and practical" love is evident in its pages.

Indeed guided by more or less an opposite axiom we have come to dominate most species extant on this earth. I see little reason to suppose that a mass change in human behavior is even possible - much less desirable.

There are many contemporary Platonists of various stripes who would have us all unite around their various concepts of perfection or redemption and live by the rules they imagine are good for us. Unfortunatedly such folks too often become oppressive and even murderous if they achiecve power. Indeed a great deal of the suffering of the last few centuries was done at the hands of self-appointed elites who supposed they knew what was good for the rest of humanity aand ultimately became willing to exterminate those who resisted their path to perfection. I am confident that the new crop of saviors of manking will be just as destructive as were their predecessors.

The Children of Men is quite well done, dj. I believe it was one of her early novels, before she settled on crime fiction and invented Inspector (or whatever his rank is) Dalgleish. She has also done a couple of non-fiction books, examining historical murders from a new point of view.

Margo! Where have you been.

I would like to make it clear that i've not said that Miss "James" preaches. In my experience, she doesn't. I was simply struck by the turn of phrase. It is from Unnatural Causes.

The character in Miss James' novel who utters the phrase does so conversationally, but is hardly the type to set up for a benevolent dictator. In fact, the character is a retired and retiring author who is described as having written the last of his opus thirty years previously, and who now lives in rural Suffolk, paying little to no attention to his neighbors and dining in company seldom and then only with a select few friends (of whom, one assumes, he has few). This is not at all the interfering busybody type, and his remark is offered only in the context of looking beyond the walls of his house, something in which he hasn't much interest.

Albequerque, Lithuania? Never heard of it . . .