text:
Joseph McCarthy

Joseph Raymond McCarthy (14 November 1908 - 2 May 1957) was an American politician and attorney who served as a Republican U.S. Senator from the state of Wisconsin from 1947 until his death in 1957. Beginning in 1950, during the Cold War, McCarthy claimed widespread communist subversion alleging numerous Soviet spies and sympathizers had infiltrated the United States federal government, universities, and film industry. Ultimately, the smear tactics he used led him to be censured by the U.S. Senate. The term "McCarthyism", coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy's practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist activities. Today, the term is used more broadly to mean demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents.

Quotes

 * Today we are engaged in a final, all-out battle between communistic atheism and Christianity. The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time, and ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down — they are truly down.
 * Speech in Wheeling, West Virginia (February 9,1950), as quoted at History Matters

 * As you know, very recently the secretary of state proclaimed his loyalty to a man guilty of what has always been considered as the most abominable of all crimes — of being a traitor to the people who gave him a position of great trust. The secretary of state, in attempting to justify his continued devotion to the man who sold out the Christian world to the atheistic world, referred to Christ's Sermon on the Mount as a justification and reason therefore, and the reaction of the American people to this would have made the heart of Abraham Lincoln happy. When this pompous diplomat in ugly pants, with a phony British accent, proclaimed to the American people that Christ on the Mount endorsed communism, high treason, and betrayal of a sacred trust, the blasphemy was so great that it awakened the dormant indignation of the American people. He has lighted the spark which is resulting in a moral uprising and will end only when the whole sorry mess of twisted warped thinkers are swept from the national ugly so ugly that we may have a new birth of national honesty and decency in government.
 * Speech in Wheeling, West Virginia (February 9, 1950), as quoted at Civics Online

 * Any man who has been given the honor of being promoted to general and who says, "I will protect another general who protects Communists," is not fit to wear that uniform, general.
 * Remark to Gen. Ralph Zwicker during the Army investigations (February 18, 1954), as quoted in A Conspiracy So Immense (2005) by David M. Oshinsky

 * Good evening. Mr. Edward R. Murrow, Educational Director of the Columbia Broadcasting System, devoted his program to an attack on the work of the United States Senate Investigating Committee, and on me personally as its chairman, and over the past four years he has made repeated attacks upon me and those fighting Communists... Now, ordinarily--I would not take time out from the important work at hand to answer Murrow. However, in this case, I feel justified in doing so because Murrow is a symbol, a leader and the cleverest of the jackal pack which is always found at the throat of anyone who dares to expose individual Communists and traitors.
 * From Senator McCarthy's rebuttal to Edward R. Murrow's program on CBS news show See It Now best remembered as the show that criticized the Red Scare and contributed to the political downfall of McCarthy.

Disputed

 * I have here in my hand a list of 205 that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.
 * Attributed to a speech in Wheeling, West Virginia (February 9, 1950), as printed in the Wheeling Intelligencer. At dispute is whether McCarthy claimed 205 names, as many historical accounts say, or 57 names, as McCarthy said on the Senate floor; see Congressional Record (February 20, 1950). McCarthy admitted using the number 205 in speeches, but in reference to a statistic for which he had no names. Eyewitnesses to the speech remember him referring to both figures at different points. McCarthy provided a copy of his list to Sen. Millard Tydings on request; it had 81 names, some of which had handwritten annotations. He refused to disclose all of the names publicly unless given access to relevant government files, citing libel concerns. See also Blacklisted from History (2007) by M. Stanton Evans.

Quotes about McCarthy

 * Sorted alphabetically by author or source.

 * The Western Right, on the other hand, did struggle to condemn Soviet crimes, but sometimes using methods that harmed their own cause. Surely the man who did the greatest damage to anti-communism was the American Senator Joe McCarthy. Recent documents showing that some of his accusations were correct do not change the impact of his overzealous pursuit of communists in American public life: ultimately, his public "trials" of communist sympathizers would tarnish the cause of anti-communism with the brush of chauvinism and intolerance. In the end, his actions served the cause of neutral historical inquiry no better than those of his opponents.
 * Anne Applebaum in Gulag: A History (2003)

 * When the wind is right, a faint odor of kerosene is exhaled from Senator McCarthy.
 * Ray Bradbury, in Nation (May 2, 1953), and quoted in "About Fahrenheit 451 : Historical Influences for Fahrenheit 451"

 * Democracy has so disappeared in the United States that there are some subjects that cannot even be discussed. The essence of the democratic process is free discussion. There was a time, when men were not allowed to talk of universal suffrage, education for women, or freedom for Negro slaves. Today communism is the dirty word and socialism is suspect. ... In this state, and in our time, occurred one of the worst blows to the democratic process which our nation has suffered. Senator McCarthy succeeded in making America afraid to discuss socialism.
 * W. E. B. Du Bois, Speech at University of Wisconsin, 1960, as reproduced in Against Racism: Unpublished Essays, Papers, Addresses, 1887-1961, p. 303

 * Nothing would probably please him more than to get the publicity that would be generated by a public repudiation by the President.
 * Dwight D. Eisenhower, on declining to publicly confront McCarthy's strategies, as quoted in The Party of Fear (1988), by David Harry Bennett, p. 304

 * I will not get in the gutter with that guy.
 * Dwight D. Eisenhower, as quoted in Eisenhower: The Inside Story (1956) by Robert J. Donovan

 * The junior senator from Wisconsin, by his reckless charges, has so preyed upon the fears and hatreds and prejudices of the American people that he has started a prairie fire which neither he nor anyone else may be able to control.
 * J. William Fulbright (D-Arkansas), as quoted in Enough Rope (1969) by Arthur Vivian Watkins

 * When public men indulge themselves in abuse, when they deny others a fair trial, when they resort to innuendo and insinuation, to libel, scandal, and suspicion, then our democratic society is outraged, and democracy is baffled. It has no apparatus to deal with the boor, the liar, the lout, and the antidemocrat in general.
 * J. William Fulbright, remarks in the Senate (February 2, 1954), Congressional Record, vol. 100, p. 1105

 * Radicalism or anti-radicalism should have had nothing to do with the sly, miserable methods of McCarthy, Nixon and colleagues, as they flailed at Communists, near-Communists, and nowhere-near Communists. Lives were being ruined and few hands were raised in help. Since when do you have to agree with people to defend them from injustice?
 * Lillian Hellman, in Scoundrel Time (1976), p. 82

 * Sad is a fake word for me to be using, I am still angry that their reason for disagreeing with McCarthy was too often his crude methods. . . . Many of the anti-Communists were, of course, honest men. But none of them . . . has stepped forward to admit a mistake. It is not necessary in this country; they too know that we are a people who do not remember much.
 * Lillian Hellman, in Scoundrel Time (1976), p. 150

 * In fact, most of what people ordinarily mean when they talk about the 'red scare', the House Un-American Activities Committee; anti-Communist probes into Hollywood, labor unions, and America's schools and universities; the Rosenberg trial; blacklisting in the media and schoolteachers fired for disloyalty, had nothing to do with McCarthy and he had nothing to do with them (although when asked, he generally approved of them, as most other Americans did). McCarthy's own committee in the Senate, the, which he chaired for less than two years, had a specific duty to investigate communism in the federal government and among government employees. It had done so before he became chairman, and it did so after he left, under Senator John McClellan and Bobby Kennedy. The men and women McCarthy targeted, rightly or wrongly, as Communists or Communist sympathizers all shared that single characteristic: they were federal employees and public servants, and therefore, McCarthy and his supporters argued, they ought be held accountable to a higher standard than other American citizens. That fact tends to get lost when historians dwell exclusively on the stories of harassment, professional disgrace, and other indignities suffered as a result of McCarthy's and other anti-Communist investigations.
 * Arthur Herman, as quoted in "Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator" (1999), by A. Herman, Free Press

 * The hardest thing I ever did was keep my temper at that time.
 * George Marshall, in a comment to a personal friend, about McCarthy's attacks upon his loyalty (which went so far as to call him a "traitor"), as quoted by Alistair Cooke, in Letter from America : General Marshall (October 16, 1959), published in Memories of the Great and the Good (1999)

 * Hoover knew that Joe wasn't the best guy in the world to be doing this job. We all did ... But his attitude was, "Thank God somebody's doing it." They were fighting the same enemy, you know.
 * Robert J. Morris, as quoted in A Conspiracy So Immense, (2005) by David M. Oshinsky, p. 258; this summation of Hoover's attitude by Morris has since appeared as if it were a direct quote of Hoover.

 * It is necessary to investigate before legislating, but the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine one and the junior Senator from Wisconsin has stepped over it repeatedly. His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind as between the internal and the external threats of communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men — not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular. This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent, or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities. As a nation we have come into our full inheritance at a tender age. We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it — and rather successfully. Cassius was right. "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves." Good night, and good luck.'''
 * Edward R. Murrow, in his See It Now broadcast focusing on McCarthy's tactics (March 9, 1954)

 * We cannot speak unequivocally for the long future. But we can have faith. And our faith is strong that long after Senator Eastland and his present subcommittee are gone, long after segregation has lost its final battle in the South, long after all that was known as McCarthyism is a dim, unwelcome memory, long after the last Congressional committee has learned that it cannot tamper successfully with a free press, The New York Times will be speaking for the men who make it, and only for the men who make it, and speaking, without fear or favor, the truth as it sees it.
 * "The Voice of a Free Press", The New York Times (January 15, 1956), as reprinted on January 8, 2015

 * The mingling of object and image in collage, of given fact and conscious artifice, corresponds to the illusion-producing processes of contemporary civilization. In advertisements, news stories, films, and political campaigns, lumps of unassailable data are implanted in preconceived formats in order to make the entire fabrication credible. Documents waved at hearings by Joseph McCarthy to substantiate his fictive accusations were a version of collage, as is the corpse of Lenin, inserted by Stalin into the Moscow mausoleum to authenticate his own contrived ideology. Twentieth-century fictions are rarely made up of the whole cloth, perhaps because the public has been trained to have faith in "information." Collage is the primary formula of the aesthetics of mystification developed in our time.
 * Harold Rosenberg. Art on the Edge: Creators and Situations (1975) p. 178 University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-72674-6

 * Not only in Britain but also in the USA the communists were as distant as ever from power and influence. But not every anti-communist was willing to do things on the quiet. Joe McCarthy, the rough-tongued Senator for Wisconsin, made his case inside and outside the Senate and avowed that communism was sucking the lifeblood of American public life. He dug up evidence – and sometimes invented it – that Moscow had secret collaborators everywhere. He appeared live on television brandishing his lists of communists and their supporters. Those whom he identified as subversives were required to ‘name names’ of communist friends or face professional ruin. McCarthy concentrated his fire on filmmaking and other sectors of the media. Often his accusations were ill founded but he succeeded in creating an atmosphere of suspicion which pervaded American public life. The playwright Arthur Miller refused to submit to the Senator for Wisconsin. Instead he drafted The Crucible, a play about the witch-hunt craze in seventeenth-century New England, which was an obvious allegory of hysteria and persecution. McCarthy’s own activities came under scrutiny after he was accused of seeking illegal favours for his protégés. The Senate held a debate on him and by a large majority ruled that he had abused his power. McCarthy died in ignominy in 1957. Yet his impact was enormous and permanent. No longer did the left-wing American press give gentle treatment to Marxism as had been the case before the Second World War. Words like communism and socialism – and eventually even liberalism – became widely pejorative. Mainstream political discourse in the USA underwent a drastic constriction. Sympathy for communism, where it survived outside the Communist Party of the USA, was usually confined to individual writers or students' political groups; it impinged little on popular opinion.
 * Robert Service Comrades: A History of World Communism (2009)

 * This is the first time in my experience, and I was ten years in the Senate, that I ever heard of a Senator trying to discredit his own Government before the world. ... Your telegram is not only not true and an insolent approach to a situation that should have been worked out between man and man but it shows conclusively that you are not even fit to have a hand in the operation of the Government of the United States.
 * Harry S. Truman, drafted response (probably unsent) to a telegram received on February 11, 1950

 * This is more than a matter of history. Trump has been poking the military in the eye in a way that is reminiscent of McCarthy, pressuring it to rout demonstrators, peaceful and otherwise, from the streets of America.
 * Larry Tye, as quoted in "What Donald Trump could learn from Joe McCarthy: The armed forces are too big to bully", USA Today (June 15, 2020)

 * Trump, like McCarthy, could push back against the onslaught when it was coming from the press, protesters or political foes. But as the Wisconsin senator's downfall makes clear, the armed forces are too big to bully.
 * Larry Tye, as quoted in "What Donald Trump could learn from Joe McCarthy: The armed forces are too big to bully", USA Today (June 15, 2020)

 * Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. … Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?
 * Joseph N. Welch, in response to McCarthy accusing Fred Fisher, one of the employees of Welch's law firm, of being a Communist. (Transcripts and audio of the exchange between Welch and McCarthy

 * With preparations for war came fears of domestic subversion. The link had been made many times before in US history: the Red Scare after World War I or the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II were just recent examples. The public witch hunt against Communists and other Left-wingers in the 1940s and 1950s had equally damaging effects. Charges of disloyalty, most of which were entirely unfounded, drove many knowledgeable and gifted experts away from government service. Joseph McCarthy, the demagogic and hyperbolic Wisconsin senator who through his speeches on the Senate floor came to symbolize anti-Communist paranoia, did more damage to US interests than any of Stalin's covert operations. In February 1950 McCarthy claimed that he had evidence of 205—later corrected to 57—Communists working in the State Department, and denounced the president as a traitor who "sold out the Christian world to the atheistic world." The series of hearings and investigations, which accusations such as McCarthy’s gave rise to, destroyed people's lives and careers. Even for those who were cleared, such as the famous central Asia scholar Owen Lattimore, some of the accusations stuck and made it difficult to find employment. It was, as Lattimore said in his book title from 1950, Ordeal by Slander. For many of the lesser known who were targeted— workers, actors, teachers, lawyers—it was a Kafkaesque world, where their words were twisted and used against them during public hearings by people who had no knowledge of the victims or their activities. Behind all of it was the political purpose of harming the Administration, though even some Democrats were caught up in the frenzy and the president himself straddled the issue instead of publicly confronting McCarthy. McCarthyism, as it was soon called, reduced the US standing in the world and greatly helped Soviet propaganda, especially in western Europe.
 * Odd Arne Westad, The Cold War: A World History (2017)

title: Joseph McCarthy


text:
Barton Fink

Barton Fink is a 1991 film about a newly successful New York playwright in the 1940s who accepts an offer to write movie scripts in LA, and finds himself with writer's block when required to do a B-movie wrestling script, the only relief coming from a traveling salesman living next door.
 * Written and directed by Joel and Ethan Coen.

Between Heaven and Hell There's Always Hollywood!taglines

Jack Lipnik

 * I run this dump, and I don't know the technical mumbo-jumbo. Why do I run it? Cause I got horse sense, goddamit. SHOWMANSHIP! And also, and I hope Lou told you this, I am bigger and meaner and louder than any other kike in this town. Did you tell him that, Lou? And I don't mean my dick is bigger than yours, it's not a sexual thing, although you're the writer, you'd know more about that. Coffee?
 * We're only interested in one thing, Bart. Can you tell a story? Can you make us laugh? Can you make us cry? Can you make us want to break out in joyous song? Is that more than one thing? Okay!
 * Look, Bart, barring a preference we're going to put you to work on a wrestling picture, Wallace Beery. I say this because they tell me you know the poetry of the streets, so that would rule out westerns, pirate pictures, screwball, Bible, Roman... look, I'm not one of those guys who thinks poetic has got to be fruity. We're together on that, aren't we? I mean I'm from New York myself, well, Minsk if you want to go all the way back. Which we won't, if you don't mind and I ain't asking. Now people are going to say to you, Wallace Beery, wrestling, it's a B picture. You tell them: BULLSHIT! We do NOT make B pictures here at Capitol. Let's put a stop to that rumor RIGHT now!

Charlie Meadows

 * Look upon me! I'll show you the life of the mind! I'll show you the life of the mind!
 * C'mon, Barton, you think you know about pain? You think I made your life hell? Take a look around this dump. You're just a tourist with a typewriter, Barton, I live here, don't you understand that? And you come into MY home... and you complain that I'M making too... much... noise.

Dialogue

 * Geisler: Ever act?
 * Barton: ...Huh? No, I'm—
 * Geisler: We need Indians for a Norman Steele western.
 * Barton: I'm a writer. Ted O—
 * Geisler: Think about it, Fink. Writers come and go; we always need Indians.

 * Barton: Have you read the Bible, Pete?
 * Pete: Holy Bible?
 * Barton: Yeah.
 * Pete: Yeah, I think so. Anyway, I've heard about it.

 * Charlie: I could tell you some stories...
 * Barton: Sure you could and yet many writers do everything in their power to insulate themselves from the common man, from where they live, from where they trade, from where they fight and love and converse and...So naturally their work suffers and regresses into empty formalism and... well I'm spouting off again, but to put it in your language, the theatre becomes as phony as a three-dollar bill!
 * Charlie: Well I guess that's a tragedy right there!

 * Mastrionotti: What do you do, Fink?
 * Barton: I write.
 * Deutsch: Oh yeah? What kind of write?
 * Barton: Well, as a matter of fact I write for the pictures.
 * Mastrionotti: Big fuckin' deal.
 * Deutsch: You want my partner to kiss your ass?
 * Mastrionotti: Would that be good enough for you?
 * Barton: No, I - I didn't mean to sound...
 * Deutsch: What did you mean?
 * Barton: I - I've got respect for - for working guys, like you...
 * Mastrionotti: Jesus! Ain't that a load off!

 * Mastrionotti: Started in Kansas City. Couple of housewives.
 * Deutsch: Couple days ago we see the same M.O. out in Los Feliz.
 * Mastrionotti: Doctor. Ear, nose and throat man.
 * Deutsch: All of which he's now missin'.
 * Mastrionotti: Well, some of his throat was there.
 * Deutsch: Physician, heal thyself.
 * Mastrionotti: Good luck with no fuckin' head.
 * Deutsch: Anyway.

 * Geisler: Look, you confused? You need guidance? Talk to another writer.
 * Barton: Who?
 * Geisler: Jesus, throw a rock in here, you'll hit one. And do me a favor, Fink: throw it hard.

 * Deutsch: [questioning Fink about Mundt] What else?
 * Barton: Trying to think. Nothing, really. He... he said he liked Jack Oakie pictures.
 * Mastrionotti: You know, ordinarily we say anything you might remember could be helpful. But I'll be frank with you, Fink. That is not helpful.
 * Deutsch: Notice how he's not writing it down?

 * Barton: I'm sorry if I let you down.
 * Jack: You didn't let me down Fink, or even Lou. We don't live or die by what you scribble. You let Ben Geisler down. He liked you, trusted you... and that's why he's gone, he's fired. That man had a heart as big as the all outdoors and you fucked him.

Taglines

 * Between Heaven and Hell There's Always Hollywood!
 * There's only one thing stranger than what's going on inside his head. What's going on outside.

Cast

 * John Turturro - Barton Fink
 * John Goodman - Charlie Meadows
 * Michael Lerner - Jack Lipnick
 * Judy Davis - Audrey Taylor
 * John Mahoney - W.P. Mayhew
 * Tony Shalhoub - Ben Geisler
 * Jon Polito - Lou Breeze
 * Steve Buscemi - Chet
 * David Warrilow - Garland Stanford
 * Richard Portnow - Det. Mastrionotti
 * Christopher Murney - Det. Deutsch
 * Megan Fay - Poppy Carnahan
 * Lance Davis - Richard St. Claire

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Barton Fink


text:
George R. R. Martin

George Raymond Richard Martin (born George Raymond Martin September 20, 1948) is an American novelist and short story writer in the fantasy, horror, and science fiction genres, a screenwriter, and television producer. He is best known for A Song of Ice and Fire, his international bestselling series of epic fantasy novels that HBO adapted for its dramatic series Game of Thrones.
 * See also:
 * A Song of Ice and Fire

Quotes

 * I'm not an "American First" (and maybe because I read science fiction) I'm a "Terran First". I'm a human being first. And I have this sympathy for other human beings no matter what side of the giant ice wall they happen to be born on.
 * At Tuscon 43 (2016)

 * Of all the bright cruel lies they tell you, the crudest is the one called love.
 * Meathouse Man (1976)

 * Been on the river thirty years, York. Rafted down to New Orleans when I was just a boy, and worked flatboats and keelboats both before steamers. I been a pilot and a mate and a striker, even a mud clerk. Been everything there is to be in this business, but one thing I never been, and that's a sharper.
 * Abner Marsh to Joshua York when York questions his honesty, Fevre Dream (1982)

We read fantasy to find the colors again, I think. To taste strong spices and hear the song the sirens sang. There is something old and true in fantasy that speaks to something deep within us, to the child who dreamt that one day he would hunt the forests of the night, and feast beneath the hollow hills, and find a love to last forever, somewhere south of Oz and north of Shangri-La. They can keep their heaven. When I die, I'd sooner go to Middle Earth.
 * The best fantasy is written in the language of dreams. It is alive as dreams are alive, more real than real... for a moment at least... that long magic moment before we wake. Fantasy is silver and scarlet, indigo and azure, obsidian veined with gold and lapis lazuli. Reality is plywood and plastic, done up in mud brown and olive drab. Fantasy tastes of habaneros and honey, cinnamon and cloves, rare red meat and wines as sweet as summer. Reality is beans and tofu, and ashes at the end. Reality is the strip malls of Burbank, the smoke-stacks of Cleveland, a parking garage in Newark. Fantasy is the towers of Minas Tirith, the ancient stones of Gormenghast, the halls of Camelot. Fantasy flies on the wings of Icarus, reality on Southwest airlines. Why do our dreams become so much smaller when they finally come true?
 * The Faces of Fantasy (1996)

 * Art is not a democracy. People don't get to vote on how it ends.
 * Interview with GamePro magazine (8 April 2003)

 * Back at the Philadelphia Worldcon (which seems a million years ago), I announced the famous five-year gap: I was going to skip five years forward in the story, to allow some of the younger characters to grow older and the dragons to grow larger, and for various other reasons. I started out writing on that basis in 2001, and it worked very well for some of my myriad characters but not at all for others, because you can't just have nothing happen for five years. If things do happen you have to write flashbacks, a lot of internal retrospection, and that's not a good way to present it. I struggled with that essentially wrong direction for about a year before finally throwing it out, realizing there had to be another interim book. That became A Feast for Crows, where the action is pretty much continuous from the preceding book. Even so, that only accounts for one year. Why the four after that? I don't know, except that this was a very tough book to write -- and it remains so, because I've only finished half. Going in, I thought I could do something about the length of the second book in the series, A Clash of Kings, roughly 1,200 pages in manuscript. But I passed that and there was a lot more to write. Then I passed the length of the third book, A Storm of Swords, which was something like 1,500 pages in manuscript and gave my publishers all around the world lots of production problems. I didn't really want to make any cuts because I had this huge story to tell. We started thinking about dividing it in two and doing it as A Feast for Crows, Parts One and Two, but the more I thought about that the more I really did not like it. Part One would have had no resolution whatsoever for 18 viewpoint characters and their 18 stories. Of course this is all part of a huge megaseries so there is not a complete resolution yet in any of the volumes, but I try to give a certain sense of completion at the end of each volume -- that a movement of the symphony has wrapped up, so to speak.
 * Interview with Locus magazine (November 2005)

 * Sure. Some of the reviews have been very flattering, but the series is not finished yet. The end needs to be as strong as the beginning.
 * Talking about his magnum opus, A Song of Ice and Fire, in an interview with Patrick St-Denis on Pat's Fantasy Hotlist (1 May 2006)

 * I've been killing characters my entire career, maybe I'm just a bloody minded bastard, I don't know, [but] when my characters are in danger, I want you to be afraid to turn the page (and to do that) you need to show right from the beginning that you're playing for keeps.
 * Audio Interview with Geekson in Episode 54, (4 August 2006)

 * As a writer, my goal, (which I'm never going to achieve, and I know that, and no writer can achieve that,) but my goal is to make you almost live the books... I want you to fall through that page and feel as if these things are happening to you.
 * Audio Interview with Geekson in Episode 54, (4 August 2006)

 * There are many different kinds of writers, I like to use the analogy of architects and gardeners. There are some writers who are architects, and they plan everything, they blueprint everything, and they know before the drive the first nail into the first board what the house is going to look like and where all the closets are going to be, where the plumbing is going to run, and everything is figured out on the blueprints before they actually begin any work whatsoever. And then there are gardeners who dig a little hole and drop a seed in and water it with their blood and see what comes up, and sort of shape it.  They sort of know what seed they've planted — whether it's an oak or an elm, or a horror story or a science fiction story, but they don't how big it's going to be, or what shape it's going to take. I am much more a gardener than an architect.
 * Audio Interview with Geekson in Episode 54, (4 August 2006)

 * I think that for science fiction, fantasy, and even horror to some extent, the differences are skin-deep. I know there are elements in the field, particularly in science fiction, who feel that the differences are very profound, but I do not agree with that analysis. I think for me it is a matter of the furnishings. An elf or an alien may in some ways fulfill the same function, as a literary trope. It’s almost a matter of flavor. The ice cream can be chocolate or it can be strawberry, but it’s still ice cream. The real difference, to my mind, is between romantic fiction, which all these genres are a part of, and mimetic fiction, or naturalistic fiction.
 * Interview with Weird Tales (24 May 2007)

 * Ten years from now, no one is going to care how quickly the books came out. The only thing that will matter, the only thing anyone will remember, is how good they were. That's my main concern, and always will be.
 * Official blog, (July 2007)

 * Tolkien made the wrong choice when he brought Gandalf back. Screw Gandalf. He had a great death and the characters should have had to go on without him.
 * On a panel at Odyssey Con 2008 (April 2008)

 * My reading of history has shown me that simply 'being a good man' is not enough. That there are many kings who are good men and yet bad kings. And even good kings sometimes make disastrous decisions. So government is complex, politics is complex.
 * On a panel with R. Scott Bakker in Semana Negra, Spain (2008)

 * Believe me, no one wants to finish this book more than me.
 * Progress update on A Dance with Dragons via his website (2008)

 * With great power comes great responsibility, Stan Lee once wrote. Spidey's credo articulates the basic premise of every superhero universe, including ours. But Lord Acton wrote that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The tension between those two truths is where the drama comes in. My own heroes are the dreamers, those men and women who tried to make the world a better place than when they found it, whether in small ways or great ones. Some succeeded, some failed, most had mixed results... but it is the effort that's heroic, as I see it. Win or lose, I admire those who fight the good fight.
 * Talking about Busted Flush the Wild Cards novel, Interview on Pat's Fantasy Hotlist (December 2008)

 * I hear you jeering. Pfui. Those of you who know my work only from A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE may not be aware that I was once considered the most romantic science fiction writer of the 70s, back when I was doing my Thousand Worlds stuff.
 * On romance in science fiction and fantasy, in his blog (January 2010)

 * The House of Fantasy is built of stone and wood and furnished in High Medieval. Its people travel by horse and galley, fight with sword and spell and battle-axe, communicate by palantir or raven, and break bread with elves and dragons. The House of Science Fiction is built of duralloy and plastic and furnished in Faux Future. Its people travel by starship and aircar, fight with nukes and tailored germs, communicate by ansible and laser, and break protein bars with aliens. The House of Horror is built of bone and cobwebs and furnished in Ghastly Gothick. Its people travel only by night, fight with anything that will kill messily, communicate in screams and shrieks and gibbers, and sip blood with vampires and werewolves.
 * "The Furniture Rule", explaining the differences and similarities between the fields of weird fiction in Dreamsongs

 * Nobody is a villain in their own story. We're all the heroes of our own stories.
 * "George R. R. Martin Interview GAME OF THRONES" by Christina Radish, Collider (17 April 2011)

 * The battle between Good and Evil is a theme of much of fantasy. But I think the battle between Good and Evil is fought largely within the individual human heart, by the decisions that we make. It’s not like evil dresses up in black clothing and you know, they’re really ugly. These are some of the things that Tolkien did; he made them work fabulously, but in the hands of his imitators, they become total clichés. I mean the orc-like creatures who always do dress in black and... they’re really ugly and they’ve got facial deformities or something. You can tell that if somebody’s ugly, he must be evil. And then Tolkien’s heroes are all very attractive people and all that, of course, again this became cliché in the hands of the Tolkien imitators.
 * "GRRM Interview Part 2: Fantasy and History", interview with Time magazine (18 April 2011)

 * Much as I admire Tolkien, and I do admire Tolkien — he’s been a huge influence on me, and his Lord of the Rings is the mountain that leans over every other fantasy written since and shaped all of modern fantasy — there are things about it, the whole concept of the Dark Lord, and good guys battling bad guys, Good versus Evil, while brilliantly handled in Tolkien, in the hands of many Tolkien successors, it has become kind of a cartoon. We don’t need any more Dark Lords, we don’t need any more, ‘Here are the good guys, they’re in white, there are the bad guys, they’re in black. And also, they’re really ugly, the bad guys. It is certainly a genuine, legitimate topic as the core of fantasy, but I think the battle between Good and Evil is waged within the individual human hearts. We all have good in us and we all have evil in us, and we may do a wonderful good act on Tuesday and a horrible, selfish, bad act on Wednesday, and to me, that’s the great human drama of fiction. I believe in gray characters, as I’ve said before. We all have good and evil in us and there are very few pure paragons and there are very few orcs. A villain is a hero of the other side, as someone said once, and I think there’s a great deal of truth to that, and that’s the interesting thing. In the case of war, that kind of situation, so I think some of that is definitely what I’m aiming at.
 * AssignmentX interview (June 2011)

 * Sometimes I think some of my fellow novelists who have not worked in television and film are very naive about this process. They get an offer and there's the dump truck full of money and they sign it, they cash the check and then they're not involved in the series. They may get invited to the premiere and they come out of the premiere looking like all of their children had just been gassed, with a stunned look on their face because everything has been changed.
 * On his background in Hollywood and the risks of adaptioning one's work for the screen, at Authors@Google (August 2011)

 * I think worship of death is an interesting basis for religion, because after all death is the one universal. It doesn't seem to matter what gods you pray to. We all die, in the real world and in fantasy worlds, and if there was some religion where you did not die I suspect that would be, that god would become very popular. They all promise us eternal life, but whatever.
 * Discussing the influence of real-life faiths on his work and its religious systems, Authors@Google (August 2011)

 * I always felt like Gandalf should have stayed dead. That was such an incredible sequence in Fellowship of the Ring when he faces the Balrog on the Khazad-dûm and he falls into the gulf, and his last words are, “Fly, you fools.” What power that had, how that grabbed me. And then he comes back as Gandalf the White, and if anything he's sort of improved. I never liked Gandalf the White as much as Gandalf the Grey, and I never liked him coming back. I think it would have been an even stronger story if Tolkien had left him dead.
 * Interview on The Sound of Young America (September 2011)

 * I think even during the campaign I said that Trump reminded me most of Joffrey. They have the same level of emotional maturity. And Joffrey likes to remind everyone that he's king. And he thinks that gives him the ability to do anything. And we're not an absolute monarchy, like Westeros is. We're a constitutional republic. And yet, Trump doesn't seem to know what that means. He thinks the presidency gives him the power to do anything. And so, yeah, Joffrey is Trump.
 * Interview by Jamie Sims in the T: The New York Times Style Magazine, "George R. R. Martin Answers Times Staffers’ Burning Questions," October 16, 2018.

infinity plus interview (2001)

 * "Sunsets of High Renown : An Interview with George R. R. Martin" by Nick Gevers, at infinity plus (3 February 2001)

 * I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers... which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don't know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there's always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has.

 * Historical processes have never much interested me, but history is full of stories, full of triumph and tragedy and battles won and lost. It is the people who speak to me, the men and women who once lived and loved and dreamed and grieved, just as we do. Though some may have had crowns on their heads or blood on their hands, in the end they were not so different from you and me, and therein lies their fascination. I suppose I am still a believer in the now unfashionable "heroic" school, which says that history is shaped by individual men and women and the choices that they make, by deeds glorious and terrible.

I wanted to stand much of that on its head. In real life, the hardest aspect of the battle between good and evil is determining which is which.
 * The battle between good and evil is a legitimate theme for a Fantasy (or for any work of fiction, for that matter), but in real life that battle is fought chiefly in the individual human heart. Too many contemporary Fantasies take the easy way out by externalizing the struggle, so the heroic protagonists need only smite the evil minions of the dark power to win the day. And you can tell the evil minions, because they're inevitably ugly and they all wear black.

Quotes about Martin

 * Alphabetized by author

 * I keep trying to come up with a better way to put it, but the simplicity of things, at least from my perspective is this: George R. R. Martin is not your bitch. This is a useful thing to know, perhaps a useful thing to point out when you find yourself thinking that possibly George is, indeed, your bitch, and should be out there typing what you want to read right now. People are not machines. Writers and artists aren't machines.
 * Neil Gaiman in "Entitlement issues..." (12 May 2009) on his blog, defending authors who need time to produce quality work.

 * I saw Mr. Martin at Worldcon last year. And I almost went up to him and asked, “How have you gone this long without killing someone?” Because however much flak I happen to get from fans, he has to get a thousand times more. In my opinion, he's a saint. If I had to deal with that level of fan dickishness, I would have already lost my shit in some spectacular way. There would be a video of me on youtube, gone all berserk with nerd rage, holding someone up by the neck, shouting "I've got your sequel right here, bitch!"
 * Patrick Rothfuss, author of The Kingkiller Chronicle in "Floating on a Sea of Love" on his blog (9 March 2009)

 * Whenever we got to a George R. R. Martin script, you realized no one thinks like this guy. If the ‘Beauty and the Beast’ staff was a jazz quintet, George R. R. Martin was like John Coltrane, because he plays a solo and you go, ‘How did he do that? How did that juxtaposition of notes ever come into anybody’s head?’ George’s stuff was fluid and funky, weird and kinky, but also had this gravitas, this profound thought, that gave it weight and import. He’s one of the really, really good guys.
 * Ron Perlman about working with George R. R. Martin

 * It is no shame to lose to me, mortal. Even among mythical creatures there are very few who can give a unicorn a good game.
 * Roger Zelazny, in lines written for a unicorn speaking to Martin, after a game of Chess, in Unicorn Variations (1983)

Interviews

 * Interview with George R.R. Martin at Neth Space
 * Interview with George R.R. Martin at SFFWorld.com
 * Interview with George R. R. Martin in Abebooks.com
 * Audio interview with National Review Online
 * Audio Interview with George R.R. Martin at Geekson.com
 * Interview with fiction writer George R.R. Martin at FreeMagazine.fi
 * In a Fantasy World of His Own Northwestern magazine profile

title: George R. R. Martin


text:
Talk:Prem Rawat/Archive 1

If you post a quote, you must provide source and demonstrate that either the quote is in the public domain or fall within the copyright guidelines. Attempts to quote from copyrighted material will be mercilessly deleted. --168.143.113.138 04:00, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * This comment is not correct. Most short quotations of modern works and people are used under fair use guidelines nearly everywhere, including here. Extensive quotations or complete poems and lyrics are something that press the limits of fair use, even by non-profit and educational organizations, but use of most short quotations is a commonly permitted practice. ~ Moby 18:46, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

64.81.88.140, why did you remove the obsolete name "Guru Maharaji Ji"? Thanks in advance. Andries 16:26, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * The honorofic title Maharaji is mentioned. It is not used as the title of the Wikipedia article, nor this one, as most honorific titles are avoided in page names both here and at Wikipedia. ~ Moby 18:46, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Moby thanks for your answer, I would call Maharaji a monastic name. There is a lot of controversy with this guy who is accused of obscuring his past including even his former names, see Criticism of Prem Rawat. These old names are important because that is how he is known to the public and how he used to call himself. Andries 19:01, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Andries. I removed the quote you copied to the section "about himself" for the simple reason he was not talking about himslef, but about his father and teacher, his Guru maharaji. If you want you can add it back under a different heading. -- 05:05, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I gave a reference for my assertionn. There was even an authorized biography published under the name Who is guru maharaji ji with his picture on the cover.      I will revert. Andries 17:28, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * .140 and others, His father was called Hans_Ji_Maharaj. If he did talk about his father then he must have used a very idionsyncratic terminology. Andries 17:54, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You have no understanding of how this was said. --64.81.88.140 16:47, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

An attempt at resolution of conflicts:
There have been disputes and edit conflicts occurring over some sections of this article: I am attempting to initiate a resolution that can accommodate the broadest range of perspectives, and preserve the greatest amount of pertinent information. I am restructuring the article to conform to most other articles in Wikiquote: Sourced quotes in chronological order, + attributed ones in alphabetical, and I am removing most of the sometimes interpretive headings. I have not checked all references that have been cited, but am reformatting them as if they were correct.

I am also restoring a link to the very much esteemed (and perhaps sometimes reviled) site at the University of Virginia on New Religious Movements, as it is entirely appropriate for those seeking a diversity of perspectives, rather than promoting a narrow range of them. ~ Kalki 18:35, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks Kalki, I support this compromise. I regret that the link to the Universty of Virginia website has already been removed. Andries 09:55, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Chronological order of quotes for a person that is still alive, is best presented in descending order, as it is always more relevant what this person is saying now than what he/she said 30 or 40 years ago. For people that have passed away, the traditional ascending order is preferred. --Jossifresco 15:52, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, It is normal to start with the oldest quotes. That is also prescribed in the template. I changed to chronological order. Besides in that way the reader can see the evolution in his teachings. Andries 10:56, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Comments on recent edits:
Wikiquote, like the Wikipedia, is a Wikimedia project for providing information to people, which permits them to join in the process of providing information to others. It is a place where people can either place or find quotations upon various subjects from various sources, including those by or about particular people, and the organizations they are strongly associated with, and provide links to sites with further information upon them and related subjects, these links including, but not limited to, the Wikipedia.

A link to the University of Virginia was erased, with the comment "what is the point of having a link about Elan Vital on a page of quotes about Maharaji?"

From the Elan Vital website it states: "Elan Vital, incorporated in 1971 in the US, is a charitable organization that promotes the message of Maharaji."

It is entirely appropriate to provide links to such sites, where people can seek further information from those with favorable impressions of his ideas, and also to provide links to sites that attempt to provide objective analysis, or even to those with hostile perspectives. Such balance is entirely appropriate for any Wikimedia project.

The reversal of chronological order that is used on this page is peculiar, and I believe unique, for a Wikiquote article on a person, but I personally have no strong objections to it being retained. The erasure of a link to an academic site that attempts to provide balanced information on the history, doctrines and practices of this group, that is so strongly and innately associated with the man now commonly referred to as Prem Rawat, is something I do strongly object to, and I am restoring that link, as well as providing one to Elan Vital itself. I do not see that there is any legitimate reason for not providing either of these links. ~ Kalki 18:25, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * The reason forthe deletion are is thatElan Vital is an organization that organizes events and fundrisers. They have nothing to do with Prem Rawat's teachings or quotes. The "promotion" they refer to is constrained to administrative functions only. Hardly a good reference for a Wiki dedicated to quotes. The article from Virgina university is not an objective article. It was written as a dissertation by a student of the university, mainly by quoting from a hate-group site of ex-students. Andries is on a campaign of that he calls a "public service" to "reveal the truth" about Prem Rawat. The motive, is that he has been burnt by a bad experience with a guru. That is why he is adding these nagative references. IMO, the quotes from Prem Rawat speak for themselves. Let the reader judge them.

 * For a discourse on Prem Rawat, his history, and the criticisms such as the one Andries profess, there is Wikipedia. Substantial articles exist there on the subject, so place links to these pages intead of re-inventing the wheel here at Wikiquote. That is common sense and aligned with Wikiquote policy
 * Prem Rawat
 * Criticism of Prem Rawat
 * Elan Vital
 * Hans_Ji_Maharaj
 * --64.81.88.140 03:31, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * .140, You call these references negative. I would could these references informative and revealing. The reason why this student quoted so much from the ex-premie website is because he found it an informative website (he also calls it opionated). Far more than the websites of Elan Vital and Maharaji. And to say that Elan Vital has little to do with Prem Rawat is ridiculous. It is an organization that supports his work. What you call "hate group" are people who used to be involved in the Divine Light Mission and Elan Vital and try inform the public about what they know.

 * Last Thursday, I visited an introduction meeting of Elan Vital because I wanted to see for myself whether I had been under the influence of "propaganda of a hate group" as some students of Prem Rawat would classify the information on www.ex-premie.org During the meeting students showed a video with only Prem Rawat speaking. He made vague, manipulative statements and made great promises. I received hardly information, nor were my questions answered. No books were available that gave more information. They said that if I wanted to know more I should come more often and experience myself. So, if I can draw conclusion from that meeting, then I can say that Elan Vital and Prem Rawat are very closely related and both hardly give information. Excellent reasons to re-add the UVa website to Wikiquote.

 * Anyone who really tries to be objective and gets the right information can easily see that something is wrong with Prem Rawat. I do not like it when people get exploited and cheated and that is why I care about all the articles related to this person.

 * Andries 16:38, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I see your point. In any case, I hope that you would you agree with me that it will be better to cross link to the main article in Wikipedia rather than repeating the arduous editing process here. let;s remove all the links from here and just give w: links to to main articles at WP. And FYI, I have known Prem Rawat for more than 20 years and I can assure you that there is nothing wrong, on the contrary. :) --64.81.88.140 01:41, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Andries POV
Andries. I will not allow you to take advantage of WQ policy and use the freedom to throw mud on Prem Rawat. Your behaiviour is utterly unacceptable.

Addoing Abbie Hoffman is just disgutingly POV. SHAME! --64.81.88.140 22:24, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

==.140 and Jossi== You have no right to censor relevant quotes here. And also the table of contents is prescribed according to the template Wikiquote%3ATemplate. I will re-add the Hoffman quote and the table of contents. Andries 17:40, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Andries, What is the point of that last quote you posted? I do not see why that quote is relevant. Please explain. You also said available in video, what video? what date? Thanks --Jossifresco 16:37, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * well the quote is relevant because of the accusations of financial exploitation. I will move the quote to the atttributed section and move it back to the sourced section when I have more information about the video. Andries 09:23, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Recenlty added quotes
Thaks for these new quotes. I have restored the original chronology, as discussed previously. The excellent quote about Bhakti Marg I moved to the undated section. The 2002 was the date of the video or DVD release. Also removed the "restricted" release label. If it was broadcast it could not have beenm "restricted".--64.81.88.140 14:42, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * .140, Let us follow the Wikiquote template. i.e. chronological order. That is done for all other people here. I will revert reverse chronological order. Andries 15:46, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * .140, The video may have been broadcast for a selected group. "Restriced usage" is the information that I received about the video. I support your move to the undated section. Andries 15:46, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * ,.140, I suppose that your move of the Peace bomb quote to the attributed section is a mistake. It is a famous satsang with a transcript available. If not please explain. Andries 15:46, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * .140, I also noticed that you removed some external links (ex-premie). Why did you do that? I suggest either leaving all external links intact or remove them all. Let us not remove external links with "negative" information and at the same time leaving the links with the positive information intact. Andries 15:46, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Chronology
As I did not wish to become too involved in a dispute about a particular person and their ideas, and do support experiments in formatting, I initially made no objection to the reverse chronology that was used here, but as I stated in a recent comment elsewhere: I must weigh in with Andries on the question of chronology: forward chronology has been the standard used on all other Person-pages where chronologies are used at all, and I do not think that the blog-style reverse chronology is an appropriate format for such a page devoted to a single person, living or dead. Advocates of a particular person's views might prefer the latest expressions of that individual be presented first, but the chronological progression of thoughts, expressions and ideas provides far clearer and easier to understand presentation of how a person's opinions and expressions have progressed, or failed to, on various subjects. The only pages where I feel a reverse chronology is appropriate are on a registered editor's User-page, if they wish to use it, or in the Quote of the day archives, so that the latest quote of the day is the first thing encountered when opening a page, and people don't need to scroll to the bottom to see what the latest quotations were. I do not intend to perform any edits on this page myself, but I do not accept that the page on Prem Rawat should be the one exception to having a forward chronology, nor do I accept that a blog-style presentation of a person's quotations should be used on the Wikiquote pages for other living people. ~ Kalki 15:36, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I respectfully disagree. Wikiquote needs to allow freedom of experimentation on the presentation of quotes. When a person is newsworthy, a blog-style of chronology is not only acceptable, but preferable. Wikiquote is a young enough project to allow and certainly encourage innvation and experimentation in the presentation of quotations for people thata re alive. --Jossifresco 18:33, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Jossi, I disagree, on controversial entries we should not experiment but strictly follow the guidelines. Andries 20:17, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I must diaagree again with you, Andries. The fact that you call this a controversial subject does not make it so. ≈ jossi ≈ 20:37, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, if this subject is not controversial then what subject is? I mean, look at the edits at Wikipedia. Look at their talk pages. Let us face it. It is an old, deep-rooted, bitter dispute that is now being fought here. Andries 20:50, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I have been away from the computer a few hours, and just recently returned. As I have stated, and have done: I encourage experimentation. In this case I have stated my reasons for believing the experimentations that have been made are not satisfactory, and should be rejected. From the very earliest days of the project it was stated that "Wikiquote is not a blog", and this particular page should not be made into primarily a "Prem Rawat Fan Blog". As disputes about its structure have definitely arisen, I believe that it should conform to the general form that that has been developed on most other extensive pages about people: Name, brief personal description, chronological presentation of quotes by that person (where possible), and then of sets of quotes from works by that person, and an alphabetical ordering of attributed quotes; these can be followed by misattributions, quotes by others about that person, and external links for further information and study. I personally strongly disagree with the idea that this page should be an exception to having external links, merely because there are disputes about what external links are considered most "relevant". I accepted the situation for a time, because there seemed to be a compromise on the part of the major disputants, and if they could accept it, I could. The University of Virginia project for information on "New Religious Movements" does have an article on some of the religious activities developed by, or around Prem Rawat. This article  does include statements of those critical of him and projects associated with him on it, but the project aims at providing a fair and honest account about a broad diversity of religious movements. It is not the University of Virginia's mission or policy to be primarily favorable or unfavorable to any religious creed, but to present prominent facts and opinions about them, and not exclude them. I do not think that policies at Wikiquote should be anything other than ones similar to these. ~ Kalki 20:44, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

.140 Please do not revert without explanation on the talk page
Please try to be reasonable. Let's face it we are both POV pushers on this subject so the only thing we can do it to follow the rules and remain civil. Thanks. Andries 16:58, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * My points:
 * When quoting sources, what we need to quote is the original source of the quote, i.e. the original publication in which it was quoted.
 * Using a blog type of chronology is perfectly acceptable as recent quotes are newsworthy. Newsworthiness can only be provide on a blog type of chronology. Of course, this applies to people that are alive only, of course. Prem Rawat is alive. Blog-style of chronologies is as valid as any other type of chronology used in WQ.
 * Quotations from dubious sources, such as hearsay and that have not been published and not worthy of inclusion.
 * therefore my edits as follows:
 * I have re-formatted the article to blog-style chronology;
 * removed links to websites unless that is the original source; and
 * removed quotes that do not have a published source.
 * Jossifresco 18:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, thanks for your explanations
 * 1. I agree that the original source is the best. Andries 19:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2. A blog type is totally unacceptable in Wikisource. Please follow the template. I will revert to normal chronological orderm, following the example of all other entries here. Andries 19:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 3. Videos are good sources too. There are lots of quotes from movies here in Wikiquote. Please tell me what quotes you have deleted as it is difficult to compare reverse with forward order versions. Andries 19:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 4. I do not see why the links to articles that are not the original sources should be removed. We should link to the best available source, which is always the original source if available but if not available then linking to other website is fine. Andries 19:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Unacceptable edit by Andries. He has an agenda here and that is to paint a negative image of Prem Rawat as well to promote the site of the hate group ex-premie.org. Andries, given a previous very negative experience with a guru, has decided to utilize WP and WQ as a forum in which he can promote his nd anti-guru bias. This is totally unacceptable and contrary to WP and WQ policies.

 * Andries is in collusion with this ex-premie hate group. He converses and strategizes daily with them on how to push their negative POVs in the http://forum8.org, the discussion form of this hate group.

 * He hides beneath a facade of neutrality when in fact the only motivation has nothing to do with the sucess of WP or WQ, rather than a poor's man form of therapy to get over his bad past experience.

 * In summary, Andries has not be be respected as a neutral voice. Correct me if I am wrong, Andries. --64.81.88.140 20:27, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I openly adnitted that I was not neutral. But I try to be reasonable and follow the rules. You don't. That is the difference between you and me. Andries 20:35, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Edits

 * Although I do not agree with not allowing a descending chronology (and I will take this issue for discussion with other editors later this week) I agree for now to leave it as is until such time.
 * Links to the ex-premie website are not needed as they are not the source for the Alta Loma Q&A session. The source is a magazine. The only reason they have been placed ther is to attract traffic to their website. Please read more about these people's motives and character in WP at
 * Deleted quotes about "trainings". These are not quotes and cannot be attributed to Prem Rawat as these notes have not been corroborated or attributed anywhere besides the hate group website with a clear agenda to smear Prem Rawat's name.
 * ≈ jossi ≈ 21:48, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * The reason I placed the link is so that people can have a look in what context it has been said. And for verification. I do not understand why only links to original sources should be allowed. If a link to the original source is available then that link is to be preferred of course. Andries 04:44, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * really Andries, do you want anyone to believe this? The only reason for including the unecessary link is propaganda. Not acceptable. ≈ jossi ≈ 19:40, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Then why are the links to Elan Vital not propaganda? Andries 20:04, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Jossi, I think it is better to delete all external links~, both to Elan Vital and ex-Premie because they are not prescribed in template. Andries 17:05, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * These training quotes are true, I believe. Yes, of course the Pro Rawat websites to do not mention them. What reason do you have to question the authenticity apart from the fact that they are published on ex-premie? If I follow the reasoning that you follow then we could as well delete all the quotes from Elan Vital or DLM magazines because they try to put Prem Rawat in a positive light. Have they been corrobated by independent journalists? And I do not mean those writers from public relations magazines but real journalists. I will add a comment that the transcripts of the training session are unverified as I think is common here. I do not agree with the term hate group nor with the term smear campaign. It is true that ex-followers are looking for evidence for their conviction. that Prem Rawat is unreliable. In this case they have found it. Andries 04:44, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * These are not "quotes". Whatever they published on the hate group site are unverified notes taken by an anonymous source the "leaked" these notes to the ex-premies. yes, and pigs fly too.
 * The fact that you don't like the term hate group and smear campain does not make it not be true. Ex-followers are not hateful. The group that call themselves ex-premies are. And there is plenty of proof.≈ jossi ≈ 19:40, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, the transcript is not anonymous.
 * "Prem Rawat's comments - Training, 23d July 1999 This is the original transcript of Maharaji's comments on the first day of a training session that took place in Arundel, England, in 1999. The transcript was written by Chuck Natham, and the only edits that have been done are the replacement of attendees names with initials, and a few very obvious spelling corrections. " from
 * Andries 20:02, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Bogus Andreis, bogus. That is what John Brauns ex-premie webmaster wrote and wants us to believe. As I said, pigs fly too. --≈ jossi ≈ 05:04, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, have you checked with Chuck Natham? I think you'll find that he will confirm that the transcripts are genuine (in private if not in public). To be honest, I don't particularly care if the training quotes are included here, but thanks again Andries for your dedication to the truth. The source of the transcripts has so much dirt on Rawat he knows he is safe from ever being persecuted for leaking these transcripts. Oh, and one piece of advice Jossi, do not make libellous allegations against me here. --John Brauns 23:33, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Jossi, I try to be open for evidence that I am wrong so if you could tell me why you believe the quotes are bogus then I could possibly learn something. I think the quotes can be re-added with the warning that they have been unverified. Andries 16:11, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

--64.81.88.140 03:35, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Moved quotes from purported training to the attributed section
 * NPVed entries by Andries,

Abbie Hoffman
--64.81.88.140 16:55, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Where is that video on the internet in which Abbie hoffman says that? Deleted until then.
 * 2) NPOVed also the entry about Who is Guru Maharaj Ji.

 * 1) Here is the video 3.4MB I reverted. Andries 18:12, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) And it is an proven and documented fact that the book Who is Guru Maharaji was presented as an authorized biography. That is printed on the cover. You can read it with some difficulty. I reverted. Andries 18:12, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

guru maharaj ji
I added a quote that clearly shows that Rawat is talking about his father and not himself when speaking about "guru maharaj ji". --Zappaz 22:37, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Enough quotes from the 1970's
Enoughj Andries, enough.

There needs to be a balance between quotes from 30 years ago and more contemporary ones.

For each quote you add from th 1970's you need to add one from 90's or 2000's. OK?

--64.81.88.140 23:09, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * If you think that the quotes are unbalanced then add new quotes to balance them but do not remove quotes from the article. Andries 03:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Unacceptable. Reverted.
 * This is a lame attempt, Andries. All these quotes from 30 years ago simply are padding the top of the page in a blatant attempt to push your anti-guru POV. You know better than me that what you are doing is disgraceful. Stop it.
 * --64.81.88.140 22:26, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Prem Rawat/Archive 1


text:
User talk:Cnygaard~enwikiquote

Everything is relative

Don't walk first if you dont know the path

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Cnygaard. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Cnygaard~enwikiquote that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:20, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:44, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cnygaard~enwikiquote