Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 February 17

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 17

foreign literature in schools

In the American school system, why are European and American classics the only writings that are studied? Why isn't African or Asian literature studied? --Metroman (talk) 00:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I can't give you a straight or unbiased answer, but read Western canon and dead white males as a start. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Just wait until they get to college. When I was in college (and this was nearly 15 years ago) I said the prototypical college class would be called "Gay and Lesbian Literature of the Asian Diaspora." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm too old to have been in said school system when Black History Month became a big thing, but I'd be surprised if African ones weren't at least options. Or, does this month mostly celebrate African-American history?

As far as a reason, remember that the major influx of Asians only began in the last few decades. Also, it was only in the last few decades that American schools were integrated. Now, consider that the students who grew up in the integrated schools/schools with more Asian students are just now becoming the leaders of various school systems. it is these leaders who must purchase the books and decide on the curriculum. So, it sems quite logical that any said classics are just now entering the curriculum, and that it might take a while.

Another problem, of course, is that some teachers complain they spend all their time teaching kids how to pass the aptitude tests to graduate, so they have no time to teach a large multitude of things, but I'm nto sure if this would really apply, so I won't go futher on that point.209.244.187.155 (talk) 01:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe this used to be true, but it is becoming less so. Things Fall Apart, for example, is standard HS reading in North Carolina, and I suspect there are others that fall outside of the Western canon. --Jayron32 02:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

If we widen the question, writing haiku (or tanka) is not an uncommon assignment and a few translated examples are often read first. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

When I was in high school (late 80s/early 90s) we read The Good Earth in freshman year. Later we read One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and, I think, Things Fall Apart. So, while I never took a full semester of, for example, Asian literature, we were assigned selected works from non-European works. And yes, I know TGE was written by an American, I threw it in because it wasn't written about Americans and Buck spent much of her life in China. Dismas|^(talk) 06:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I had a year of "World Literature" when I was a senior. It covered all continents excpet probably Australia. Woogee (talk) 07:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Certainly a large part of the answer, especially in the lower grades, is the focus on English-language works. Before high-school there is no such thing as "literature" class. Only "English" class. Even in high-school you've typically got four more years of "English", with, maybe, one or two semesters of "literature". When you look at it from that point of view, it makes sense that they would focus on english-language works. Sure, there are translations of great foreign works, but what do they teach you about English? APL (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you can generalize about "the American school system". There are thousands of school districts in the United States, and hundreds of thousands of teachers, and each of them has a different curriculum. When I was in school in a New York suburb (ahem) thirty years ago, we certainly read a few authors from Asia and Africa, and I would have thought that the trend would be to read more such authors. I am fairly certain that such authors are read in many school districts today. However, there is resistance to reading "nontraditional" authors in conservative parts of the United States, such as Texas. (See this recent New York Times article.) I am not sure why some people involved in setting curricula would want to exclude authors from outside Europe and North America. I would guess that they might say (not entirely correctly, in my view) that the culture of the United States is derived from that of Europe and that, therefore, students can best prepare for life in the United States by studying the culture of the United States and its European antecedents. A less charitable view might be that the achievements of non-European peoples pose a threat to the conservatives' belief in white supremacy. Marco polo (talk) 17:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The Canadian situation is not so different. Twenty-something years ago, when I was in high school, the only non-North American or European book I can recall reading was Cry the Beloved Country. That didn't seem so strange to me at the time, as the history I got was largely Canadian history and the geography I got was largely Canadian geography. By that same token, consider the plays kids in HS get exposed to. When I was in HS, we typically went for five years and the plays studied were: Julius Caesar, Romeo and Juliet, King Lear, Macbeth... and Death of a Salesman, which was the prize you got in 5th year English for having gone through nothing but Shakespeare until then. Even as a HS student I appreciated Shakespeare, but that's obviously a bit screwy. No Wilde, no Shaw, no Gilbert and Sullivan or Rogers and Hammerstein. With some years of perspective, here's what I think went on: if you decided that you wanted to add, say, Pygmalion (or even My Fair Lady!) you're going to have to take something else away and comparing anyone to Shakespeare at a particular level is going to be a tough sell. Nobody really stepped back and said "Well, how about we only do two or three Shakespearean plays and work in a few other authors?" they just looked at a particular grade level. The same thing goes on with other literature. "Okay, we need to add some African literature to the program, so let's dump... To Kill a Mockingbird!" It's a hard sell. Matt Deres (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

When I was in (Canadian) high school (~15 years ago) we didn't read anything but American and British stuff, with a few Canadian books. Maybe only one, all I can think of is The Stone Angel. We didn't even do any exotic Shakespeare. We did Hamlet twice! Adam Bishop (talk) 22:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Note that all of the Old Testament is African and Asian, and most of the New Testament is Asian. I don't know if they are read in the US, but they are read (in small parts) in many European countries. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

They are read, but not in (public) schools for the most part. —Akrabbim^talk 20:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I think a lot of the reason there's an emphasis on European writing in American literature classes is, quite frankly, because America has been hugely influenced (and was started by) Europeans and descendants of Europeans. So European literature is "familiar" to America as a whole, because most Americans have European ancestry/influence. American literature is obviously studied in American schools because, well, they're in America! I'd imagine that in Japan, the emphasis would be on Asian (and primarily Japanese) literature; in India the emphasis would be on Indian literature; in Russia, the emphasis is on Russian literature; and so on. 24.247.163.175 (talk) 20:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The first and obvious question is are you referring to a concentration on European classic or English classics? These are clearly two different things. Do you study War and Peace, The Iliad, Beowulf, The Divine Comedy, The Prince, The Republic (Plato), Les Misérables, Don Quixote, The Count of Monte Cristo etc? Nil Einne (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm referring to a concentration in European classics. I consider Russia to be more of an European country than an Asian country. --Metroman (talk) 03:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Because the literary analysis things you'd do in class would be less valid for a translated text, as you;d have both an author and a translater involved. Different translations of the same text differ somewhat. 78.149.241.220 (talk) 16:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

working together

Do the European Union and the Commonwealth of Nations work together on a variety of things?24.90.204.234 (talk) 05:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they do. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Name of long book then movie, author died in obscurity without publishing it

I saw a trailer or read an article a few years ago that seemed intriguing but I can't remember any of the key names/titles involved, perhaps someone here knows this. (This is the real life background, not a plot) A guy lives his entire life in complete obscurity - no friends, no family, no connections of any kind, there may have only been one photo of him, and for his whole life he has some crappy job like a janitor or something. He dies, and in his apartment they find this massive novel or collection of stories or something that he has been writing for decades, like 30,000 pages long; it's either a work of genius or the ramblings of a nut, depending on how you want to look at it. Anyway, they go on to publish it and now the book has a cult following and I believe there was a movie made about it. Does this ring a bell for anyone? AlexiusHoratius 06:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Was it Henry Darger? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

That must be it; thanks! Although the trailer I remember seems to have left out the part about the drawings of little girls with penises... but whatever... art for art's sake, I guess. AlexiusHoratius 07:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

When I read your question, I knew I'd heard about this before. The name Henry Darger didn't ring any bells with me, though. I suspect it's not the only such case, and Darger is not the person both you and I are remembering. The search continues. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I know I've seen similar storylines at least twice. Ages ago, though... Vimescarrot (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It reminds me of A Confederacy of Dunces. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 17:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

A similar question was asked on the ref desk a number of months ago but it concerned a man that had made a sculpture. It was viewed as a very impressive sculpture by those in the know, but did not excite me at all, however the man seems to be viewed as a genius of sorts posthumusly. Maybe if some one with a bit more time on their hands can scawl through the archives they will be able to find this Q&A~Zionist/NO need for a name/never sign a post —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 15:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

This sort of art is called Outsider art, work that is developed outside academies by often isolated, unrecognised individuals and are often only discovered after their deaths or at least late in their careers. That page mentions several of them including Darger and several sculptors. meltBanana 21:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Need help identifying people in this picture (Reagan-related)

http://ipsnews.net/lobelog/ovaloffice.jpg

This is apparently from around 1985? But who are the people that Reagan is sitting with? I know they are Afghans, but names, associations, etc? Surely these must be some noted people if they're sitting in the White House with an American president. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.--70.122.117.52 (talk) 06:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I was going to say that since IPS is a news organization, they should know about the photos on their web site, and simply suggest you email them.

However, I then decided to try googling "reagan", "afghans", and "oval office", and this page at the Reagan Presidential Library web site was the first hit. The same photo appears there, with photo number C12820-32 and caption "President Reagan meeting with Afghan Freedom Fighters to discuss Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan. 2/2/83." If you want the names of the people, you could try contacting the library, or you could go to a library and look up the Washington Post or New York Times for dates around Februray 3, 1983. --Anonymous, 10:54 UTC, February 17, 2010.

The six Afghans shown are probably a group who traveled to the U.S. in January-February 1983 with Michael Barry, a scholar on Afghanistan. The six were: three witnesses to a massacre by Soviet forces in the town of Padkhwab-e-Shana (mayor Habib-ur-Rahman Hashemi, village elder Gol Mohammed, and cleric Sayyid Mortaza); a medical student Farida Ahmadi who said she was arrested and tortured by the pro-Soviet Afghan police; and two rebel leaders, Umar Babrakzai and Ghafur Yusufzai. You can read something about their claims here. --Cam (talk) 03:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, but which is which? Obviously the only girl there is the medical student, but what about the others?--70.122.117.52 (talk) 00:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

When was this village created

Hello when was this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Las_Estrellas created? also can people go visit to there on as article says village has hostel but does not say people can go? also are there any towns or villages in antarctica i am not sure if this counts as a town? (Dr hursday (talk) 08:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC))

We have some articles on these things: there's Demographics of Antarctica which might be of most use to you, then there is a chronological List of research stations in Antarctica, and you might also be interested in this. Long story short, there are no real "towns", they are mostly research stations. There are, however, people who had been born on Antarctica. TomorrowTime (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

AFRICA HOME

Is Africa the home of man kind, culture and civilization —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edafirobor (talk • contribs) 10:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this question—rather than worded for a 'yes' or 'no' answer—might better be rephrased, "In what ways might Africa be considered the birthplace of...?" -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

In the current state of scientific understanding, it's a plausible theory that all significant evolution in the direct line leading from the population that was the common ancestors of both chimpanzees and modern humans, down to the humans of ca. 100,000 years ago, took place within Africa. Also, Egypt was one of the first two or three historically known full civilizations (with cities, writing, etc.), though Egypt was probably not the most important earliest site of plant and animal domestication... AnonMoos (talk) 11:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Man: yes, humans likely originated from Africa. Culture: yes, it is likely that culture was present in Africa first due to its headstart in having humans. Civilization: no, the earliest civilizations (which are characterized by centralized power, agriculture, and some degree of specialization) were found in places like the Fertile crescent in the Middle East, the Indus valley in India, and Yellow river valley in China. There was independent civilization creation in the New World, but it wasn't earlier than the previously mentioned areas. Africa's civilizations developed later and many of the major explanations involve geographical and environmental constraints on civilization formation.--droptone (talk) 12:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The answer about civilization depends upon how exactly you define civilization. Great Zimbabwe National Monument may be of interest. What we regard as ancient civilizations now all have stone or ceramic artefacts that survived until modern times. But its possible that there were other ancient civilizations where none of the artefacts suvived. 89.240.100.129 (talk) 13:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, ancient Egyptian civilization developed not far behind Mesopotamian civilization, and ahead of Chinese (certainly as far as the development of writing). Zimbabwe is significantly behind Egypt, since in all probability agriculture didn't arrive in the general area until the 1st millennium B.C., and the famous stone buildings weren't built until long after that.... AnonMoos (talk) 14:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Jiahu symbols contradicts your claims concerning the development of writing. Woogee (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Really? It says "Current research would indicate that they do not represent systematic writing at all and that they were simply used as pictures or at best are a form of proto-writing that conveyed a message without encoding language." -- AnonMoos (talk) 20:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

As others have said, Africa was almost certainly the home of the first people and cultures. Probably the key defining feature of civilizations is cities, and the evidence suggests that cities (such as Jericho and Eridu) existed in Southwest Asia thousands of years before cities emerged in Egypt (or any other part of Africa). However, another key feature of civilizations is writing, and recent evidence suggests that true writing (as opposed to simple pictograms) developed in Sumer and in Ancient Egypt nearly simultaneously, around 3200–3100 BCE. Egypt was also a few steps ahead of Mesopotamia in developing key state structures such as elaborate bureaucracies and systems of taxation. So an argument can be made that Africa is one of the first homes of civilization. Marco polo (talk) 17:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

"Civilization" actually came from Broadway in 1947. Edison (talk) 18:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought that Sid Meier developed Civilization in 1991?--Jayron32 18:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Why does your statement have a question mark? Buddy431 (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

There may have been early cities in Africa. The problem is they may not have left an archeological record, or that record may be undiscovered. Timbuktu goes back to at least the tenth century, and it seems to be in a dry area seemingly not suited to settlement. Who knows if earlier cities existed elsewhere? The population size of a city would be like that of a village now, in British-english. There were other cities in Africa in the 19th. century, I dont know how far back they went. 89.243.151.96 (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

We certainly know that there were sub-Saharan cities before Timbuktu - even locally, Aoudaghost was well established by the ninth century, and Koumbi Saleh apparently dates back to the third century. On the east coast, the first century text Periplus of the Erythraean Sea mentions various early port cities. Yeha is older still, dating from around the 8th century BC - and we can go back even further, closer to the Nile. Warofdreams talk 14:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

However, you can't have cities without agriculture, and there are reasonably secure (though approximate) estimates available for the date of the introduction of food crops and food animals into various regions of Africa, so that the existence of lost civilizations can be effectively ruled out for many combinations of regions and historical periods. AnonMoos (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there or was there any argiculture around Timbuktu? It seems like a very dry place with sand instead of soil. And agriculture could mean just keeping food animals rather than doing things with ploughs. 89.243.197.22 (talk) 15:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Kitzmiller v. Dover

The article Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District states:

The three school board members who voted against it resigned in protest, and science teachers in the district refused to read the statement to their ninth-grade students, citing the Pennsylvania code of education, which states that teachers cannot present information they believe to be false.

What part of Pennsylvania's code of education states this, and is there a similar provision in Missouri's educational code? --J4\/4 <talk> 17:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Possibly Section 10, Item 2 in this document? No idea about Missouri. --LarryMac | Talk 18:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

According to the court testimony of one of the teachers concerned [1] , the relevant provision is Section 253.10 of the Pennsylvania Code [2] - "The professional educator may not: ...(2) Knowingly and intentionally misrepresent subject matter or curriculum." Tevildo (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The Missouri equivalent is section 160-045 [3] - there isn't an immediately equivalent clause in the statute, and I fear that any more detailed research might come under the heading of "legal advice". Tevildo (talk) 17:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Twelve Apostles in Sub-Saharan Africa

Why didn't any of the Twelve Apostles of Christ go to Sub-Saharan Africa? Apostle Thomas went to India. He didn't go to China because it was unknown to the rest of world and it was too far away back then, am I right? Apostle Thomas could have went to Ethiopia and preach his messages there. 174.114.236.41 (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, his Lord and master supposedly created the world, so He would have known about the peoples of China, and Japan, and Siberia, and the Americas, and Australia and the Pacific, and far-flung Europe. Why would he have chosen to deny such knowledge to his apostles? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the Twelve Apostles themselves, but there are records of Christianity spreading throughout (northern) Africa shortly after the death of Christ, as well as the recorded story of the Ethiopian eunuch, who presumably would have helped spread and encourage Christianity in Ethiopia. Before Islam (and even after Islam), there were huge Christian populations throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa, and before this time there are records of Christianity reaching as far south as the equator. Of course, you have to remember that there were many other missionaries other than the Apostles (such as Paul, who wasn't actually one of the "big twelve" apostles) also traveled throughout the world, so I'd say it's reasonable to assume some went to Africa as well. 24.247.163.175 (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I forgot to mention--I've also heard that in the 600s, Christianity had reached China and was well-known there, and in the 800s, a Chinese Christian leader named Adam worked on a Chinese translation of the Bible. So it did go there, it just took some time. 24.247.163.175 (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Legend holds that the apostles and other leaders in the first generation of the church divided up the world among themselves, and that St. Mark the Evangelist went to Egypt. Nyttend (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I misread the question and failed to see "sub-Saharan"; sorry. Nyttend (talk) 05:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

For China, see Nestorian Stele... AnonMoos (talk) 10:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The prosaic short answer is that sub-Saharan Africa was not part of the Greco-Roman "oecumene", and not along any of the major trade routes leading to or from the oecumene (with the marginal exception of the horn of Africa region, perhaps -- but even there it was really Yemen which was on the trade route). AnonMoos (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

They also didn't really know that there was anything down there. It's possible that the Phoenicians or Egyptians circumnavigated Africa in pre-classical times, but this was either forgotten or disbelieved, and ancient maps don't even show that part of Africa. The Ocean usually cuts through Africa south of the desert. (Also, China certainly was known to the Greeks and Romans, although only through stories, since they never actually went there.) Adam Bishop (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

As an aside, the evidence for Thomas in India seems very plausible. Edison (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

According to the Talmud (written in Late Antiquity), when Alexander the Great conquered the Middle East, he told the "elders of the south country" that he wanted to go to Africa. The elders told him he couldn't because mountains of darkness block the path. Alexander went anyway and reached the land of the Amazons, where there were no men. Now Alexander was hundreds of years before the early Christian period and the Talmud was written hundreds of years later, but perhaps this gives us some idea of what people in ancient Israel thought of the African interior. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Driving East Coast

I already've been to the beginning of I95 in Key West Fl. I would like to to know what is the farthest northern city one could drive a vehicle to on the Eastern side of the North American continent? Imagine if I took I95 north but kept on driving... --Reticuli88 (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI - I'm only referring to coastline cities. --Reticuli88 (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The Trans-Labrador Highway goes to Goose Bay, then you can take a ferry across Lake Melville to Lewisporte, which is considerably fruther south than Goose Bay. Woogee (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

How about Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island. Rmhermen (talk) 20:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible to drive to Ellesmere Island? --Reticuli88 (talk) 20:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No, the road ends more than 1,000 miles away! (The Dempster Highway ends in Inuvik, Northwest Territories, just over 1,000 miles from Ellesmere.) Rmhermen (talk) 21:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Am I the only one who's a little bit confused? The section heading clearly says "USA" but then the question text says "North American continent". So, due to your replies, I guess you really do mean the continent and don't intend on stopping at the US/Canada border? Dismas|^(talk) 21:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Fixed it. Sorry for your dismay. --Reticuli88 (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

First of all, I-95 doesn't begin in Key West. You are thinking of U.S. Route 1. I-95 begins in Miami, Florida. The northern end of I-95 is in Houlton, Maine, but the northernmost point along the coast (in a coastal municipality) would be in Portland, Maine. If you are really asking about U.S. Route 1, the northernmost point along that highway is in Madawaska, Maine, but its northernmost point along the coast, depending on how you define the coast, would be Calais, Maine. If what you are really asking is what is the northernmost point on the east coast of North America that you can reach by highway, Woogee is right that it's Goose Bay in Labrador. However, you have to drive pretty far inland to get to Goose Bay. If you wanted to stick to the coastline, the farthest north you could go, driving around the St. Lawrence Estuary, would be Natashquan, Quebec. Marco polo (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No, that's the farthest you could go, but not the farthest north, because when you come into Natashquan the shoreline is angling back south. Going by Google Maps, the northernmost coastal community along that road appears to be Baie-Johan-Beetz, Quebec, about 50 miles away.

It might also be argued that an estuary does not qualify as "coastal", and according to Wikipedia the St. Lawrence estuary actually includes the entire Gulf of St. Lawrence. By that interpretation, and if Goose Bay also does not count because you have to go way inland to get there, then the answer would be in northeastern Cape Breton Island — perhaps Main-à-Dieu, Nova Scotia, depending on exactly where you decide you're no longer on the estuary.

Also, we were asked for a "city". In North America that word is often used loosely to mean a community of any size, in which case all these answers are fine; but if you mean a place incorporated as a city, or at least a place of some size, then answers like Natashquan and Main-à-Dieu won't do. Even Goose Bay is incorporated as a town according to Wikipedia, and it only has about 7,500 people. However, I'm not going to attempt to consider what places would qualify as "cities" unless we have a much more specific question. --Anonymous, 05:30 UTC, February 18, 2010.

I would just like to know how far north up the eastern seaboard I could legally drive to before road ends/told to turn around/etc. I was kinda thinking of an unbroken line from I95 north. And if I was traveling on this road, what would be my very last stop where a US citizen to get a room for the night and then turn around in the morning. --Reticuli88 (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Assuming you're willing to drive around the Gulf of St. Lawrence, then it sounds like your ultimate destination would be Natashquan. Some lodging options are listed here. John M Baker (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

If I understand correctly what you mean, you can drive I-95 to Houlton ME, where it ends at the New Brunswick border. From there, there are two options: 1) you continue east through New Brunswick towards the Atlantic Coast of Nova Scotia, then follow the road in a roughly northwards direction towards the tip of Cape Breton Island. That's as far north as you can get without hopping on a ferry and continuing to Newfoundland. 2) you take US route 1 north from Houlton to Van Buren, Maine, cross the New Brunswick border there and follow various roads towards Natasquan as described by John Baker above (you'll need a ferry to cross the Saint-Lawrence River's estuary, though). However, by the time you've reached Houlton, you've headed quite a bit north away from the Atlantic Coast. If you want to keep following the coast, you'd have to leave I-95 around Bangor, Maine, head south to catch Route 1, follow it east towards St. Andrews, Maine, cross into New Brunswick there, follow Canadian Highway 1 heading east towards St. John, New Brunswick, and eventually, as you follow the coast line, you will catch up with the route described under 1) above. All three of these itineraries are well-travelled roads which can be done without any particular preparations. US citizens have no trouble getting a room for the night in Canada, but if you wish to remain in the United States, St. Andrews, Maine, would be your last stop before turning back. --Xuxl (talk) 16:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Capital Controls

What effect will capital controls have on international lending/borrowing? How does it effect the world interest rate? 192.58.221.196 (talk) 21:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

By capital controls, I assume that you mean restrictions on the movement of capital across borders. Obviously such restrictions would limit international lending and borrowing. How they affect interest rates in a given country would depend on that country's capital account balance. If a country is a net borrower, capital controls would tend to raise interest rates within that country. If the country is a net lender, capital controls would tend to lower interest rates. On a global basis, the mean effect of capital controls, by reducing liquidity, should be to raise interest rates, other things being equal. If this is a homework question, be forewarned that I have never taken an economics class, so you would use my response at your peril. Marco polo (talk) 21:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

If your teacher framed the question to include the phrase “world interest rate,” I would go directly to him or her and ask which tenure and currency he or she thinks should be known as the “world’s” interest rate. As for capital controls’ effect on foreign borrowing, the first issue is whether the lender (to a country with capital controls) will be repaid, and if so, under what conditions. Uncertainty tends to raise the price of capital, so those with controls would likely pay more. Finally, I’m going to disagree with Marco polo about capital controls’ effect on the world economy. No economy with capital controls is big enough to make any difference whatsoever, even China. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm returning to this a little late, but I think the scenario being raised is that capital controls spread to many or most economies. Marco polo (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

If that's the case, then the teacher certainly needs questioning! DOR (HK) (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Papal Assassinations

Hey, I'm trying to find out how many popes have been assassinated and who they were. I cannot find a wiki page on Popes cause of deaths. Is there one, or do I have to go through every single pope page there is? -Shmuls (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

You might find List of murdered Popes to answer your question, with caveats about some deaths. There are several early Popes of questionable historicity during a period of oppression and martyrdom, and there are old men who "died in their sleep" perhaps due to a little something extra in their bedtime beverage. Edison (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow. In just 433 years (872-1305) up to 17 of the 88 popes were murdered! And even stranger, none murdered since 1305, unless you subscribe to Pope John Paul I conspiracy theories. Astronaut (talk) 06:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Fish on Ash Wednesday

Why don't most Catholics count fish as meat? My mother, who was raised Catholic, doesn't know (just thinks it's 'an Italian thing'), and I can't seem to find any internet sources that point to a reason. Horselover Frost (talk · edits) 22:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if this is relevant, but Judaism also doesn't consider fish to be meat. This comes up for instance in the guidelines concerning milk and meat combinations being considered not kosher. Bus stop (talk) 22:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

i'm sure something about this has come up here in the past, and that there once was a pope with a financial interest in the fish-trade, who discovered through much prayer that fish wasn't meat. DuncanHill (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Sources, or you're just propagating anti-Catholic memes. Our article Lent has a little on the history, and shows how it varies with place and time. This AllExperts answer confirms my feeling that it is about the experience of eating flesh, as opposed to the less luxurious fish. This Catholic-Answers answer (generally a good source for what the Catholic Church practices and why) suggests that it is because the wording of the original law specified meat, using a word that is not used for fish. That doesn't really tell you why, but it starts to: the words for 'meat' and 'fish' were (and still are) separate because they were (and are) culturally considered different things. Meat is a more 'indulgent' thing to eat than fish. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 00:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The rumor I heard as well was that there was a pope that was approached by representatives of the fishing industry who begged the pope (due to the poor sales at the time} to revise the "fish is meat" argument. As far as I have ever looked into this story, my research shows this to be a complete fallacy. As for Judaism, I can say that in the Torah, there is a Kashrut distinction between fish and other animals.
Of the "beasts of the earth" (which basically refers to land mammals with the exception of swarming rodents), you may eat any animal that has cloven hooves and chews its cud. Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6.
Of the things that are in the waters, you may eat anything that has fins and scales. Lev. 11:9
Not sure if this distinction carried over into Catholicism or not. ^Avicenna_sis @ 09:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Checking my 1960 Webster's, part of the problem is the ambiguity of the term "meat". It comes from Anglo-Saxon and means "food in general, especially solid food, hence the edible part of anything". Hence terms like "nutmeats", the edible part of a nut inside its shell. The second definition is "the flesh of animals used as food". That leads to a further ambiguity if you separate "animals" (i.e. "beasts") from birds and fish (as with the fact that Indians who don't eat beef might eat fish and/or chicken). The third definition is "the main meal". Hence the metaphor "the meat of the subject" or whatever. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

See, the reason I was given was that so many of the early apostles were fishermen, including Simon Peter. The eating of fish was a reminder of that. Fish was also used at the Sermon on the Mount, so there's a connection there as well. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 16:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

That could well be a specific reason or justification. Fish are a recurring theme in the gospels - "fishers of men", and so on. Basically, fish-on-Friday would be "to remind yourself that you're Catholic," just as less-than-orthodox Jews might keep kosher to remind themselves of being Jewish. Unlike with the kosher laws, there's no general Catholic proscription against any particular foods that I know of. Fish-on-Friday was a church doctrine, not a Biblical rule, which is why the Pope was free to rescind it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Just to be clear, Fish-on-Friday is in no way a Church doctrine, at all, ever. No-meat-on-Fridays has been, and is a standard way of fasting within the Church. Since fish is not considered meat, this led many to eat fish on fastdays, but the eating of fish is not required. In fact, if you really like fish or plan on eating lobster, it would be better to eat meat that you weren't fond of. The point is fasting, denying yourself something, being less indulgent. Anything else is people making things up off the tops of their heads. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)