Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 New Adequacy Feature?

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Sep 29, 2001
I'm wondering if there's anyone else on this site interested in a bimonthly book review.

More diaries by jelerial
Wonderfulk! - popularity increasing.
Adequacy Update
Adequacy using too much bandwidth?
Whereas certain other sites routinely review books, Adequacy's book review would only include worthwhile literature, instead of the useless drivel that others do. I'd be happy to start writing the first of several reviews, in hopes of sparking the imagination of several other cultured readers here.

Note: Examples of the fine literature I wish to review include such greats as Les Miserables, Inferno, etc. I will not however, review material that is unfit for our higher minds (such as picture books or plays especially of Shakespeare the known pedophile.) I would also like to take a look at the 'classic' science fiction literature, such as the Asimov series', and such.


If you're going to promote perversion, at least... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by elenchos on Sat Sep 29th, 2001 at 03:39:06 PM PST it openly, instead of attempting some kind of subliminal crypto-pedophile book promotion campaign.

Just saying "no Shakespeare" is fine, but then you are going to turn around and poison young minds with Shakespeare-derived works? That's just selling Shakespeareaninsm under the guise of Morality. You would be like the the Pharisees changing money in the temple, hypocritically trying to appear pius when in fact you are blashpemying every thing good and decent in all aspects of your plot.

Take this "Les Miserables" ploy. Shakespearean through and through. Or take Asimov. Shakespeareanism pervades every page of his work. 'The Mule' for example, in the Foundation series (an idealization of Marxist historical theory in itself, as if you didn't know), is just a re-contextualization of William Shakespeare's typical arch-villians, especially Richard III and Aaron the Moor. Hello? Not that we should be surprised by this, considering where Asimov's sympathies lie.

A section reviewing decent literature is a fine idea, or else reviews of known filth, with appropriate warnings and adult-check devices installed, would be fine. But don't claim to be presenting works demonstrating decent values, by virtuous authors, and then slip in vile influences and subersive deviancy. Any and all Shakespeare-derived or Shakespeare-influenced books should be either eschewed (preferred) or clearly labeled as unworthy and diabolical.

And don't think you can just substitute some other brand of child-molester propaganda, like Plato or any Platonic or Platonically-influenced books (Dante, anyone?) and call yourself some kind of saint. Sure you can fool yourself, but WE will be watching, my sick, sick friend!

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Please, please, yes! (3.00 / 2) (#2)
by tkatchev on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 02:23:39 AM PST
I would love, love such a feature. Please do it!

One small request: try to be honest with it, ok? What I mean is, if the book is tripe, you should obliterate it even if it has critical recognition. (Asimov's "Foundation" comes to mind, for example.)

Peace and much love...

P.S. (3.00 / 2) (#3)
by tkatchev on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 02:27:31 AM PST
P.S. I can help you write reviews, if you want to.

P.P.S. Shakespeare was not a pedophile. You're confusing him with Lewis Carroll. Shakespeare was a known pot and crack addict, however.

Peace and much love...

I agree! (none / 0) (#14)
by Well Adjusted Individual on Mon Oct 1st, 2001 at 05:00:37 AM PST
As long as only christian approved books are rated! No Shakespeare or Oscar Wilde or anyone else with anything resembling anything not wholesome and full of christian values.
-- May the lord strike down those who are not rightous.

cambridge homosexuals (none / 0) (#4)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 10:38:31 AM PST
I would like to see a survey of smart poofters like Wittgenstein and Turing, written by Adam Rightman and edited by jsm. I think a subtle insinuation of the correlation between intelligence and homosexuality would reveal the sexual proclivity of adequacy readers in their comments, information I desperately need to know.

Oh, come on. (none / 0) (#5)
by tkatchev on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 11:17:52 AM PST
What is there to know? Anybody who posts here has to be perverted in one way or another. Do you really care what exact brand of perversity each of us ascribes to? That's disgusting, IMO. There is something scatological in your endeavor.

Peace and much love...

I care! (none / 0) (#6)
by sapphic soldier on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 12:45:58 PM PST
Imagine a world full of plain vanilla straight people, with plain vanilla "perversions" centered around the sexual objectification of women and a little hand lotion. This is the world we live in. It's torn apart by warfare, crawling with desperate 40 year old prostitutes and knee-deep in unwanted children.

Now imagine a world where everybody spent all their spare time indulging in kinky homosexual sex. All children would be carefully planned by committed, loving parents. All prostitutes would be working out of genuine lust for their jobs. Peace would reign over all nations, because a fully decadent orgiastic lifestyle leaves no place for warring religious zealots. Anyway, who can think of cruise missiles when you've got a 9" black strap-on staring you in the face?

This is the world the International Queer Conspiracy is working towards. To get there, we need to know when and where to strike, and understanding the bedroom habits of adequacy readers is only the first step in the long War on Heterosexuality.

OK. (none / 0) (#8)
by tkatchev on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 01:12:34 PM PST
What I don't understand, however, is how homoerotic speculation on is going to further your cause.

P.S. You are sorely mistaken if you think that lesbian women will want to bear children. That, however, is a topic for another discussion.

Peace and much love...

a thoroughly original *sigh* (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 02:29:01 PM PST
What I don't understand, however, is how homoerotic speculation on is going to further your cause.

Well, we've already established that homosexuals are smarter than heduhros, so if you knew who was gay, you'd know enough to rate up their comments despite your predictable heterosexual befuddlement over the meaning in those comments.

It's all about the appearance of propriety.

You know, you dont appear to have been paying attention to this thread -- almost as if you were a breeder, or a faux Linux user who thinks "propriety" is just another social grace to be squandered away in a public display of penis thumping and OS bashing.

I despair. I mean, geeks are supposed to be smart, right? Honestly, you make it appear as if a preference for Natalie's boyish figure were accidental.

Geek?!!? (3.50 / 2) (#10)
by tkatchev on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 03:12:50 PM PST
I take insult. A so-called "geek" is (to me, at least) an infanitile lower life form, a pathetic excuse for an undeveloped human being. Yes, indeed, I am a "breeder". (What a disgustingly unnatural, inhuman word choice!) I am a libral-arts conservative weenie. I think poetry is more important than all of our technological "advances" put together. I draw pictures in graphite pencil in my spare time. I am a luddite and a staunch conservative; I take offense at adultery, objectification of women and homosexuality. I think life would be better if lived in a teepee and never developed formal logic.

No, my friend, I think you have confused me with a petty stereotype you have created for yourself. I am not a geek, and take offense at the label.

Peace and much love...

mea maxima culpa (none / 0) (#11)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 04:56:58 PM PST
My premature diagnosis was based on the ambiguous sexuality betrayed in your comment history.

I am a libral-arts conservative weenie. I draw pictures in graphite pencil in my spare time.

Yes but all conservatives normally draw blanks anyway, so until you get an MBA and draw up plans to bomb the Middle East, your bible belt degree in cartooning is no Jin Wicked.

I rated you a 5 (none / 0) (#12)
by venalcolony on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 05:08:13 PM PST
In order to preserve the appearance of propriety and not appear befuddled, although I predictably understood the words much less than I felt the stirrings in my loins. Which is weird.

The difference between trolling and life is life doesnt have to make sense.

you're flirting with me! (3.00 / 1) (#7)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 12:53:27 PM PST
R u cute? Mine's 9 inches -- I mean, 36C. Unfortunately, if my suspicions are confirmed, you should know that people who cannot spell pearl correctly are as unseductive as the other half of geekdom which can spell well enough to recite Tolkien at every amorous opportunity.

I will admit, I have not read Turing (none / 0) (#13)
by Adam Rightmann on Sun Sep 30th, 2001 at 07:18:50 PM PST
and I am oly vaguely aware of Wittgenstein. Is Turing one of those overrated postmodern novelists like Pynchon, Wallace or Gaddis? And Wittgenstein is a philosopher, is he not? Can he add anything that Thomas Aquinas didn't already cover?

Anyhow, thanks for the vote of confidence, perhaps I will submit a book review (when is this jsm person on vacation?).

A. Rightmann


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to