Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 August 2

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.

August 2

Antigone the Play

Who says "I owe a longer allegiance to the dead than to the living" and how is it Oxymoronic? -vvvv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.112.241 (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/antigone.html

ANTIGONE :I will not urge thee,-no nor, if thou yet shouldst have the mind, wouldst thou be welcome as a worker with me. Nay, be what thou wilt; but I will bury him: well for me to die in doing that. I shall rest, a loved one with him whom I have loved, sinless in my crime; for I owe a longer allegiance to the dead than to the living: in that world I shall abide for ever. But if thou wilt, be guilty of dishonouring laws which the gods have stablished in honour.

Which is easy to find by using google by the way...87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

As for the oxymoron - you need to find something apparently contradictory - no idea..87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

eg "sinless in my crime" is oxymoronic.87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't look oxymoronic to me. She wants to bury her brother, in accordance with the divine rules about honoring the dead, but in violation of her uncle's edict against doing so. Corvus cornix_talk 19:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there any chance you mean "ironic"? Irony is the best term I can think of to describe Antigone's counterintuitive comment that, as she will spend more of existence (eternity, presumably?) in the world of Hades, she ought to consider herself more closely allied with the dead than the living. It's philosophical, perhaps naive or idealistic, but not oxymoronic. Oxymoron implies a statement or phrase that is openly self-contradictory--a package labeled "real imitation snow", for example. There's nothing contradictory about Antigone's claim--we can dispute her notion of allegiance, or suggest that, if there is no afterlife, her analysis is flawed, but we cannot demonstrate it to be internally inconsistent. User:Jwrosenzweig writing as 71.112.34.57 (talk) 09:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Stock movements in earnings season

I'm new to this whole stock investing business, but can someone please explain to me why, when a company like GMCR (green mountain coffee roasters) announces earnings that exceed wall street expectations, the stock PLUNGES by 6%? What's the sense in that? Why are all these people selling?

--76.66.198.165 (talk) 04:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with that stock but, according to this and this, the comany's performance was below expectations. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 08:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The first place I'd look for an explanation is the sector (commodities? retail?). If it had a bad day, that likely would have had an affect. Next, the broader market: if the entire market crashed, your favorite stock probably would have followed the crowd. Remember, there is a lot more bigger fool theory than hard facts at work in stock markets. DOR (HK) (talk) 01:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There's also a stockbroker's adage: buy on the rumor, sell on the news. That could have happened here as well: investors (most of whom are corporations, not individuals) caused the price to rise prior to the announcement. Once the announcement occurred, there was wider awareness, possibly with a sense that the stock was now due to disappoint. OtherDave (talk) 03:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I checked similar companies when I looked for an answer. None of their stock prices fell by that much that day. The answer's in the first link in my previous post. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 07:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

DBZ

I first watched DBZ as a kid. Rewatching it now as an adult, I see a lot of themes I didn't really notice before. Male psychology and sexuality, mainly. I was wondering if there was any serious analysis of those themes in DBZ. Preferably in English, I don't read Japanese. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 05:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC) DBZ stands for DragonBallZ, of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 09:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

There have been a few books written in English about cultural themes in Japanese animation, like Anime from Akira to Princess Mononoke by Susan Napier (amazon), Samurai from Outer Space by Antonia Levi (amazon), and The Anime Companion by Gilles Poitras (amazon). Frederik Schodt's famous Manga! Manga! (amazon) might also be helpful. I don't know whether any of those deal with Dragonball specifically, but I don't think there are any themes in Dragonball that you won't also find in many other Japanese animated children's shows. (The Amazon links aren't meant to endorse buying from Amazon, they're just for the Search Inside feature.) -- BenRG (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

As an aside I think many cartoons/things you watch as a kid contain adult themes.. Had you considered widening your search a little to include 'all cartoons' instead of just DBZ - that would probably make the search easier. (I'm sure someone somewhere has written a thesis or lesser dissertation on this exact subject - but it might be difficult to find.. possibly if you can find a university or college that does a course on "animation and criticism" or similar you might get lucky.87.102.86.73 (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Check out the series Animaniacs. This is one of the most brilliant cartoons I've ever seen, as a lot of the humor applies across generations. Little kids get the physical humor and silly situations, while some other jokes (Mozart being a pianist, for example) are aimed more at teens and young adults. Then there are the jokes that only adults will get; for example, a Don Corleone-type character makes a reference to "sleeping with the fishes," to which one of the characters replies "Is Jimmy Hoffa there?" - — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 18:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

As pointed out, many shows aimed at a younger demographic include cultural references to things their parents are more likely to get (one example I can think of is Play School (Australian TV series) which has included blatant innuendo). In addition to that, though, is the cultural difference between countries. Anime in general is a very different beast to American animation, and things acceptible in one may be unacceptible in the other, or may have a reduced impact. I suspect it is easier to pick up on those things when you're older, and more aware of those cultural differences. For a real learning experience, try watching the same show in both the "cut and dubbed for American TV audiences" and "original Japanese with English subtitles and a bunch of production notes" versions - depending on the show, these can be hugely different, particularly when the American version is targeted at a different demographic to the Japanese one. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 06:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, bear in mind that the Japanese was not necessarily aimed at children. Do we have an article on the animation ghetto? 79.66.32.107 (talk) 15:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

TVTropes has articles on this: 'Parental Bonus' and 'Getting Crap Past the Radar' Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 01:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

US Senate

Hello, I'm trying to improve US Executive Branch articles of the French Wikipedia and i'm looking for confirmation and precisions about the US Senate elections I do not find or not sure to well understand on the english Wikipedia :

• Confirmation :
  • Each state elected two senators with single-winner voting system except Louisiana with a two-round system.
  • Every american, citizen for more than 9 years and old more than 30, housed in the State, could be a candidate
  • A senator is elected for six years and each two years, a national election renews third of the Senate assembly
• Precisions :
  • How each senator is elected in a state ? Is each state divided in two constituencies or all the state vote for the two senator seats in separates elections ?
  • Both senators of a same State can be elected à the same time ?
  • Difference between states in case of vacancy ?
  • Is Senator position incompatible with all others elected or executive positions ?

Thanks. TCY (talk) 10:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

All senatorial elections are "at large" across a whole state (no districts), and terms are always staggered. AnonMoos (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately Elections in Louisiana doesn't say anything about the first "confirmation," but confirmations two and three are definitely correct. Is there a minimum period of US citizenship required for Senate candidates, as there is in Presidential elections?

Precisions:

1. I think all states elect their two senators at different times.

3. Correct. An elected Senator (or a Congressman, from the House of Representatives) can't serve in the Executive, for example, as the Secretary of State. This is because the USA has a separation of powers. They would not be allowed to be a federal judge either - they would have to resign before being appointed to a court.

78.150.171.9 (talk) 14:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

My fault. Actually, Elections in Louisiana DOES say that it has "two round elections," at least until this year.78.148.175.228 (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I have a bit of an addition to precision 2). This year, two states (Wyoming and Mississippi) will elect both their senators. However, only one election per state is a regular senate election, the other one is a by-election to fill a vacant seat for a shorter term than six years. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 15:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the answers. For Louisiana, i found a link in Elections in Louisiana to the Louisiana election code and the RS 18:1275.13 which confirm the two-round system for Senate election in this State (French remains ? ;-)). For the point 3, if I well undestand you, a Senator couldn't have also a local executive position like mayor. ~~

For example, could Hilary Clinton be the Mayor of New York City (currently Michael Bloomberg, when she is already the/a Senator for New York state? 78.144.222.192 (talk) 16:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

She could run for mayor while serving in the Senate, but she can't serve as mayor and keep her seat in the Senate. If she won the mayoral election, she would have to resign her Senate seat. From the Constitution: no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office. Note also that the elections to the Senate changed under the 17th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Prior to that, Senators were elected by the legislatures of the states. Corvus cornix_talk 19:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any constitutional reason why not. Article I, Section 6 only applies to offices "under the United States", i.e. federal positions. But certainly it is not customary for senators to hold a local position as well. I think most people would say that being a senator is a full-time job.

About the "single-winner election" in most states: understand that in most states there are party primary elections to determine the candidates for the main election for senator. See United States Senate#Term of office.

It is also important to know that until the 17th Amendment in 1913, senators were not elected by the public at all, but were "chosen by the legislature" of their state. --Anonymous, 19:36 UTC, August 2, 2008.

State voting systems for Senate

All states, not just Louisiana, have a two-round voting system in effect, although it operates differently in the other states.

Outside Louisiana: Most people who want to be Senator run as the candidate of a political party (usually, but not always, one of the two major political parties, Democratic and Republican). It can happen that more than one person wants to be a particular party's candidate. In that case, there is a primary election to pick the party nominee. In some states, the person with the most votes wins the primary. In other states, there is a threshold, such as 40% -- the person with the most votes wins the primary provided that he or she receives at least 40% of the vote, and if no one reaches that percentage, there is a runoff between the top two candidates, with the winner of the runoff becoming the party nominee in the general election. (The general election is always on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, but timing of primaries is up to each state, and varies greatly.)

Thus, in a particular Senate contest, there might even be three rounds of voting. This has happened, for example in Texas in 1984 (see this list of Texas election results and scroll down to 1984). Three prominent Democrats sought to run for the Senate: Lloyd Doggett, Kent Hance, and Bob Krueger. In the Democratic primary, they were all very close, with Hance slightly ahead of Doggett who was a bit ahead of Krueger. Krueger was thus edged out of the runoff. In the runoff, Doggett finished ahead of Hance and became the Democratic nominee, losing the general election to Phil Gramm. Some states don't have a provision for a runoff, and under their laws, Hance would have been the nominee.

Even a primary is not automatic, however. For example, this year there were at least two Republicans, Jeff Beatty and Jim Ogonowski, who wanted to run for the Senate against John Kerry, who is up for re-election. Under the law of the state of Massachusetts, a candidate needs to collect a certain number of signatures on petitions. If Beatty and Ogonowski had both met the requirement, there would have been a primary to decide which of them would be the Republican candidate in the November election. Ogonowski, however, did not submit enough signatures. Therefore, there will be no Republican primary for Senate. Beatty will oppose Kerry in November. That will be the only round of voting to fill the seat. JamesMLane t c 20:37, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Is that mean that :

1. except for for democrat or republican candidates who have to go through primaries with one or two rounds (depends on party state rules), a third party or an independent candidate can run for senate election if he is 30 years old, housed in the state and american citizen for more than 9 years with no others conditions except for states like Massachussets where a candidate needs to collect a certain number of signatures on petitions ?
2. Louisiana is the only state with a two-round official voting system (except primaries rounds) ?

TCY (talk) 23:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

1. I believe all states have some minimum signature requirement to get on the ballot for independent candidates. In some areas, parties like the Greens or Libertarians may be big enough to have primaries, and a state might require that a candidate win a primary in order to have a party listed next to his or her name on the November ballot.
2. Washington state appears to have adopted the two-round system as of this year: [1].-- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to give general answers because of the state-to-state differences.

I would guess that, in every state, someone with enough signatures can get on the ballot as an independent candidate or as the candidate of some minor party. In 2006, Joe Lieberman lost the Democratic primary for Senate, but submitted enough signatures for the new "Connecticut for Lieberman" Party to get a ballot line. (He won, defeating both the Democratic and Republican candidates.)

Nevertheless, it is not exactly the case that all states have signature requirements for candidates who are not Democrats or Republicans. In the state of New York, other parties can achieve the same status. A party's status is determined by the election for Governor held every four years. A party that receives at least 50,000 votes for its nominee for Governor has automatic ballot status for the next four years for all offices. In the 1998 election, the candidate of the Green Party of New York received more than 50,000 votes. The result was that, in 2000, the Green Party put Ralph Nader on the ballot for president and also ran a candidate for the Senate against Hillary Rodham Clinton (Democrat) and Rick Lazio (Republican). In the 2002 election for governor, though, the Green Party nominee fell short of 50,000. Thus, in 2004, they could not automatically put a presidential candidate on the ballot. They submitted petition signatures to get a candidate on the ballot but, after challenges (saying some of the signatures were invalid), they did not meet the requirement, so there was no Green Party candidat on the ballot. In 2002 the Green Party again did not get 50,000 votes for governor. There was a Green Party candidate for the Senate in 2006, though, so I assume they submitted enough petition signatures.

I would guess that there is NO state in which someone can just put his name on the November ballot, with no signatures and no affiliation with an established party, but I'm not completely sure.

By the way, a candidate does not have to be 30 years old to run. He or she has be 30 years old to take office. It has happened at least once that someone was elected who had not yet reached the minimum age to serve, but I forget who it was. Senators currently take office in January, so there is time for a winning candidate to reach his or her 30th birthday. If the winner is not yet 30 when the new Senate begins, he or she must wait until that birthday before being sworn in. JamesMLane t c 02:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all this informations. I will improve the french Wikipedia US Senate article with it ... and will probably come back soon with same kinf of question with House of representative. TCY (talk) 09:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Procedure for filling vacancies

How a vacancy is filled is determined by the law of each state, so here again there are differences.

The Seventeenth Amendment states that "the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct." The phrase "the executive thereof" refers to the Governor of the state. According to our article on the United States Senate, the Governor has this power in 49 of the 50 states, but does not have it in Alaska. (In Alaska, the Governor used to have the power. In 2002, Senator Frank Murkowski was elected Governor. He resigned from his Senate seat, became Governor, and then filled the vacancy in his former seat by appointing his daughter. This was very unpopular. The result was the repeal of the Governor's power to fill a Senate vacancy.)

Among the states that allow the Governor to fill a vacancy, the laws differ in some respects. In some states, the process can result in a change of the party holding the seat, but in at least one state this cannot happen.

An example of a change in party occurred in New York in 1968. Robert F. Kennedy, a Democrat, had won the 1964 election for the Senate. He was assassinated in 1968. The Governor of New York was a Republican, Nelson A. Rockefeller, and he appointed another Republican, Charles Goodell, to fill the seat and serve the remainder of Kennedy's term. (Goodell ran for a full term in 1970 and lost.) As a result, the seat changed hands from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party.

I don't know the laws of all the states, but I happen to know that the state of Wyoming is different. Last year, the elected Senator, a Republican named Craig Thomas, died in office. The Governor of Wyoming was Dave Freudenthal, a Democrat. Under Wyoming law, Freudenthal had the power to appoint a successor, but he could not appoint anyone he wanted. Because the seat had been held by a Republican, the governing committee of the state Republican Party was to prepare a list of three candidates. Freudenthal could then choose which one of those three to appoint. Of course, all the candidates chosen by the Republican Party were Republicans. Thus, Thomas's death did not change the seat from one party to another.

The states also have provisions for a special election. To continue with the Wyoming example, Senator Thomas had been elected to a six-year term in 2006. He died on June 4, 2007, only a few months into his term. On June 22, 2007, Governor Freudenthal appointed John Barrasso to the vacancy. Barrasso is now the Senator. His appointment, however, did not entitle him to serve out Thomas's term. There will be a special election this fall. The winner will serve the final four years of what would have been Thomas's term. (Barrasso is a candidate and is favored to win.)

Even if Barrasso loses the special election, he will have served about a year and a half just because of the Governor's appointment. I suspect that Wyoming law provides for a special election at the next regular Congressional election, which is held in November of each even-numbered year. In other states, though, there is a special election earlier than that. In January 1993, Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas resigned to become Secretary of the Treasury. The Governor of Texas, Ann Richards, appointed Bob Krueger to fill the vacancy. His appointment lasted only a few months, though. There was a special election in May 1993. The top two finishers were Kay Bailey Hutchison and Krueger, but neither had a majority. In the runoff a month later, Hutchison defeated Krueger. (Voting totals for both votes are here.) In a quick search I have not found the exact date on which Hutchison took office, but I suspect it was very soon after the June 5 runoff. Thus Krueger, unlike Barrasso, had only a few months to enjoy his appointment to the Senate. JamesMLane t c 21:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Excellent analysis, James. Corvus cornix_talk 19:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the informations. Same rules applie for the representatives ? TCY (talk) 22:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No. As far as I know, there is no state in which the Governor has the power to appoint someone to fill a vacant seat in the House of Representatives. I'm not completely sure of this, but I think that a House seat will remain vacant until a special election is held to fill it. I very strongly suspect that different states have different rules on when to hold a special election.

The issue arose recently in New York, with the troubles of Congressman Vito Fossella. Running a red light was bad, driving while intoxicated was worse, doing all this en route to meet his mistress and their child (unknown to the wife and children back home) pretty much doomed him. He announced that he would not seek re-election. It was thought that he might resign, so someone researched the New York law on the point. If the resignation were effective after July 1, then there would be no special election and the seat would remain vacant until the beginning of 2009. If the resignation were effective before July 1, then it would be up to the Governor, David Paterson -- he could schedule a special election, with the winner to serve out the remainder of Fossella's term (that is, until January 2009) or he could decide against a special election and leave the seat vacant. [2] (Fossella decided not to resign so he remains a member in good standing of the Republican caucus in the House.) I suspect, however, that in at least some states, the Governor has no such option. JamesMLane t c 03:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

USS Nimitz

The Royal Navy, when naming ships after individuals, go for the surname e.g. HMS Nelson. The US Navy goes for the whole name USS Winston S. Churchill, why then, USS Nimitz not USS Chester Nimitz? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.217.122 (talk) 13:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the list of current ships of the United States Navy (or even just the list of Arleigh Burke class destroyers, which are all named after individuals and of which USS Winston S. Churchill is an example), your premise that the US uses a person's full name when naming a ship does not seem to be accurate. Some ship names are just surnames, some have first names, some have middle initials, some even have ranks. Politicians seem to get full names more often than not. FiggyBee (talk) 13:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Mmmh Are we sure it wasn't named 'USS Chester Nimitz' and the shortened form has become so common that the original name has been mostly forgotten?87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

eg http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22USS+chester+nimitz%22&btnG=Search&meta= turns up a few hits.87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

While you can't prove a negative, the extensive use of full names for preceding (USS John F. Kennedy) and succeeding (USS Dwight D. Eisenhower) US carriers makes it seem exceedingly unlikely. — Lomn 15:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

John F. Kennedy and Dwight D. Eisenhower were politicians while Nimitz was a sailor. Also searching the .mil (where they should know the correct name) for "uss chester nimitz" returns a single hit. And the ship's website calls it USS Nimitz as well. Rmhermen (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Bengali Muslim surnames

This question applies to Bengal-speaking Muslims.

The questions is besides Sarkar, Chowdhury and Bhuiyan, is there any other Bengali surnames that is commonly used by Muslims only? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.53.92 (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Scientology inspiration

Right. So where does Scientology claim that L. Ron Hubbard got the inspiration for his knowledge of other galactic civilisations like Xenu or the Marcab Confederacy? I know he claimed to 'meditate' on certain things to gain insight, but where is all that bizarre information on the intricacies of a civilisation half the galaxy away even come from? I know he obviously made it up, but what's the Church position on his source of inspiration? 81.158.29.92 (talk) 19:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

According to our article the founder instructed his disciples to "play down" the "space opera" concepts within Scientology. It may therefore be unlikely that this somewhat secretive enterprise has an official credo on the sources of His inspiration.

Bear in mind that Moses talked to God and Mohammed dictated the Qur'an under instruction of Jibril / archangel Gabriel. Extraterrestrials, possessing mysterious technologies, are quite common in the few religions I know of.

Christianity seems to be an exception where God is the geeky Harry Potter next door (well, in an irreverent nutshell). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, not really. The Bible says 'the Spirit descended upon Him like a dove' after He was baptized, which sounds more extraterrestrial, as you put it. I know Christians like to play it up differently but the geeky Harry Potter stuff didn't happen until after that, just as with Moses. -LambaJan (talk) 02:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

My father insists that the 'chariot of fire' that pivked up Ezekiel was a UFO. Of course, he also believes that Noah's Ark is on Turkey's Mt. Ararat, so his opinion is pretty much null and void. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 01:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Officer-elect

What is an 'officer-elect'? ----Seans Potato Business 21:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Going on similar terms such as president-elect, it would be someone who's been elected to become an officer of something or other, but the term of the office hasn't begun yet. What was the context? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. "Once elected, Officers-elect may shadow their outgoing counterparts for the remainder of their term of office." ----Seans Potato Business 20:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Right. So it's clear that the outgoing guy is still the "officer" until his term ends, but the name of the incoming guy is known before they take over, so they have a chance to do some pre-office training and can hit the ground running. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)