quick funny

милый заур!
прошу оказать содействие и избавить поклонников вашего сайта от моей статейки. перевод, знаете ли, дилетанский...

пожалуй, тема эта не впервые поднимается.
но все же...

пользовался ли кто-нибудь Amazon'ом при покупке книг?
насколько это приемлемый вариант по доставке к нам? есть ли надежные альтернативные предложения-рекомендации?
и потом, если книги специфические, узко-специализированные, и на разных языках - куда податься с таким запросом?

если кому есть чего сказать - вильком

заранее благодарю.

любителям современного искусства и английского юмора посвящается.
(знание английского языка желательно, потому как нет никакого смысла переводить эту *бессмыслицу*)

как известно, богата земля лондонская талантами. их шедевры можно увидеть где угодно, прямо на улице. но самые звездные, конечно, складируются в галерее  современного искусства тэйт.

такая вот композиция: белая стена, к ней приделана хрупкая стеклянная полочка, а на полочке стоит стеклянный стакан с водой. наименование: The oak tree (дуб). наверное, каждый прошел бы мимо этой экстравагантной инсталляции, если бы не интервью с автором, вывешенное там же. Я получила огромное удовольствие от прочтения и долго веселилась. Надеюсь, вам тоже понравится. Как говорится - enjoy!

The oak tree (interview)

A = author
B = journalist

B: To begin with, could you describe this work?
A: Yes, of course. What I?ve done is change of glass of water into a full-grown oak tree without altering the accident of the glass of water.
B: The accidents?
A: Yes. The colors, feel, weight, size...
B: Do you mean that the glass of water is a symbol of an oak tree?
A: No. It?s not a symbol. I?ve changed the physical substance of the glass of water into that of an oak tree.
B: It looks like a glass of water...
A: Of course it does. I didn?t change its appearance. But it?s not a glass of water. It?s oak tree.
B: Can you prove what you clam to have done?
A: Well, yes and no. I claim to have maintained the physical form of the glass of water and, as you can see, I have. However, as one normally looks for evidence of physical change of terms of altered form, no such proof exists.
B: Haven?t you simply called this glass of water an oak tree?
A: Absolutely not. It is not a glass of water any more. I have changed its actual substance. It would no longer be accurate to call it a glass of water. One could call it anything one wished but that would not alter the fact that it is an oak tree.
B: Isn?t this just a case of the emperor?s new clothes?
A: No. With the emperor?s new clothes people claimed to see something which wasn?t there because they felt they should. I would be very surprised if anyone told me they saw an oak tree.
B: Was it difficult to effect the change?
A: No effort at all. But it took me years of work before I realized I could do it.
B: When precisely did the glass of water become an oak tree?
A: When I put water in the glass.
B: Does this happen every time you fill a glass with water?
A: No, of course not. Only when I intend to change it into an oak tree.
B: Then intention causes the change?
A: I would say it precipitates the change.
B: You don?t know how you do it?
A: It contradicts what I fell I know about cause and effect.
B: It seems to me you?re claiming to have worked a miracle. Isn?t that the case?
A: I?m flattered that you think so.
B: But aren?t you the only person who can do something like this?
A: How could I know?
B: Could you teach other to do it?
A: No, it?s not something one can teach.
B: Do you consider that changing the glass of water into an oak tree constitutes an artwork?
A: Yes.
B: What precisely is the artwork? The glass of water?
A: There is no glass of water any more.
B: The process of change?
A: There is no process involved in the change/
B: The oak tree?
A: Yes, the oak tree.
B: But the oak tree only exists in the mind.
A: No. The actual oak tree is physically present but in the form of the glass of water. As the glass of water was a particular glass of water, the oak tree is also particular. To conceive the category *oak tree* or to picture a particular oak tree is not to understand and experience what appears to be a glass of qater as an oak tree. Just as it is imperceivable, it?s also inconceivable.
B: Did the particular oak tree exist somewhere else before it took the form of the glass of water?
A: No. This particular oak tree did not exist previously. I should also point out that it does not and will not ever have any other form but that of a glass of water.
B: How long will it continue to be an oak tree?
A: Until I change it.

ой, я даже не посмотрела, сорри...

[quick funny редактировал это сообщение 22-04-2002.]

привет! помнишь, ты как-то говорила о микроавтобусе (в контексте байкерских вылазок). идея его использовать еще жива?