Humanities desk
< October 17	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 19 >

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.

October 18[edit]

Looking for a film[edit]

Hello. I'm looking for the name of a film which I watched in the theater two or three years ago. It was a British film, about a couple who visits a quarry for the weekend, for a relaxing swimming holiday. The man remembers it from his childhood, and soon thereafter it was meant to be drained and turned into condos. However, they are terrorized by local kids who steal their car, kidnap and attempt to eventually kill both the man and the woman. I don't want to spoil the ending, so I won't say anymore. I remember it as being quite scary, but can't remember the title. Thanks for any help. Llamabr (talk) 01:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eden Lake? --173.49.11.179 (talk) 03:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one. Thanks. Llamabr (talk) 12:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That movie at first sounded a little like Deliverance, but as it evolved it appears to be drenched in what Siskel and Ebert used to call "the idiot plot". I don't want to say any more than that, for spoiler reasons, but the entire story is in the article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Saints[edit]

Who were canonised as saint with Mary MacKillop and Saint André Bessette? --Ksanyi (talk) 06:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're listed at the bottom of this page. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caspar David Friedrich - Tetschen Altar[edit]

Which Dresden gallery has the painting Tetschen Altar (Cross in the Mountains) by Caspar David Friedrich? According to the list of works by Caspar David Friedrich, it's in the Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; but the German article on Galerie Neue Meister implies that it's in the New Masters Gallery. Lfh (talk) 08:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a German article about the painting, Tetschener Altar, which also says it's in the New Master Gallery - which makes sense, I suppose, because the works in the Old Master Galery are from the 15th to 18th century and this is from 1808. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 09:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks. Lfh (talk) 10:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tax breaks[edit]

Seems to me that the united states has been giving tax breaks for American businesses to do business over seas for at least 40 years. Is this correct?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parpar47 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not in the way you mean. In America, when any business spends any money on anything, that spending is deducted from their "income" calculation, and taxes are paid on income. If an American business earns US$3 million in one year but spends US$2 million, then its income is US$1 million and it pays income tax on US$1 million. It doesn't particularly matter whether the US$2 million is spent on employees, equipment, supplies, and facilities in America or in India. There is normally no additional "tax break" for doing business outside of the US. American businesses do a lot of business outside the US because many costs are cheaper, particularly labor; it's not because of some tax incentive. Comet Tuttle (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, because of the lower costs abroad, and the resulting higher taxable income, one could make the argument that the U.S. government taxes outsourcing companies more heavily (in total cash, not as a percentage) than if they'd been using labour/materials from within the U.S. Of course, sourcing from within the U.S. brings other benefits to that economy than taxed income. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Comet Tuttle is incorrect that the business pays taxes on the $1 million in net earnings, if those earnings come from overseas. The tax break for outsourcing that comes up in U.S. political discourse is actually a potentially indefinite tax deferral for the "unrepatriated income" of corporations that do business overseas, so long as they reinvest that income overseas. What this does is to incentivize investment in countries with lower tax rates than the United States, since income earned in those countries is taxed at a lower rate. The difference, which would normally be owed to the US Treasury, is exempt from taxes if it is used to expand the business overseas, whereas it would incur additional taxes if it were invested in the United States. This tax provision therefore gives corporations an incentive to move operations to countries with lower taxes than the United States. See this explanation. Marco polo (talk) 18:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected (for the duration of the deferral). Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In practice, the deferral is indefinite, as long as the corporation reinvests the earnings overseas, which corporations typically do to avoid the tax. So the deferral in many cases amounts to an exemption. Marco polo (talk) 18:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a few days later, but another area of "concern about overseas operations" is this type of story, highlighting the way major US corporations shuttle money in and out of various countries in order to qualify for tax loopholes — Google apparently paid under 3% tax on its earnings during this period, while the US corporate tax rate is normally around 35%. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basic story themes.[edit]

Someone said to me the other day that all literature stemmed from a limited number of basic story archetypes or themes (ie. all stories are variations on 5 basic story themes) When I pressed them they could not provide these themes yet were very sure in their conviction. I have searched using the obvious variations of the words story, basic, archetype and have found nothing that supports such a simplistic explanation for all of man's storytelling. Is there any support for this? 17:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ledbelly62 (talk • contribs)

Christopher Booker wrote a book called The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories. We don't have much info about it, but the ever valuable TV Tropes lists his seven, and cites examples of them here. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 17:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might also be interested in the Joseph Campbell article (which has some coverage of his influence on pop-culture works like Star Wars). I don't think he's quite so prescriptive as to divide all stories into 5 or 7 or however many broad baskets, but his broad thinking (the cowboy film is the same story as the samurai film is the same as the monster film) is in the ballpark of your question. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 17:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite subjective; I've read one claim there are only 2 stories ("A person goes on a journey" vs. "A stranger comes to town") and read another that there are 40 stories. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Aarne-Thompson classification system. -- Wavelength (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Vladimir Propp for another folktale classification system. 92.15.28.219 (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Plot (narrative) and the links from it. 92.15.28.219 (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link to previous thread on the same topic. Deor (talk) 01:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Monomyth. 92.24.191.1 (talk) 09:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Find private collectioniers[edit]

Hi, maybe some one knew private collectioniers who are buy 8-10 age things —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martand7 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you need to explain a little more what you are looking for. Are you looking to sell some toys that were designed for kids aged 8 through 10? If so, eBay may be your best bet, depending on where you live. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Im look collectioner who buy 8-10age things likes jewelcraft brooch 8-10age —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martand7 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

African American history month[edit]

If the United States has an African American History month, than why don't we have a Caucasian History month? Common sense, right? Albacore (talk) 20:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've often wondered this myself. I guess this is as close as you can get. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These commemorative months are meant to make people "aware" of what has been underrepresented (in history, politics, society, culture, medical research, etc.). The White American narrative has been covered pretty well since the beginning of "Caucasian" American history. The same cannot be said of Black American history. Another way of seeing it is as making up for past injustice. Or guilt. Anyway, February is the shortest month. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think I have ever seen an advertisement for Irish-American Month. I see them for Black History month every year. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's typical to think that there are a lot more black people than Irish people in the United States, although it's actually not much different (36 million self-identified as Irish in 2008: [1], while 37 million self-identified as black or African American in 2000: [2]. Still, at least the common perception is that there is a larger, more cohesive "black community" than there is an Irish community in the United States (at least from my Mid-Western perspective. Perhaps someone from Boston would disagree). Plus, we need to keep in mind that the Irish have St. Patrick's day :). Buddy431 (talk) 23:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a serious question? I suppose the kneejerk reply would be "Every month is White History Month", but the OP probably wouldn't be satisfied with that. To put it briefly and crudely: The idea is that black Americans, among all American subgroups, are historically unique on account of the fact that slavery, and not (for instance) starry-eyed immigration, was what brought them to the United States. Black Americans regard it as extremely important to educate people about that fact, and about the subsequent cultural and economic ramifications of their enslavement, so that they might be seen "in context", as it were. But the more general thrust of the OP's question seems to be, "If we're equal, why isn't everything symmetrical?" That's the problem: equating political equality with some kind of superficial symmetry. Lyndon Johnson anticipated that view: "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair." Of course you're free to disagree, as many do, but that's basically the logic of the position. LANTZY ^TALK 21:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Onion has this covered. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also National Hispanic Heritage Month. 216.93.213.191 (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In any case it has long been controversial, and not just from people who in a misguided sense long for a white history month. The leftist argument against it is more along the lines that the answer to biased history is not to have a month of "other" history, but to integrate that history into the mainstream curriculum. In the USA, history curriculum is so varied that I don't know whether that has been accomplished very well, but when I was in elementary and high school, we certainly did learn a lot about African-American history as part of our regular curriculum. Whether that was aided by the month (or could survive its removal) is unclear to me, of course. Still, one also has to remember how recent things like the Civil Rights Movement were. It wasn't very long ago that it was pretty commonplace to assert that the history of human civilization was a history limited primarily to white men. This change likely happened within the lifetime of your parents and grandparents (depending on how old you are). --Mr.98 (talk) 01:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a nice example of that attitude that I saw quoted in another forum recently. According to the person who posted it there, when Ronald Knox returned home from colonial Rhodesia to England, he enumerated a list of things along the way that "make you glad to be going home". And the first one was "the sight of the Nile and the reflection that this belongs to the history of the world, whereas everything else you have seen in Africa dates from Livingstone." --Anonymous, 06:29 UTC, October 19, 2010.

This from somebody from Rhodesia? Had he never heard of Great Zimbabwe? 216.93.213.191 (talk) 20:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody from England, as I implied. --Anon, 04:15 UTC, October 20/10.

Whites had a hard time believing that the Great Zimbabwe was made by, you know, real Africans (during the medieval period). It was thought to be a product of a much older civilization. I think the Queen of Sheba was batted around pretty frequently: [3] (I forget where, but it's an interesting interview anyways). Buddy431 (talk) 03:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presenting one's credentials[edit]

When somebody is chosen to be an ambassador from one country to another, they have to "present their credentials" to someone in the new country. Firstly, what are credentials? Are they actual pieces of paper? What do they say? Secondly, to whom do they present their credentials? Does an ambassador to the US present their credentials to the President, or to the Secretary of State? Does an ambassador to the UK present their credentials to the Prime Minister, or to the Queen? 216.93.213.191 (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The practice may differ in some other countries, but in the Commonwealth realms, new ambassadors present themselves and their credentials to either the monarch or her representative, the relevant governor-general. Ambassadors to the UK are formally known as "Ambassadors to the Court of St James's", i.e. they are accredited not to a government but to a monarchical court (not that the stereotypical image of such things exists anymore). Yes, they actually hand over documents prepared by their home governments. What these documents say I have no idea, but I imagine it's a (much) more high-falutin' and ornate version of a passport. It verifies who they are and which government they represent, so it has to be something fairly formal and contain a high degree of gravitas, not just something your local dealer in fake documents could whip up in an afternoon. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 01:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about if my local dealer happens to be Geoffrey Chaucer? --Anon, 06:31 UTC, October 19, 2010.

See Diplomatic credentials. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-diplomatic-passport.htm. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My Google image search for diplomatic passport found images of diplomatic passports.

—Wavelength (talk) 02:16, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But diplomatic passports, which will be issued to just about everyone travelling on behalf of a country's diplomatic service, will be very different to the sort of diplomatic credentials we're talking about. Rojomoke (talk) 08:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The credentials are presumably letters from their home heads of state saying "Please accept the bearer of this letter as my ambassador to you" - in as long-winded a way as possible. In the middle ages these would have fulfilled a function. The seals would have been examined in case the person was a fake. Itsmejudith (talk) 10:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does the person they present them to hold on to them? If the ambassador is asked to leave the country, do they have to retrieve their credentials? 216.93.213.191 (talk) 18:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair question. We talk about "presenting credentials", not "providing credentials". Presenting suggests they're handed over, read, and returned, but I'm guessing. We need an expert in the arcane ways of diplomatic protocol here. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]