And I say in the book, 'Hard Measures,' that actually they were pretty wimpy if you really - if the American people actually knew what these techniques where, they would say, what are you talking about?
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
In history books, or the one about the guy who cut his hand off to get out of a canyon in Utah, you really want them to be accurate. But my stuff is such small beer by comparison.
The book is like the spoon, scissors, the hammer, the wheel. Once invented, it cannot be improved. You cannot make a spoon that is better than a spoon... The book has been thoroughly tested, and it's very hard to see how it could be improved on for its current purposes.
Men were not intended to work with the accuracy of tools, to be precise and perfect in all their actions.
Since I grew up, I have never deliberately used any technique at all other than the physical shaping of my tale so that it more or less resembles what has been thought of as a novel for these last two hundred years.
There's a difference between knowing what's on the page in a history book and actually feeling that page have curves and valleys.
To me, the technique was almost irrelevant; it was what was coming across.
Then when I reached college I realized that many people had thought about the problem during the 18th and 19th centuries and so I studied those methods.
The American experiment has always depended on a measure of tolerance and good sense.
You'll remember Dr. Rice said that several times: It was not a warning about the place and the method and the time - it was a general warning. And that points out the imperfection, if you would, of our intelligence.
Our incapacity to comprehend other cultures stems from our insistence on measuring things in our own terms.
No opposing quotes found.