--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As to your statement, Vaj, "Yes and my understanding (perhaps not of publishing genre) was that it's ok per casual anglais," Judy would like to tell you (and I heartily agree) "that it's not OK no matter how casual your anglais, unless perhaps you're spray-painting it on the subway walls." And in response to your statements, "I don't live by my c. 1977 Norton Reader or (heaven forbid) a dictionary" and "I'm just an ordinary being," Judy points out that "Many utterly ordinary beings have no need of the dictionary or Norton's Reader of any vintage to know the difference between a possessive and a contraction." :-) (P.S. It looks as though you've apparently chosen yet again to ignore the main point of the post: the distinction between sattva and purusha, or judging "it's a really, really *good* movie" vs. actually freeing oneself from belief in the movie. While I enjoy sattvic behavior as much as the next guy, judging anyone's behavior as "enlightened" or "not enlightened" would to me fall into the category of judging the quality of the movie.) :-)
