Dune: Xiao Bai asked how to cut with a knife after interstellar crossing? V.S. Neware didn't know BDO

Discussing with a friend in the circle of friends, he complained about the movie "Dune": how can you still use a knife to cut after all the interstellar crossings?

I don't know him well, but I can feel that he is a friend worth exploring, and he immediately followed up with a sentence: There must be a way to talk about it, but I have not read the original book, and there is no explanation in the movie.

His view is consistent with mine, and my description is called: "circle."

When you make a movie, you should shoot a "circle", and what should be accounted for must be accounted for. Not to mention the grass snake gray line, it should always echo back and forth.

Or you can't be headless.

No tail

This man wrote that it was gone

This matter is written and written not to be accounted for

No head

Why can't you hit with a laser when you have a laser?

A lot of mediocre works, when someone defends it, says: You should read the original book, where there is an explanation.

I generally debate: Do I need a Ph.D. in physics or a master's degree in sociology to watch a movie? Am I eligible to buy a ticket?

And I think that entertainment works like movies should not set any preconditions. As an author, it is your responsibility to tell the story clearly. Either you tell the story round or you don't tell it.

But it seems that for the work "Dune"; for the director of Bullfrog; for the good things, my standards are wandering again.

This is my question: should there be a precondition for general entertainment works? Do you want to do some homework? If it is the right and the right one, how can the preconditions be appropriate? How much homework is done?

This wanders.

I didn't kneel down to bullfrogs, I preferred to go further to the truth. Or show a little bit of the characteristics of a smart person.

Russell quote: The problem in this world is that the wise are full of doubts and the fools are convinced.

When I was in school in England, it happened that my tutor was a Chinese, and I found that the foreign teachers: Chinese; Russian; Indian teachers were more "stubborn" in Shanghainese than the native British teachers.

Teachers in the United Kingdom teach very Buddhist. It's like coming to chat, not from the student's point of view.

Among the foreign teachers, it is really the Chinese teachers who "teach" from the perspective of the students. How is this teaching defined? Teach by hand as we say.

Teachers should evaluate and advise each other. My mentor told me that he had received a suggestion saying that he had no beginning or end in his lectures.

I ask him to review the last lesson at the beginning as a basic preparation for this lesson. At the end of the lesson, summarize and generalize.

The English class is called lecture, the first time I did not know this word, and then I used it and did not care, that time I deliberately went to look up the word.

From the very beginning, China's "lessons" have been a matter between teachers and students, and because we respect teachers and emphasize teaching, it is a very serious matter.

I understand this lecture, and there is another layer of entertainment meaning. The correspondence we are closest to is now: knowledge payment.

Lecture was another fashionable entertainment at that time, Miss Gentleman, in addition to watching the play. Of course, there is also the dissemination of knowledge.

Mainly to do some physical and chemical experiments, i.e. hydrogen and oxygen can burn and become water. Electrical energy makes the lights on and the fans turn.

This kind of lecture, you can't ask the audience to have any degree, you have to talk interestingly, otherwise you can't make money.

In Europe at the time, this kind of lecture was very popular.

Every class, every legcture is an independent system, and you can't ask the audience to come every time.

This is what I understand, the logic behind the suggestion of other teachers lecturing to my mentor.

One year the Nobel Prize in Literature was given to an Arab writer, and each chapter of his work had large repetitions of the previous, which was a very distinctive feature of Arab writers.

The reason is that in the past, Arab storytellers had to go back and forth between different tribes, and there were probably two types of people who listened to this book:

1. People who have heard the previous reply.

2. People who have not heard of the previous reply.

In order to satisfy people who have not heard the previous reply, the previous content must be repeated.

This and our Chinese storyteller: the book picked up, said...

Completely different.

Our basket was a fixed place, where we talked about it every day, where it was broken, where it was picked up.

The Arab storytellers, almost all the previous contents, are briefly repeated. Speaking of the third time, we must first pinch the first time, the second time, and then receive the third time.

So, whether there is a precondition, from the perspective of the work may not be able to say a golden standard.

Are there any preconditions, and how many? Or according to the market situation, the audience reflects the conditions.

Newva didn't know the BDO

"Big Dumb Object" (BDO: Big Dumb Object)

Everyone thinks That Newval is a good hand at BDO, and Dune is waiting to see BDO.

An interview reporter asked him to make a presentation about BDO, and he asked what BDO was, and he didn't know that there was this abbreviation and this term.

Which led me to talk about what books to read? And what knowledge reserves do you need?

We think Neware shoots BDO, he calls it number two, and no one dares to call it number one. But he didn't have that concept.

This confirms my view of reading: no book must be read.

My logic is:

1. It is impossible for the predecessors to read the books of the later generations, and they can also succeed.

2. In the past, human beings did not communicate with each other, and they did not read each other's books, and they were quite successful.

i.e.

Confucius did not read the books of his descendants, how did he obtain his wisdom?

I don't think Washington read the Analects, he also established America.

Success can be really complicated, or human beings are complicated.

This is really not to say that these books, this knowledge is necessary, you must have these preconditions, you can succeed.