Talk:Gor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page. Please feel free to add your name the project participation list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Online Gorean Gaming Sites

Since it looks like people are going to keep adding in their play places, we might as well have a sub-section for them and one that makes it very clear what they are. This differentiates it from the offline and lifestyle web sites.

--Malkinius 17:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I deleted or modified the most egregious BDSM and misogynist references and noted that the Barsoom references are not the whole series but mostly in the first book, opening section, and in the early books in the series. I do not remember in which book Tarl stopped sending the manuscripts back or I would have included that.

Malkinius

[edit] Red link

I've taken out the link to the non-existant "Gorean Slave Positions" page. If anyone does want to write this up (and God knows there are enough versions of this on the web to make it unnecessary), I think it would better enrich the kajira page. Mind you, expanding that page would be a fine thing. Wyvern 23:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

I honestly can't see calling something a "Redneck soap opera" or something being "edited by Rednecks" in an encyclopedia. The article also seems to be leaning towards an opinion that, to use the vernacular, "John Norman is teh suk lolol". In fact, I believe the last paragraph of "General notes" is mainly hogwash and could be deleted easily. "His greatest works are considered his first third..." By who? Certainly not me. Where is this information coming from? Kyou 17:29, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


i removed that last paragraph because it doesn't contribute anything at all to the article. it is clearly biased, and if i may say so, it is just flamebait. why would you put that paragraph back? it lowers the quality of the article by a huge margin. who gets to decide that the paragraph stays, hmm?

[edit] Erotica

The word "erotica" and reference has obvious place as large portions of the books deal with human sexuality.

Agree with the "BDSM" removal. "Erotica" alone is more fitting since the nature of S&M especially is denounced in the novels as a sickness resulting from sexual repression/denial - what the author sees the modern world suffering from. Punishment, and punishment for sexual arousal arent the same thing. Men who are truly able to be masculine and who have a healthy sexuality dont need to beat women to arouse themselves or to "feel" dominant. It is only in a society that attempts to deny the respective masculine and feminine natures of humanity that such a necessity would occur, for nature cannot truly be denied, and any such attempt will lead only to sickness.

(I'm not championing these ideas or promoting them, I am simply stating what the author presents in his novels, regardless of if any of us agree with his conclusions or not. So dont take this as a "sales pitch" of Gorean philosophy.)

  • I disagree with the removal of the BDSM tag; while John Norman has written passages against S&M, he's fully behind B&D, and there are plenty of people in the BDSM community who overlap with the "Gorean" set. Having said that, I'm in full agreement with the addition of a "Erotica" tag; the novels are historically notable for their integration of SF and erotica. Wyvern 11:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 discussion

  • "B&D"... but not "S&M." The term "BDSM" is inclusive of the latter which gives a false impression of what the novels present and what the author is expressing, thus I think the removal of the full "BDSM" tag is correct. The use of the expression "B&D" alone would be fine and would present a less general and potentially confusing explanation. Use of the full BDSM tag causes confusion since the majority who "overlap" resultingly and inaccuratley define Gorean as being inclusive of S&M, and infact often think its even dependent upon it (or want to think that). Also, use of "BDSM" tends to make people think "Gorean" is a subset of that collective term, when in reality it is a lifestyle unto itself of which sexuality is only a single part. Potential B&D aspects are only a possibility but not a dependence, and often modern Gorean sexuality isnt at all inclusive of what is commonly thought of when someone thinks "B&D" (though use of the term in the general sense is correct). Ambiguity in this regard would only make the presented facts less factual, so clarity in the explanation of this point and avoidance of simple catch-all phrasing would make clear what we have both said since we are pretty much saying the same things - the problem is somewhat an issue of semantics and how a reader new to the topic might interpret things if not made clear.
BDSM is a made-up acronym that was meant to be rather vaguely widely inclusive -- "Bondage & Discipline" and/or "Dominance & Submission" and/or "Sadism & Masochism". So technically, you're only objecting to the "M" and half of the "S"... ;-) Sometimes it's jocularly referred to as "BDSMNOP" in recognition of the "everything including the kitchen sink" approach.
The category's probably going to stay -- for additional discussion, see Talk:Gorean AnonMoos 19:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I know what BDSM is/means lol and that is exactly the point - it is vague and widely inclusive. That's exactly why the term BDSM should not be used because, as Ive already stated, it isnt clear and gives the false impression that Gorean includes "everything" which it does not. In fact, Gorean rejects much of what comes under that catch-all (and most people do not know this), and for that matter isnt dependent on any of it anyway (lol which most people also do not know - none of what falls under BDSM is necessary to the Gorean Lifesyle, its just possibility), which if not clearly stated makes the article less factual and useful. So no, I am not only objecting to the "M", I am objecting to the fact that the use of the term promotes misunderstanding that is already widely believed as a result of this exact thing. -- unsigned comment by IP 68.199.37.202 13:52, 10 April 2006
Please sign your contributions; it's polite, and makes it clearer who said what. On the BDSM subject, I think that you may have the set order inverted. The 'Gorean Lifestyle' as some people practice it is a subset of BDSM, rather than BDSM being a subset of the Gorean Lifestyle - therefore it is irrelevant what might be within BDSM that is not Gorean. As for the coments on the acronym, yes, and I remember that years ago on alt.sex.bondage it was necessary to coin the acronym WIIWD for 'what it is we do'...since no more specific term could be agreed upon. Don't worry about it too much. Wyvern 15:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I do not have it inverted at all. You are making the all too common mistake of defining the Gorean Lifestyle by what the BDSM crowd terms it to be, which goes back to my original point about why the use of the term "BDSM" is misleading if not properly clarified. What you are describing is a BDSM "Lifestyle" into which some Gorean terms and ideas have been brought - things possibly practiced within the Gorean Lifestyle, but only a possible part and not the most important. This is what the BDSM crowd incorrectly pushes as the definition of Gorean. The Gorean Lifestyle is a reflection of the lifestyle of the fictional people living on Gor, not just their possible sexual practices. Seriously, think about it. How did Goreans on Gor live? The novels present an entire society reflecting not just the institution of slavery but an entire culture and its supporting philosophy. This philosophy is rooted in Nietzsche (who Norman paraphrases throughout the novels, sometimes for pages on end, and who the whole concept of comparing the conflicting morality of our modern age (which both Nietzsche and Norman term - "the morality of the slave" - a morality of weakness and conformity) to that of the morality of ancient times (which both Nietzsche and Norman term - the "morality of the master" - a morality of strength and individuality) comes from), Ayn Rand's Objectivism (Norman has lectured professionally on Rand and participated on professional panels discussing this philosopher), Aristotle and some of the Stoics (for the sake of brevity I will stop there). We are talking about an entire culture when we use the words "Gor" or "Gorean". When we talk of their lifestyle we are speaking of how they lived their lives - not just how some of them may have had sex (as it is female slaves were only a very small fraction of the population; beings that only a very few ever owned compared to the non-slave owning majority). Modern Goreans base their lives in the philosophy behind this culture - the "why" behind what the people do in every life situation and the surrounding society itself. This is why you see so many arguments on this subject, because BDSMers constantly think they can define Gorean by what they think it to be or want it to be, rather than what is really presented in the novels in the fuller sense, and what many of us modern Goreans actually really do live by. A life that isnt at all focused on the "slave stuff" but on life as a whole, to which the Gorean novels do fully speak.
The Gorean Lifestyle is rooted in a philosophical system. Think less of BDSM "lifestyle" (which is primarily defined by the respective individual) and more along the lines of something like Libertarian or Objectivist (I dont mean the same philosophy, but the same depth and range in terms of what it speaks to). One can be an Objectivist and practice aspects of BDSM, but that doesnt mean Objectivism is a subset of BDSM as a result. Terry Goodkind's "Sword of Truth" fantasy series is heavily founded upon Objectivism and also presents many BDSM-ish scenes. That doesnt make BDSM practices necessary to Objectivism or even to Goodkind's take on it. It just means these things can be done (and that sex sells lol). In terms of Gor the same holds true. While the institution of slavery is present on Gor (just like it was in Rome, Greece, etc. - the ancient cultures upon which Gor is based), and the books often detail this for the exact reason of audience attraction, its only one part of that world, and it isnt one necessary for someone to be a "Gorean" (again, female slaves were a small minority of the female population and most people never owned them). Fighting and the life of a Warrior is also heavily present in the stories (such is a lot more interesting and sells more books than the daily scenes in a Tailor's life lol) but the vast majority of Goreans are not of the Warrior Caste. You dont have to be a Warrior to be a Gorean, you dont have to know how to use a sword or fight either. Yet even though the Warrior Caste is the most focused on, a clear picture of the general Gorean mindset and philosophy beyond far more than just the Warrior's is presented (and besides, Caste in and of itself is an aspect of Gorean society - the importance in terms of the philosophy isnt how that institution is enacted on Gor, but the "why" behind it, which is applicable across the board). Besides also, most of the "slave conversations" in the books are not really speaking of BDSM at all, but are examinations of the conflict between the ancient world/Gorean viewpoint on femininity and masculinity vs. the modern world's take on these subjects and others - all those passages where Tarl and the given girl go back and forth between what is Gor and what is taught on Earth. Whats there goes far deeper than any simple promotion of BDSM, we are reading a presentation of what the author feels is the natural way each respective sex should approach life and each other (and that natural way isnt slavery - its the ancient view on what feminity and masculinity is and how these two are complimentary). The same holds true with Tarl's introspection - he doesnt just contemplate the idea of female slavery, he examines how a person should live his life as a whole, in the process contrasting Gor to Earth and ultimately rejecting the latter for the former, with we the readers present for the multi-book spanning process (which is reiterated in part in the Jason Marshall trilogy). BDSM isnt a subset of the Gorean Lifestyle, aspects of it are simply things that could be done and obviously enjoyed (though some things are unacceptable). But they do not need to be done, and one can lead a Gorean Lifestyle without ever crossing into the realm of BDSM. Just like one could a Libertarian, Objectivist, etc., or any life based on a developed philosophy. Which means the Gorean Lifestyle in reality isnt a subset of BDSM, its just that BDSMers claim this and no matter how many times those living a Gorean Lifestyle (not a BDSM "Lifestyle" into which Gorean slave ideas have been brought) try to correct this, the general BDSM crowd says the opposite and demands that to be the simplified definition/classification, even though it isnt even their lifestyle in the first place lol... not to mention many of them have little familiarity with the subject or the books excepting what theyve read of BDSM based websites. Websites which often do not like Gor, or just want to relegate it to something they can "claim" as part of their thing.
Also, saying that "it is irrelevent what might be within BDSM that is not Gorean," is wrong. If we are trying to define Gor it is very important to make these distinctions, else it leads to people confusing the subject. In response to my original post opening the "Erotica" topic you yourself pointed out that Norman has written passages against S&M. Using the general BDSM term without clarifying things leads to the continued error of people thinking that Gorean is inclusive of all that is in BDSM. This isnt like other subjects. BDSM, for the most part, is tolerant of people's kinks. When someone says they are a "BDSMer" they probably dont practice or even like all the possibilities. But here, with Gor, we have not an individual but a defined subject that doesnt just not include all those possibilities, but flat out rejects some, such as S&M, as being born of a sickness. Big difference there. Gor is quite intolerant at times. It isnt necessary to go through a whole list rattling off all the possibilites that werent suggested in the novels - that would both unnecessary and impossible. But those things that are very clearly rejected - S&M - should be noted, especially since not doing so has created this ongoing false assumption that Goreans are into S&M of an unsafe form claiming no need for "safe words" and thus Goreans are dangerous people who promote abuse (a side note on "safe words" - such are not needed because the situations where they would be needed simply should not occur for the Gorean. In the case of a relationship the words "please stop" in any case mean exactly what they mean, not "I love this please continue until I really mean stop by saying the 'safe word'". But this is again irrelevent because the Gorean mindset rejects S&M and its practice, and views the damaging of a woman in any way - physical or emotional - as stupid). Not only isnt the idea that Goreans are into S&M true, but by the definition presented through the novels, such people arent Gorean at all (at least not in terms of what the philosophy projects in ideal - "bad" Goreans are shown in the novels, for the exact reason of showing the "wrong" side of things also, making the "right" all the more clear), and are behaving in a way contrary to what the books support. Made clear, Gor no longer exists as a misunderstood excuse that abusive people attempt to hide behind. It becomes actually the opposite, since Gor is really a condemnation of this particular sort of behavior. And those modern Goreans who rightfully have nothing to do with S&M (or often BDSM as a whole) arent unfairly labeled and condemned. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Such accuracy, especially in the context of a topic being assumed to approve of something it in reality rejects, is obviously both important and necessary.
As for signing, I am unable to log an account from this computer, but all the "unsigned" articles under the "Erotica" topic, up until now, are from me. -- unsigned comment by 68.199.37.202
Just put four tildes at the end of your comment, and this will automatically set forth the time and date and your IP number, at least.
Meanwhile, the definition of BDSM is conjunctive, not disjunctive -- something doesn't have to fall under ALL of Bondage & Discipline and Dominance & Submission and Sadism & Masochism to qualify as BDSM, but rather if it qualifies as being even just ONE of them (in a more or less systematic and conscious way), then it satisfies the definition of BDSM.
I don't really want to get into a long debate about whether Gor is "part" of BDSM or not, but my comments over on Talk:Gorean still apply:
...there are people who come across this article who judge Goreans exclusively by BDSM standards, and come to the conclusion that Goreans are struggling to dimly approach BDSM best practices, but failing -- while other people have the point of view that "Goreans practice a noble philosophy of honor", and insist that being Gorean has nothing to do with mere "game-playing" or "role-playing" (you must imagine the word "playing" to be pronounced with ineffable contempt and disdain). Neither point of view, if taken to extremes, would result in a very good Wikipedia article -- but this article kind of has to be written in such a way that neither side would be completely outraged on reading it. -- AnonMoos 20:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I already know that the definition of Gor and Gorean as presented on Wikipedia will be a BDSM one. Gorean Lifestylers are heavily outnumbered by the BDSM crowd that thinks they know all about Gor and so that is the definition that will end up being displayed. It would be interesting to see what definition BDSM would get if the non-BDSM majority of the world did the writing, based on their misconceptions and the beliefs they want to have - the "objective reality" the "vanilla" world says they know BDSM to be all about. It would not at all be pretty in a venue like this, but the difference here is - most common people dont have any interest in defining BDSM or Gor, but BDSMers always want to say what Gorean is. (Not calling you a BDSMer AnonMoos, I dont know you -and- dont take anything that may sound harsh in this as being pointed at you, its not.)
In my last post I didnt say that "BDSM" should be removed - I know that wont happen because the misconception is too entrenched and any detailed explanations will be pretty much ignored. Whatever. What I want to see is a clarification in "the use of the term "BDSM" [for it] is misleading if not properly clarified." Clarified. S&M isnt simply not a part of Gor, or something not mentioned. It is clearly mentioned and clearly rejected in harsh terms. How hard would it really be to just make the accurate comment that the practice of S&M as commonly defined is not a part of Gor? Im not saying phrase it in any nasty way, or that it cant even be phrased nicely. If you want to leave the term BDSM, do so, I know that is what is going to happen anyway. But the fact that there is a large part of BDSM that is not only rejected in the Gorean novels, but condemned as a sickness should be made clear for the reason I stated in a previous post. And this doesnt have to be stated in such harsh, critical terms. I know the BDSM community wants to promote tolerance of all kinks but the Gorean philosophy is its own thing and it is often very intolerant. If the definition is that of Gor and Gorean, the truth should be stated, not what someone wants to be the truth or for that matter doesnt want. In my earlier post I gave a very valid reason for this in how many people think Goreans are involved in abusive forms of S&M and that Gor itself supports this. A clarification wouldnt change the misconception overnight, but more importantly, it wouldnt feed it.
An addition to my words in this discussion - Gorean Lifestyle as compared to a BDSM "lifestyle" into which Gorean ideas have been brought -- simple. I dont call the second case a "Gorean Lifestyle" because that is not so much what it is. Its focus is on BDSM with "Gorean" only adding flavor and some terminology - BDSM is the primary point with "Gorean" only clarifying what flavor, and thus being the secondary point. The simple fact that the second case is called a "subset of BDSM" proves my contention - BDSM is the focus and foundation, and thus that is what the lifestyle should be called. The Gorean Lifestyle isnt founded in BDSM, it is founded in a philosophical system influenced by and akin to that of Nietzsche, Rand, Aristotle, some Stoics and others. For this reason it is not a subset of BDSM, because such isnt the defining focus or for that matter even a major part. Its primary point is "Gorean," with BDSM being a secondary possibility at most.
BTW "noble philosophy of honor" is the simplistic newbie definition of Gorean philosophy (and I am not calling you that AnonMoos, you are right in saying many term the philosophy to be that, because they cant define what they claim is their philosophy in any way other than to blurt out the word "honor"). Gorean philosophy isnt a philosophy of slavery, and it isnt a philosophy of honor either. Some of the values presented in Gorean philosophy go into what constitutes a Gorean's common notion of the word "honor," but that word itself isnt the philosophy, and what's behind that word is only a fraction of the whole the philosophy does present. By looking at the Gorean take on honor, or for that matter slavery and anything else in the books down to the very basic actions of the characters, and asking "why" do Goreans believe this and do this, we find the philosophy behind Gor. Its the "why" that matters, with the "how" developing on top of this.
Nuff said on all this though. I know how I live, am happy with it, and will simply proceed to do so. Goodluck :) (will use your tilde suggestion AnonMoos, if I do it right, thanks) 68.199.37.202 23:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gorean Chess?

It's been a long time since I read any of the Gor series (well, except Slave of Gor a year ago or so) and I've forgotten whether there are detailed rules for Gorean chess, and if it has a proper name in Gorean. Dropped by here between the Barsoom page (looking for Martian chess) and the Ouroboros page, then the variants of chess page. Does Gorean chess have known rules, or is it only known through vaguenesses in the text?Skookum1 06:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

  • The Gorean version of chess, Kaissa, is not explicitly spelled out in full in any of the novels. However, fans have gathered together the passages mentioning it and reconstructed a playable version from the fragments; a quick googling will turn up pages describing this. Wyvern 11:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Literary Influences

At some point we should write up a section on the literary influence of the Gor novels. People have long remarked on their own antecedents, particularly the "planetary adventure" stories such as ERB's Mars novels. The Gor novels were ground-breaking and experimental in their day and have had much influence on later authors, not in the least by demonstrating that one could write about sex in a SF novel, even (or particularly) nonconventional sex, and still get published. Wyvern 02:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Norman may have broken some ground in subject matter, but not necessarily more so than the late 1960's science-fiction "new wave", and I'm not sure that he really has a broad "literary influence" as such (other than unleashing some second-rate imitators during the period when the Gor novels were having their greatest commercial success). What Norman was really successful at was getting books which many think revolve around bondage practices and "kinky sex" (though of course without "dirty words" or detailed descriptions of body parts) adopted into small suburban branch libraries across the U.S. in the late 1970's and early 1980's, where they were filed in with all the other sci-fi and fantasy books (as I saw with my own eyes on several occasions). AnonMoos 13:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed passage

"where even Norman's Free Women -- women who are citizens of their city-states -- are compelled to acknowledge the superiority of all men"

What is this specifically supposed to mean, beyond and above the article's acknowledgement that there's a general overall Gorean power imbalance in favor of men?? The upper-class women of Gor's northern cities in fact have a higher social status than women in many traditional Islamic societies, and at least on Gor there's never any religious justification offered for male supremacy (given Norman's dismissive attitude towards religion, reflected in the involuted nature of the Gorean "Initiates" -- though there are Gorean "foundation myths", not the same thing).

If you wouldn't write "free women of the Abbasid caliphate were compelled to acknowledge the superiority of all men", then don't write "free women of Gor are compelled to acknowledge the superiority of all men". AnonMoos

I disagree with your analogy, and you misquoted me in your text -- I capitalized Free Women because that is a term and category that Norman specifically defines, and uses in many cases as a plot device. I did not intend to say "women who are not enslaved", but rather the Norman usage of "female humans of the Free Woman class". D'n 00:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Dude, I did not misquote you! I quoted you perfectly in the italicized sentence in the top of the section. In my second paragraph, I mentioned something you SHOULDN'T write, not something you DID write. Please get that straight.
Furthermore, your distinction between uncapitalized "free women" and capitalized "Free Women" has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do the published Gor novels by Norman, since Norman never uses the double capitalization "Free Woman" or "Free Women" (except in a very few cases when quoting his characters who use the words as a vocative phrase of direct address -- in which case the capitalization only marks the vocative). AnonMoos 04:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Norman very precisely and often (sources available, ask me) points out several things with his use of "Free Woman": D'n 00:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
You actually mean his use of "free woman" (since Norman never uses capitalization to make any distinction here). AnonMoos 04:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • The woman is a citizen of her city-state, and as such may own property
  • Despite their special class and citizenship, the "Free Women" is nevertheless subject to the overall sexual/gendered hierarchy -- which is my point in the article. D'n 00:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes and the women of the Abbasid caliphate were also "subject to the overall sexual/gendered hierarchy", and this is adequately covered in article by stating that there's an overall power imbalance in favor of men. But this most definitely does NOT mean that every woman (no matter how high) always behaves subserviently cringingly towards every man (no matter how low) -- as your preferred language might seem to imply!!!
Furthermore, the upper-class free women of the northern cities of Gor are actually better off in some respects than the women of the Abbasid caliphate were, since at least there's such a thing as a "Ubara" on Gor, whereas there was no such thing as a Queen (in any meaningful sense of the English word) in the Abbasid caliphate, and women are not so strictly excluded from the public realm. AnonMoos 04:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • The woman is not a runaway slave, but unless she has continued and active physical protection at all times she may very well become someone's chattel
If she stays within the city of her own home stone (assuming this city is not conquered by external enemies), and she stays off high aerial bridges not protected by tarn wire, and avoids committing major crimes, then she's generally safe enough in the majority of cases. Gor is actually not much more brutal in this repect than certain periods of real history. AnonMoos 04:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
In brief, because there is a gulf of difference between the generic term "free woman" and Norman's specific "Free Woman", I absolutely would write what I did. D'n 00:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
This distinction seems to reside at least partially in your head -- and when it comes to the putative supposed distinction between lowercase "free woman" and uppercase "Free Women", it seems to exist only in your head... AnonMoos 04:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Parody/humor

Ghetto Girls of Gor (the intentionally lost scrolls) is listed under parody/humor. Maybe I just haven't encountered enough Gor stuff, but I can't see the parody/humor in it; to me it reads as a straight piece of fan-fiction involving the basic universe. Perhaps someone could leave a note here explaining why it's parody/humor?? 156.34.221.174 18:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I deleted the link -- it was added before I started keeping an eye on the article, and I never actually visited it (the title sounded sufficiently outlandish). AnonMoos 06:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, Gay, Bejeweled, Nazi Bikers of Gor doesn't work for me. Can anyone access the link, or should it be removed as dead? 156.34.221.174 18:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Nor for me. It worked the last time I tried it; if we're lucky the site is only temporarily down. I'm not sure where else the parody might be found, offhand. Wyvern 15:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Someone's fixed it without updating the talk page. There's a link to the copy on adultfanfiction.net now. Wyvern 20:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] British vs. New England

Someone's changed 'British professor Tarl Cabot' to 'New England professor Tarl Cabot.' He's British, but taught for one term in a New England college; this seems tricky to explain well. I'm thinking of just calling him British, since his teaching carreer was short and of little consequence. Comments? Wyvern 20:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/o/r/Talk%7EGor_ac75.html"