oupacademic

oupacademic:

It’s almost the start of a new school year, and we’ve put together a list of books, bibles, and other resources that will help anyone in the field of religious studies.

booknation
hypable:

There are many reasons why the film companion to Lois Lowry’s The Giver has taken several years to get off of the ground. First of all, much like Watchmen, Ender’s Game, and The Godfather, Lowry’s dystopian future novel has gained a reputation of being distinctly “unfilmable.”
Fans of the book can understand this trepidation, as the pages of the book do a great job of keeping the secrets that eventually work their way into the film’s main conflict.
However, Hollywood loves a challenge, and when actor Jeff Bridges approached Lowry about converting the book into a film, it didn’t require a Walt Disney/P.L. Travers/Mary Poppins-esque courtship process.
“I have always, even before he was the mega star that he is now, been a fan of Jeff Bridges,” said Lowry in our exclusive interview with her.
“I’m sure it’s not a surprise that he’s a very nice man, a genuinely nice man, so I wasn’t really worried about it. I was impressed by the fact that he loved the book and wanted to make the movie.”
Read the full interview at Hypable.com

hypable:

There are many reasons why the film companion to Lois Lowry’s The Giver has taken several years to get off of the ground. First of all, much like Watchmen, Ender’s Game, and The Godfather, Lowry’s dystopian future novel has gained a reputation of being distinctly “unfilmable.”

Fans of the book can understand this trepidation, as the pages of the book do a great job of keeping the secrets that eventually work their way into the film’s main conflict.

However, Hollywood loves a challenge, and when actor Jeff Bridges approached Lowry about converting the book into a film, it didn’t require a Walt Disney/P.L. Travers/Mary Poppins-esque courtship process.

“I have always, even before he was the mega star that he is now, been a fan of Jeff Bridges,” said Lowry in our exclusive interview with her.

“I’m sure it’s not a surprise that he’s a very nice man, a genuinely nice man, so I wasn’t really worried about it. I was impressed by the fact that he loved the book and wanted to make the movie.”

Read the full interview at Hypable.com

nprfreshair
nprfreshair:

The devastating news came yesterday that Academy Award-winning comedian Robin Williams committed suicide at the age of 63. 
In remembrance of him, we are replaying our 2006 interview. At one point, he talks about the dark side of comedians: 

"Oh, they have a dark side, I mean, because they’re looking at that. In the process of looking for comedy, you have to be deeply honest. And in doing that, you’ll find out here’s the other side. You’ll be looking under the rock occasionally for the laughter. So they have a depressed side. But is it always the sad clown thing? No. But I find comics to be pretty honest people in terms of looking at stuff from both sides, or all sides."

nprfreshair:

The devastating news came yesterday that Academy Award-winning comedian Robin Williams committed suicide at the age of 63. 

In remembrance of him, we are replaying our 2006 interview. At one point, he talks about the dark side of comedians: 

"Oh, they have a dark side, I mean, because they’re looking at that. In the process of looking for comedy, you have to be deeply honest. And in doing that, you’ll find out here’s the other side. You’ll be looking under the rock occasionally for the laughter. So they have a depressed side. But is it always the sad clown thing? No. But I find comics to be pretty honest people in terms of looking at stuff from both sides, or all sides."

science-junkie
science-junkie:

Why It’s So Hard to Catch Your Own Typos
[…] Typos suck. They are saboteurs, undermining your intent, causing your resume to land in the “pass” pile, or providing sustenance for an army of pedantic critics. Frustratingly, they are usually words you know how to spell, but somehow skimmed over in your rounds of editing. If we are our own harshest critics, why do we miss those annoying little details?
The reason typos get through isn’t because we’re stupid or careless, it’s because what we’re doing is actually very smart, explains psychologist Tom Stafford, who studies typos of the University of Sheffield in the UK. “When you’re writing, you’re trying to convey meaning. It’s a very high level task,” he said.
As with all high level tasks, your brain generalizes simple, component parts (like turning letters into words and words into sentences) so it can focus on more complex tasks (like combining sentences into complex ideas). “We don’t catch every detail, we’re not like computers or NSA databases,” said Stafford. “Rather, we take in sensory information and combine it with what we expect, and we extract meaning.”
When we’re reading other peoples’ work, this helps us arrive at meaning faster by using less brain power. When we’re proof reading our own work, we know the meaning we want to convey. Because we expect that meaning to be there, it’s easier for us to miss when parts (or all) of it are absent. The reason we don’t see our own typos is because what we see on the screen is competing with the version that exists in our heads.
Read more @WIRED

science-junkie:

Why It’s So Hard to Catch Your Own Typos

[…] Typos suck. They are saboteurs, undermining your intent, causing your resume to land in the “pass” pile, or providing sustenance for an army of pedantic critics. Frustratingly, they are usually words you know how to spell, but somehow skimmed over in your rounds of editing. If we are our own harshest critics, why do we miss those annoying little details?

The reason typos get through isn’t because we’re stupid or careless, it’s because what we’re doing is actually very smart, explains psychologist Tom Stafford, who studies typos of the University of Sheffield in the UK. “When you’re writing, you’re trying to convey meaning. It’s a very high level task,” he said.

As with all high level tasks, your brain generalizes simple, component parts (like turning letters into words and words into sentences) so it can focus on more complex tasks (like combining sentences into complex ideas). “We don’t catch every detail, we’re not like computers or NSA databases,” said Stafford. “Rather, we take in sensory information and combine it with what we expect, and we extract meaning.”

When we’re reading other peoples’ work, this helps us arrive at meaning faster by using less brain power. When we’re proof reading our own work, we know the meaning we want to convey. Because we expect that meaning to be there, it’s easier for us to miss when parts (or all) of it are absent. The reason we don’t see our own typos is because what we see on the screen is competing with the version that exists in our heads.

Read more @WIRED