[UA] History - is it all bunk?

[francis winkelman]

>Historicity is more important than fame.  By definition, the occult and
>arcane are specialized knowledge, so the mojo should favor the cliomancer
>who does some real homework to locate obscure but critical locations.  Fame
>is useful, since any site which remains in public awareness for a long time
>*gains* historical importance as a cultural focus.  Perhaps history
>determines the nature of the charge (significant or minor), and fame
>determines the frequency with which it produces them.  But I'd say the
>charge appears in the room of Ellis Island where immigrants got their entry
>papers stamped "approved," rather than the Statue of Liberty.

Ok to test the fame vs. importance question here's an example: Brick Lane, a 
road in London stuffed full of curry houses that attracts loads of visitors 
or the Hamburg Reeperbahn - these are famous for what they are not what 
happened or what they were. It would seem to be streching it for them to 
yield any charges.

>How relative are the places to the clio's relevant
>cultural historical-perspective. The Baby Taj isn't
>nearly as important to the Memphis Clio as the Golden
>Bowl Elvis died on.

I think what I was wondering about was some power gamer/ clio whore who'll 
suck up charges wherever they can be found. i.e. can they as opposed to will 
they get them.

I was also wondering are there any major charges left out ther for them. 
What about Mount Everest - if you only need to get to base camp that's easy 
but the summit may be a bit trickier. I presume there was an entirely 
unseemly scramble to get down to Ground Zero approximately 10 seconds after 
the first plane hit.

_________________________________________________________________
Chat, work, flirt and play online - download MSN Messenger! 
http://messenger.msn.co.uk