(no subject)
Which of the 6 Arbitrary Livejournalian Archetypes Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla
Well, I feel lame.
Whoever made this quiz has a little trouble with context, because classifying these resultant people isn't an "archetype" at all. To call them an archetype they're implying that these people are subtle knockoffs of a higher influence, but they haven't named an influence, nor do these results seem like they're too strongly-related, anyway. I suppose if you knew each person you could draw sketchy lines of similarity between them.
And to call them "arbitrary archetypes"? I mean, it's a long-shot, but I guess where I can see where the context can fit correctly. In effect, it could be meant to mean that the similarities between the resultants are dependent on the test taker, but the vocabulary is still a little bit contrived. I really think that "arbitrary" and "archetype" were pulled right out of that kid's weekly vocabulary list in high school english, because really, come on. The words both begin with the same general first letters. Wasn't it a general rule in high school english for teachers to handout packets with 3+ syllable words according to alphabetical order? I'd assume his teacher was on the As for that week and he was just yoinking words off of the sheet to put up a chicanery of intelligence, but I think it's a little too contrived.
What would the public know, though? Unfortunately, this community is filled with idiots and it's really easy to outshine the masses if you drop vocabulary bits everywhere. That seems to be a ubiquitous thing these days. I've read some of the poetry on people's journals, and it's very difficult to get through because the vocabulary is so forced. It's like people are trying to cram too many cool-sounding adjectives before a reluctant verb it jsut convolutes the entire line. I assume they either forget or are totally oblivious to the fact that a lot of poetry is based on the flow of words, or at least the deliberate celebration of contexts or structures (as in free verse). Furthermore, I assume that they really don't know what they are doing, and I have ample justification because of all the literary observations I've partaken in. I'm by no means an expert, but I have at least enough sense to know what is unknowledgeable, forced, or plainly distasteful.
People really have to learn to conduct themselves. English in high school and college were such bores to me because I understood all the presented concepts and couldn't even conceive a way for people to miss them, but when I look into the facade-bearing faces of internet-folk I'm really discouraged that people didn't care enough about their self-betterment to even pay attention!
Even now! I know I'm making many valid points, but not a soul will take the time to read this because of the length in which I explicated my frustrations with bad textmanship. This post is also lost in a backdated edit. What a waste.