Rites of Spring

Apr 30, 2007 23:41


Read more... )

Leave a comment

chrisopotamus May 2 2007, 14:44:27 UTC
Very very dramatic. The human interest in ceremony fascinates me in a purely humerous way.

Reply

strangedivine May 6 2007, 16:02:51 UTC
Humorous?

There is nothing, nothing, nothing about human interaction that is not ceremony and artifice. The fact that you sit at a table to eat or shake hands is no less ceremony than the more "esoteric" seeming aspects of my lifestyle, which is exactly the lifestyle I want.

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 04:58:37 UTC
What? There you go again, misusing big words.

Artifice: use of cunning plans or devices in order to trick or deceive

I believe you misunderstood the meaning of the word. If not, it's a sad state of affairs for you if you believe that everything about human interaction involves the use of cunning plans or devices in order to trick or deceive.

And, once again, you're really stretching to claim that eating at a table is cermonious. I do it simply because it's convenient. The plate and utensils are at the right height. I find it uncomfortable to lean over the coffee table and eat while sitting on the couch.

Shaking hands is a way of greeting, which is obviously ceremonial. Nothing particular deep about that shocking realization.

And, the last part of your blurb doesn't even make sense.

It seems to me you're at that awkward stage where you're getting high a lot of desperately trying way too hard to make yourself seem more esoteric and interesting than you really are. You'll grow out of it eventually.

Reply

strangedivine May 7 2007, 13:23:18 UTC
"It seems to me you're at that awkward stage where you're getting high a lot of desperately trying way too hard to make yourself seem more esoteric and interesting than you really are. You'll grow out of it eventually."

Possibly, but what's important is that I'm making exactly the life that I've wanted since childhood. I don't feel as though I have to justify that.

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 15:08:57 UTC
Are you sure? It seems more like you're trying to desperately to be anything but who you really are.

Reply

katranna May 7 2007, 17:47:48 UTC
Actually, he used "artifice" entirely appropriately and in full congruence with common modern usage. But I am glad you know how to use dictionary.com. Wanna get improperly nitpicky with any other words that have plural meanings?

Also, he's not really esoteric at all. You just interpret his words that way. He is exactly as he is, and it's all actually a lot simpler than one might think.

(Ha, strangedivine, I told you I'm posessive. ;-) Arrrrr.)

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 17:53:09 UTC
Um. No, he didn't use it correctly. Perhaps you both belong to a group of people who are trying to be esoteric but don't fully grasp the meanings of words? Just because a group of people frequently misuse a word does *not* mean it has multiple definitions. ;)

And, *I* didn't say he was esoteric. He did.

Reply

katranna May 7 2007, 18:18:02 UTC
Sigh. It does though. "Use of cunning plans or devices" is only one meaning, plus it depends on what you think the definition of "cunning" is. But I tend to see it used in the way he meant it--that is, as an older form of "artificiality"--quite often in theory texts, etc.

Plus I think this definition that is lower down, but still applies:
"4. a skillful or artful contrivance or expedient.
[Origin: 1525-35; < AF < L artificium craftsmanship, art, craftiness, equiv. to arti-, comb. form of ars art1 + -fic-, comb. form of facere to do1, make + -ium + -ium]"
works with it, too. (Focus on "contrivance or expedient.")

He said he was "esoteric" in quotes, you took it out of them. :-)

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 18:29:08 UTC
You're really stretching :)

Reply

katranna May 7 2007, 18:20:08 UTC
By the way, you should take a look at my journal. ;-) I am VERY esoteric. My obsession with campy pop stars? Totally indicative of my pretentious intellectual thwackery.

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 18:37:18 UTC
As much as I'm sure you would like to be esoteric, I doubt you really are. Like Mr. Man, you string together words that don't make sense. It probably impresses those with a limited vocabulary which in turn makes you feel intellegent, but those of us with a strong command of the English language are generally just irrited by the constant misuse of words ( ... )

Reply

katranna May 7 2007, 19:09:51 UTC
As much as I'm sure you would like to be esoteric, I doubt you really are.

Do you... not understand sarcasm?

Also, if any string of words on my journal doesn't make sense to you, I think you are in trouble. Here are some samples of lofty verbiage from my highly pretentious and esoteric journal:

"Because, you know, he was such a genius and all that, and he couldn't think of anything better than to just stick a self-insert into his fiction. "

"Admittedly, he was obviously feeling irritable that day, and isn't being quite as sunshiny as he usually is, but sunshiny all the time is boring anyway."

"At last, I saw Mika's "Grace Kelly" video on vh1, where it's currently in some top 20 list or other. (Have been voting for it too.) Hurrah."

THIS IS ALL SO DEEP AND INTELLECTUAL AND IMPENETRABLE.

Reply

chrisopotamus May 7 2007, 19:13:44 UTC
Sorry for the confusion. I was talking about strings of words in his journal. I didn't take a look at yours. But, now that I read some of your excerpts, I definitely will. Thanks for the first audible chuckle I've mustered in a few days!

Reply

This journal's plummeted since it got taken over by intellectual poseurs many_others_yet May 10 2007, 15:34:54 UTC
Tsk Tsk. This thread was quite interesting until it died prematurely. It was obvious from the paragraph break that Mr POTamus had switched back to talking about strangedivine's journal. Shame on you! ;-)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up