thirteen ways of looking at a geek

[heresluck]

You asked, I answer. There are still seven spots left; ask!

I've sorted these more or less by subject area. If you were going to ask "Do you consider yourself a control freak?" you can just table that one, 'kay?

Comments

[kassrachel]

These are so cool. Thank you for answering them. :-)

[heresluck]

Glad you enjoyed them!

[auroramama]

Fennel is an angelic vegetable

Is that a pun? It is related to Angelica archangelica, isn't it?

I have fennel seedlings here and there, progeny of a neighbor's plant. Italian neighborhoods always seem to have something interesting, often gone feral.

[lnhammer]

Chaucer does, indeed, not suck. Arguably, he's the poet who most Does Not Suck between Ovid and Keats.

---L.

[shewhomust]

I love that "arguably"!

[lnhammer]

I've seen the dorsal fins of Elizabethan scholars in these waters. Not to mention, I'm sometimes tempted by the shoals of Arisoto and Ronsard.

---L.

[superplin]

Ooh, narrative theory is my thing, too! But I've never read the Phelan book, so I'll have to add that to my must-read list.

This conference I just went to had as its theme "the work of stories," and it was just phenomenal. People from every discipline imaginable talking about narrative and storytelling. The first session I went to (aside from the big conference-wide panel in the beginning) was about various types and implications of narrative theory, and it got very heated during the Q&A. One poor woman took a real beating...

I loved seeing people all passionate about it. Mmm, narrative. ;)

[heresluck]

The Phelan book is amazing, but his new one (Living to Tell about It) is even better. Also check out Peter Rabinowitz's Before Reading.

I dislike Q&A sessions that get as wound-up as the one you described. Fortunately most folks at the conference I went to were pretty laid back. I got some great feedback on my paper from the other panelists, which was especially nice.

[superplin]

It was definitely uncomfortable to watch, but she set herself up for it to some extent. She made what I thought was a very convincing argument about the existence of two forms of reasoning, logical/discursive and narrative, and suggested that the latter is at least as important as the former in various aspects of social life. So far, so good. But then she said that "good narrative produces good citizens" whereas poor storytelling techniques don't foster appropriate social behavior, etc. Unfortunately, she gave a pretty narrow definition of "good storytelling," so people who study, say, different cultures that have different norms would be classed as "bad citizens" (vaguely defined, but clearly Western) under her system

[oracne]

Swedish Chef! Hee.

[sisabet]

I like Beaker. And I still fear the fennel.

[heresluck]

bork bork bork! *g*