Posts
VA Smith | Urbanity
3 weeks ago
Showing posts with label language. Show all posts
Showing posts with label language. Show all posts
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
English ABD, Chemistry PhD
JeFF, reading aloud from F.T. Marinetti's "Geometric and and Mechanical Splendor and the Numerical Sensibility": We are hastening the grotesque funeral of passéist Beauty (romantic, symbolist, and decadent) whose essential elements were memory, nostalgia, the fog of legend produced by remoteness in time, the exotic fascination produced by remoteness in space, the picturesque, the imprecise, rusticity, wild solitude, multicolored disorder, twilight shadows, corrosion, weariness, the soiled traces of the years, the crumbling of ruins, mold, the taste of decay, pessimism, phthisis, suicide, the blandishments of pain, the aesthetics of failure, the adoration of death.
A new beauty is born today from the chaos of the new contradictory sensibilities that we Futurists will substitute for the former beauty, and that I call Geometric and Mechanical Splendor.
Its essential elements are: hygienic forgetfulness, hope, desire, controlled- force, speed, light, will power, order, discipline, method; a feeling for the great city; the aggressive optimism that results from the cult of muscles and sport; the imagination without strings, ubiquity, laconism...
---
Also: xkcd
Monday, November 30, 2009
Labels
I think I have too many labels, and that I haven't applied them evenly. Anybody want to go back through all my posts and tell me what keywords should be associated with each?
I didn't think so. Neither do I.
---
I've been getting a lot of emails this semester that begin with "Hi" or "Hey." I think it's because I tell my students they can call me JeFF, but they're too uncomfortable to do so. At the same time, they feel awkward going back to "Mr. Stumpo" having been granted the opportunity to be on a first-name basis with me. It's really quite amusing.
Oh, and don't worry, I've made sure that they know how to write a more professional greeting.
---
Anybody out there think a poetic sequence and a long poem are basically the same thing?
---
When people ask me what my dogs are, I'm very proud of being able to answer "mutts." I like saying mutts as opposed to mixed-breeds. Mutt has some balls to it, some scrap, some independence that just says, "I'm the only me in the world. Don't have a chip on my shoulder about it, but recognize, I'm the only me."
Sunday, August 23, 2009
MIT Tongues
The other week I went to the MIT Museum. There was some great stuff, and even an exhibit that will be useful for my dissertation, amazingly enough (the folks involved produced visual "poetry" like 2D busts formed by terms used in a blog). My top takeaway for the day was a child's contribution to the "Wall of Ideas" in the second floor robotics area. While most other children had drawn some kind of boxy robot equipped with laser beams or nigh-magical rocket boosters or some other kind of high-flying-no-practicality inventions, this child had simply written, in all capitals, "TODAS LAS LENGUAS!!"
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Capital Fs
Yes, I capitalize the Fs in JeFF. I do this in publications (journals and chapbooks, even in my one scholarly publication so far), on my syllabuses, when signing off to family members in a letter or email. Sooner or later folks ask about those capitals. I've got three reasons.
1. The capital Fs were spawned from the way I make my signature. It looks like the Fs are uppercase, which is just a quirk of my writing. But a gentleman by the name of John Greenwood started printing them capitalized in a writing workshop we took as undergraduates.
2. I liked the look. There's a balance to JeFF Stumpo that I don't find in Jeff Stumpo. Somehow the weight at the beginning just looks right to me.
3. It makes people ask. On the downside, somebody might wonder if I made a typo in my own name. That's a rare event, as the two capitals make it appear pretty darn intentional. It's silly and vapid, but it gets me a second look from time to time. Sometimes (submitting poetry without a guardian angel comes to mind) that's needed.
Sorry that the story doesn't involve going through demon trials to upgrade the letters of my name one at a time, and if only I can defeat seven dancing genii by midnight tomorrow I'll get all the letters capitalized. Or a horrific typewriter error at the hospital when I was born, the ramifications of which later trickled into the internet and the untold millions who can't type properly. Or that time I was approached by [insert famous artist/musician/puppeteer here] who granted me a new name in exchange for one of my poems.
Signing off,
JeFF
1. The capital Fs were spawned from the way I make my signature. It looks like the Fs are uppercase, which is just a quirk of my writing. But a gentleman by the name of John Greenwood started printing them capitalized in a writing workshop we took as undergraduates.
2. I liked the look. There's a balance to JeFF Stumpo that I don't find in Jeff Stumpo. Somehow the weight at the beginning just looks right to me.
3. It makes people ask. On the downside, somebody might wonder if I made a typo in my own name. That's a rare event, as the two capitals make it appear pretty darn intentional. It's silly and vapid, but it gets me a second look from time to time. Sometimes (submitting poetry without a guardian angel comes to mind) that's needed.
Sorry that the story doesn't involve going through demon trials to upgrade the letters of my name one at a time, and if only I can defeat seven dancing genii by midnight tomorrow I'll get all the letters capitalized. Or a horrific typewriter error at the hospital when I was born, the ramifications of which later trickled into the internet and the untold millions who can't type properly. Or that time I was approached by [insert famous artist/musician/puppeteer here] who granted me a new name in exchange for one of my poems.
Signing off,
JeFF
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Sentences with line breaks
You hear/see that phrase get tossed around quite a bit, and it's generally code for "poorly-written narrative poetry." There's a general backlash against narrative in the current analogue to an avant-garde (I won't call it an actual avant-garde, as I suspect our postmodernity prevents a typical AG from occurring - the most AG productions these days would actually be reactionary ones). If there is to be narrative, it should be distrusting of itself and its own language. It should cancel itself out, suggest alternates to itself, or otherwise undermine the reader's attempt to make it linear/straight (puns intended).
I'm actually very much in favor of this approach, to a certain extent. Even as diluvium, for example, will unroll a narrative tale, all the seeds of that tale's dissolution are contained in the same pages (e.g. the second page has Noah and his wife thanking God for their new lives in language that evokes birth, while surrounding them are, among other lines, bits of Apollinaire's "Il pleut" that begins "it's raining women's voices as though they were dead even in memory").
What I don't like about the phrase "sentences with line breaks" however is the tacit assumption that if it is a sentence, it will be sensible/narrative/prosaic. I link you here to an excerpt from James Longenbach's The Art of the Poetic Line in which he tackles a series of lines/sentences from King Lear. Lear's madness is expressed through a series of sentences which, while remaining syntactically normal (i.e. the grammar all works), bounce crazily from subject to subject, tone to tone. By jamming the abnormal into a recognized framework, Shakespeare makes Lear's insanity even more disturbing, more postmodern, as it were, than if Lear were simply babbling syllables the entire time.
Longenbach's example is hundreds of years old, but let's not pretend that conceits we consider postmodern don't appear well before the 20th century (Beowulf and The Frogs, I'm looking at you).
I'm as annoyed as anyone (maybe even more so) when a so-called poem is just sentence after sentence with no real reason - there is no rhetorical building, no musicality, no jumbling of disparate subjects. But can we stop with the automatic dismissal of the sentence?
I'm actually very much in favor of this approach, to a certain extent. Even as diluvium, for example, will unroll a narrative tale, all the seeds of that tale's dissolution are contained in the same pages (e.g. the second page has Noah and his wife thanking God for their new lives in language that evokes birth, while surrounding them are, among other lines, bits of Apollinaire's "Il pleut" that begins "it's raining women's voices as though they were dead even in memory").
What I don't like about the phrase "sentences with line breaks" however is the tacit assumption that if it is a sentence, it will be sensible/narrative/prosaic. I link you here to an excerpt from James Longenbach's The Art of the Poetic Line in which he tackles a series of lines/sentences from King Lear. Lear's madness is expressed through a series of sentences which, while remaining syntactically normal (i.e. the grammar all works), bounce crazily from subject to subject, tone to tone. By jamming the abnormal into a recognized framework, Shakespeare makes Lear's insanity even more disturbing, more postmodern, as it were, than if Lear were simply babbling syllables the entire time.
Longenbach's example is hundreds of years old, but let's not pretend that conceits we consider postmodern don't appear well before the 20th century (Beowulf and The Frogs, I'm looking at you).
I'm as annoyed as anyone (maybe even more so) when a so-called poem is just sentence after sentence with no real reason - there is no rhetorical building, no musicality, no jumbling of disparate subjects. But can we stop with the automatic dismissal of the sentence?
Monday, April 6, 2009
Nah-vant Garde
1. I flippantly used this term after AWP.
2. I re-used it over at John Gallaher's blog recently.
3. What the hell do I mean by it?
4. First of all, I'm not trying to pull either a Silliman or an Abramson. This is not a new category I want to invent. See #1 regarding flippancy.
5. That being said, I do mean something by it.
6. I'm getting to the point, really.
7. If the avant garde is by definition the new, then we our first problem is establishing a timeline of the new.
8. Time being the key factor?
9. See, already there's a problem before the first problem.
10. Hence this idiotic numbering system.
11. I would first like to note that in order for something to be new, said newness has to occur faster than it used to. Much like processor speeds and fads, creativity is apparently given an ever-shorter shelf life.
12. When poetry goes bad, it smells worse than old socks. This is one reason we try to weed it out.
13. Of course, the metaphor is now hopelessly tangled, so let's get back to the new.
14. Advertising wants newness. Products want newness. Ezra Pound's dictum has been grasped by the anti-poetry of the world. Why in the name of all that is (un)holy do we want to blindly follow that path?
14a. The Italian Futurists went after the New. They also thought Fascism a pretty good idea. Newness =/= automatically good.
14b. Whitman went after the New. Dreams of peace and prosperity and gender-friendly erotica. Newness =/= automatically bad.
15. Newness for the sake of newness = planned obsolescence = Windows Vista poetry.
16. Oldnes for the sake of oldness = planned obsolescence = Windows Vista poetry in some number of years.
17. Read #12 again, just because it was vaguely humorous, and I'm getting on my soapbox about now.
18. The nah-vant garde is that which demands newness because what is old must be bad (see 14a and 14b). The nah-vant garde does not admit to itself that it in fact holds power and/or has existed long enough to no longer be avant. It is in, perhaps even behind, the garde.
19. I write a lot of different types of poetry. I read a lot of different types of poetry. Screw the garde.
20. Give me the garden. With Whitman and Futurists. And Anne Carson and Mary Oliver. And Lisa Jarnot and Tom Phillips. And Shakespeare and Aristophanes. And lots of glass walls, because some of these folks would smack the shit out of each other trying to weed out perceived problems.
21. We can train them like sharks in an aquarium.
22. Oh wait, too late.
2. I re-used it over at John Gallaher's blog recently.
3. What the hell do I mean by it?
4. First of all, I'm not trying to pull either a Silliman or an Abramson. This is not a new category I want to invent. See #1 regarding flippancy.
5. That being said, I do mean something by it.
6. I'm getting to the point, really.
7. If the avant garde is by definition the new, then we our first problem is establishing a timeline of the new.
8. Time being the key factor?
9. See, already there's a problem before the first problem.
10. Hence this idiotic numbering system.
11. I would first like to note that in order for something to be new, said newness has to occur faster than it used to. Much like processor speeds and fads, creativity is apparently given an ever-shorter shelf life.
12. When poetry goes bad, it smells worse than old socks. This is one reason we try to weed it out.
13. Of course, the metaphor is now hopelessly tangled, so let's get back to the new.
14. Advertising wants newness. Products want newness. Ezra Pound's dictum has been grasped by the anti-poetry of the world. Why in the name of all that is (un)holy do we want to blindly follow that path?
14a. The Italian Futurists went after the New. They also thought Fascism a pretty good idea. Newness =/= automatically good.
14b. Whitman went after the New. Dreams of peace and prosperity and gender-friendly erotica. Newness =/= automatically bad.
15. Newness for the sake of newness = planned obsolescence = Windows Vista poetry.
16. Oldnes for the sake of oldness = planned obsolescence = Windows Vista poetry in some number of years.
17. Read #12 again, just because it was vaguely humorous, and I'm getting on my soapbox about now.
18. The nah-vant garde is that which demands newness because what is old must be bad (see 14a and 14b). The nah-vant garde does not admit to itself that it in fact holds power and/or has existed long enough to no longer be avant. It is in, perhaps even behind, the garde.
19. I write a lot of different types of poetry. I read a lot of different types of poetry. Screw the garde.
20. Give me the garden. With Whitman and Futurists. And Anne Carson and Mary Oliver. And Lisa Jarnot and Tom Phillips. And Shakespeare and Aristophanes. And lots of glass walls, because some of these folks would smack the shit out of each other trying to weed out perceived problems.
21. We can train them like sharks in an aquarium.
22. Oh wait, too late.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Spanglish/Grunting
I just spent 20 minutes being reduced to gestures and grunting. This is thoroughly embarrassing.
Walking home from the bank, I passed a Latino couple whose car was stalled in the street. I discovered that my Spanish has deteriorated so badly that we had to communicate primarily through hand motions. That meant the guy and I were pushing on the car for a full minute before I walked up to the driver's side window and discovered she'd had it in park the entire time. Attempt to gesture on how to shift into neutral. She gives up, gets me into the front seat. I get it in neutral, but they don't have the force to move the car now. I put it back in park, hand-explain again, and we get the car in the parking lot. Unfortunately, it's not where they want it. Of course, I've offered my help, and my Spanish sucks, so I can neither just take off nor quibble. We spent twenty minutes putting the car into something approximating the place they wanted it.
As a 22-23 year old, I wrote a chapbook in both Spanish and English. Not only that, but the Spanish was nuanced, genuinely poetic. Now I'm miming steering wheels and ending up in the wrong space.
Walking home from the bank, I passed a Latino couple whose car was stalled in the street. I discovered that my Spanish has deteriorated so badly that we had to communicate primarily through hand motions. That meant the guy and I were pushing on the car for a full minute before I walked up to the driver's side window and discovered she'd had it in park the entire time. Attempt to gesture on how to shift into neutral. She gives up, gets me into the front seat. I get it in neutral, but they don't have the force to move the car now. I put it back in park, hand-explain again, and we get the car in the parking lot. Unfortunately, it's not where they want it. Of course, I've offered my help, and my Spanish sucks, so I can neither just take off nor quibble. We spent twenty minutes putting the car into something approximating the place they wanted it.
As a 22-23 year old, I wrote a chapbook in both Spanish and English. Not only that, but the Spanish was nuanced, genuinely poetic. Now I'm miming steering wheels and ending up in the wrong space.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
$400
Yeah, I should have been witty with the last post title and called it "I'll take titties for $400" or something like that.
The link will take you to Hulu and SNL Celebrity Jeopardy that contains the phrase in question.
The link will take you to Hulu and SNL Celebrity Jeopardy that contains the phrase in question.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
From the Requests #1: Run, RNC
In my Breadcrumbs post, I'd asked for readers to request topics. The first one was on a political note - Dan wonders if I could weigh in on the CD sent out by the RNC chair, and in particular on the song "Barack the Magic Negro," first featured on Rush Limbaugh's show back in 2007.
I think the initial response is best expressed by my friend Elizabeth on her blog.
In his request, Dan wonders how I think people view "this":
The problem is figuring out A) who is "people" and B) what is "this".
Let's start with the latter. The most immediate "this" is the outcry over the release of the CD and particular songs. A step back from that is the song in the context of this post-election time period. A step back from that is the release of the CD itself. A step back from that is the song in its original context.
People could mean way too much, so let's break this down into three potential groups. On the one end, there's the folks who released the CD. In the middle are people to whom the CD was given. On the other end is everybody else.
Here's problem number one. I disagree with Rush Limbaugh on just about everything, but the tack he took in his original broadcast was at least an attempt at logic. Him singing "Barack the Magic Negro" was a small part of a larger...I can't call it a conversation...diatribe on the term "Magic Negro" as it had been used in an L.A. Times article. There's a lot of good stuff here - good as in worthy of debate - but it's not what people are getting in a huff about.
Here's problem number two. People are reacting to the term "Negro" which in popular, nonironic usage, is offensive. There are some great examples of reclaiming the term (related to reclamations of "nigger") like Saul Williams's invented etymology: "Negro: after necro, meaning death. I overcame it, so they named me after it." I might be off on a word or two there, but you get the general idea. It's also slightly beside the point. This was not put out there as a positive "negro." Were the song sung to the tune of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer," we might actually have something. A president-elect who hadn't been allowed to play with the other reindeer before but now guides the sleigh? Everything changes. But again, not really the point.
The point is that somewhere between problem one and two, the nuances got stripped out. The RNC released the CD as a cheap joke, NOT as part of an effort to spark discussion on the concept of "magic negroes." The CD intentionally cashes in on the words "magic negro" out of context. So yes, I think the CD was put out there for all three reasons Dan suggests. When Rush originally sang it? Not so much. But this release of the same song, stripped of its original context? That's the mistake (in all senses of the word).
I think the initial response is best expressed by my friend Elizabeth on her blog.
In his request, Dan wonders how I think people view "this":
Humor? A puppet who when his string is pulled says "yes massa"? A pipe toking tongue and cheek poke at puff the magic dragon? Or commentary on how Barack will run the country...
The problem is figuring out A) who is "people" and B) what is "this".
Let's start with the latter. The most immediate "this" is the outcry over the release of the CD and particular songs. A step back from that is the song in the context of this post-election time period. A step back from that is the release of the CD itself. A step back from that is the song in its original context.
People could mean way too much, so let's break this down into three potential groups. On the one end, there's the folks who released the CD. In the middle are people to whom the CD was given. On the other end is everybody else.
Here's problem number one. I disagree with Rush Limbaugh on just about everything, but the tack he took in his original broadcast was at least an attempt at logic. Him singing "Barack the Magic Negro" was a small part of a larger...I can't call it a conversation...diatribe on the term "Magic Negro" as it had been used in an L.A. Times article. There's a lot of good stuff here - good as in worthy of debate - but it's not what people are getting in a huff about.
Here's problem number two. People are reacting to the term "Negro" which in popular, nonironic usage, is offensive. There are some great examples of reclaiming the term (related to reclamations of "nigger") like Saul Williams's invented etymology: "Negro: after necro, meaning death. I overcame it, so they named me after it." I might be off on a word or two there, but you get the general idea. It's also slightly beside the point. This was not put out there as a positive "negro." Were the song sung to the tune of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer," we might actually have something. A president-elect who hadn't been allowed to play with the other reindeer before but now guides the sleigh? Everything changes. But again, not really the point.
The point is that somewhere between problem one and two, the nuances got stripped out. The RNC released the CD as a cheap joke, NOT as part of an effort to spark discussion on the concept of "magic negroes." The CD intentionally cashes in on the words "magic negro" out of context. So yes, I think the CD was put out there for all three reasons Dan suggests. When Rush originally sang it? Not so much. But this release of the same song, stripped of its original context? That's the mistake (in all senses of the word).
Sunday, September 28, 2008
in/nuendo delicto & Watchmen (these items unrelated)
I'm up at school, responding to student work. Last time I mentioned them, it was at the beginning of the semester. I haven't taken time to note that there are some promising writers in class. Some generally-creative minds, as well. Hooray :-)
Yesterday Kate and I took a break from the insanity-that-is-our-current-schedule and watched the first couple episodes of The Tudors. At one point, the Duke of Buckingham walks in on a knight having sex with his (that is, Buckingham's) daughter (the idea that "his daughter" means "his property" plays out pretty strongly here). He later confronts King Henry VIII, saying he caught the man "in flagrante delicto." Now, we've all heard that phrase. I'm not bothering to look it up in the OED right now, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that "flagrante" is related to the modern "flagrant." In which case, I have to ask-
Is there an innuendo delicto? A subtle delicto? I mean, can you catch someone in the sex act, but they're kinda pretending that it's not happening (I'm picturing the awkwardness of co-ed dorms and roommates coming home early here)? And to the other end, can you have flagrantissimo delicto? Riding down Main Street, USA on a unicycle while making love?
---
In totally unrelated news, but posted here to avoid posting again: the Watchmen movie is on the way. I feel great trepidation, don't think the movie can in any way, shape, or form approach the movie. Shot-by-shot recreation of scenes does not necessarily mean that the film will be faithful to the comic. Potentially worse, especially for someone who likes video games, is the video game spinoff that's being worked on. With that in mind, however, there is hope.
Once upon a time, there was a game that essentially had a "Press x to think introspectively on your life" command. I'm thinking of Planescape: Torment. Not the best-selling game ever, but one of the most philosophically-complex games I've ever played. Within the first few minutes of playing, you're confronted by a quasi-Buddhist character telling you the world is illusory. Within twenty, you're given the option to convince another character that it's OK to die...because that person is losing his faith, and his religion posits death as a good thing, a passage to a better world. I really, really doubt that the the Watchmen game would try for that angle, but there's always the possibility.
Of course, then we'd end up with a comic book that pushes the boundaries of what a comic book can do, a video game that pushes the boundaries of what a video game can say/mean, and a movie that turns out to be the lesser/least product. Ironic, no?
Also, instead of a movie, an HBO/Showtime miniseries would rock. Webisodes/blog entries/etc to mirror the non-comic interludes. A multimedia experience that could (finally) capture the spirit of the original
Yesterday Kate and I took a break from the insanity-that-is-our-current-schedule and watched the first couple episodes of The Tudors. At one point, the Duke of Buckingham walks in on a knight having sex with his (that is, Buckingham's) daughter (the idea that "his daughter" means "his property" plays out pretty strongly here). He later confronts King Henry VIII, saying he caught the man "in flagrante delicto." Now, we've all heard that phrase. I'm not bothering to look it up in the OED right now, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that "flagrante" is related to the modern "flagrant." In which case, I have to ask-
Is there an innuendo delicto? A subtle delicto? I mean, can you catch someone in the sex act, but they're kinda pretending that it's not happening (I'm picturing the awkwardness of co-ed dorms and roommates coming home early here)? And to the other end, can you have flagrantissimo delicto? Riding down Main Street, USA on a unicycle while making love?
---
In totally unrelated news, but posted here to avoid posting again: the Watchmen movie is on the way. I feel great trepidation, don't think the movie can in any way, shape, or form approach the movie. Shot-by-shot recreation of scenes does not necessarily mean that the film will be faithful to the comic. Potentially worse, especially for someone who likes video games, is the video game spinoff that's being worked on. With that in mind, however, there is hope.
Once upon a time, there was a game that essentially had a "Press x to think introspectively on your life" command. I'm thinking of Planescape: Torment. Not the best-selling game ever, but one of the most philosophically-complex games I've ever played. Within the first few minutes of playing, you're confronted by a quasi-Buddhist character telling you the world is illusory. Within twenty, you're given the option to convince another character that it's OK to die...because that person is losing his faith, and his religion posits death as a good thing, a passage to a better world. I really, really doubt that the the Watchmen game would try for that angle, but there's always the possibility.
Of course, then we'd end up with a comic book that pushes the boundaries of what a comic book can do, a video game that pushes the boundaries of what a video game can say/mean, and a movie that turns out to be the lesser/least product. Ironic, no?
Also, instead of a movie, an HBO/Showtime miniseries would rock. Webisodes/blog entries/etc to mirror the non-comic interludes. A multimedia experience that could (finally) capture the spirit of the original
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Are you Hubert Wolfe?
Is your name by any chance Adolph Blaine Charles David Earl Frederick Gerald Hubert Irvin John Kenneth Lloyd Martin Nero Oliver Paul Quincy Randolph Sherman Thomas Uncas Victor William Xerxes Yancy Zeus Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorffvoralternwarengewissenhaftschaferswessenschafewarenwohlgepflegeundsorgfaltigkeitbeschutzenvonangreifendurchihrraubgierigfeindewelchevoralternzwolftausendjahresvorandieerscheinenwanderersteerdemenschderraumschiffgebrauchlichtalsseinursprungvonkraftgestartseinlangefahrthinzwischensternartigraumaufdersuchenachdiesternwelchegehabtbewohnbarplanetenkreisedrehensichundwohinderneurassevonverstandigmenschlichkeitkonntefortplanzenundsicherfreuenanlebenslanglichfreudeundruhemitnichteinfurchtvorangreifenvonandererintelligentgeschopfsvonhinzwischensternartigraum, Senior?
If it is, feel free to condense it to something more manageable, like good old Hubert Wolfe, typesetter, did. OK, whether or not the guy actually existed is debatable. It's also beside the point.
When your name is already only a few letters long, say Edward, or Jacklyn, why do you feel it necessary to only sign an email using E or J? Really, it does not take significantly longer, unless you are writing literally thousands of communiques per day, to just write your whole name. You're not a rock star or royalty. You're not illiterate. Write your name.
Until I next hear from you,
F
If it is, feel free to condense it to something more manageable, like good old Hubert Wolfe, typesetter, did. OK, whether or not the guy actually existed is debatable. It's also beside the point.
When your name is already only a few letters long, say Edward, or Jacklyn, why do you feel it necessary to only sign an email using E or J? Really, it does not take significantly longer, unless you are writing literally thousands of communiques per day, to just write your whole name. You're not a rock star or royalty. You're not illiterate. Write your name.
Until I next hear from you,
F
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Blognostic
Dear Molly McLay has introduced me to a wonderful concept in light of my last post. I was surprised to find out she had not just read my blog, but was reading it, getting it through an RSS feed. There's a sort of surprise that many bloggers seem to feel when they discover someone is regularly reading their work. Molly suggested that we who expect to just shout into the Abyss are blog-agnostic, neither confirming nor denying the presence of the Reader. I dub myself blognostic (which, technically, would mean something more like believing in the wisdom of blogs, but screw proper etymology, I like it!)...
OS-pagan
This begins with Windows Vista. I don't like it. It's not the embodiment of all that is evil in the world, but it has several annoying problems that I find myself unable to fix. Simple things like not being able to transfer large blocks of files from a flash drive to the hard drive or vice versa. It just sits there for hours, if I let it, trying to decide how long it will take to transfer the files rather than just transferring them. I've tried patches, suggested updates from forums, etc. Nothing seems to work. Add in the fact that, while I haven't yet had a Blue Screen of Death, the OS does just lock up from time to time, and I couldn't take it anymore.
I switched to Linux at home a few months ago. Linux Mint, to be specific (no, I'm not asking for a debate over the relative merits of different linux distributions...I don't have an internet connection at home, and Linux Mint came with the drivers that would allow me to play mp3s, watch DVDs, etc, without downloading anything new). I dual-boot, meaning I can still use Windows Vista if need be (say, to sync my iPod Touch), but the computer loads up Linux by default.
When I'm at Texas A&M, I alternately use Windows and Mac computers. Vista is installed on the SmartPodium in the classroom in which I teach. The English Department has XP and Mac OSX on computers in our two labs. In my office, there's a somewhat creaky PC running Windows 2000. This is all a long way of saying that I use "all three" operating systems in various configurations/versions.
I keep seeing this called "OS agnostic." People who switch freely among Windows, Mac, and Linux refer to themselves this way.
WTF?
I know there's variation within agnosticism, but whatever you are doing with three operating systems, it's not agnostic. You don't question that there's a possibility of an OS. You don't question whether or not humans can know the identity of the OS.
What you are is poly-OS. Or perhaps OS-pagan-with-particular-reference-to-the-cosmopolitan-paganism-of- Rome. Or even straight-up humanist (kidding about the last one...maybe). You know about all three operating systems and simply don't prefer one over the other as an end-all-be-all. That's not agnosticism in any sense of the word.
I switched to Linux at home a few months ago. Linux Mint, to be specific (no, I'm not asking for a debate over the relative merits of different linux distributions...I don't have an internet connection at home, and Linux Mint came with the drivers that would allow me to play mp3s, watch DVDs, etc, without downloading anything new). I dual-boot, meaning I can still use Windows Vista if need be (say, to sync my iPod Touch), but the computer loads up Linux by default.
When I'm at Texas A&M, I alternately use Windows and Mac computers. Vista is installed on the SmartPodium in the classroom in which I teach. The English Department has XP and Mac OSX on computers in our two labs. In my office, there's a somewhat creaky PC running Windows 2000. This is all a long way of saying that I use "all three" operating systems in various configurations/versions.
I keep seeing this called "OS agnostic." People who switch freely among Windows, Mac, and Linux refer to themselves this way.
WTF?
I know there's variation within agnosticism, but whatever you are doing with three operating systems, it's not agnostic. You don't question that there's a possibility of an OS. You don't question whether or not humans can know the identity of the OS.
What you are is poly-OS. Or perhaps OS-pagan-with-particular-reference-to-the-cosmopolitan-paganism-of- Rome. Or even straight-up humanist (kidding about the last one...maybe). You know about all three operating systems and simply don't prefer one over the other as an end-all-be-all. That's not agnosticism in any sense of the word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
