Andare, Partire, Tornare ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A rant that no doubt is masking my intellectual shortcomings It's snowing again, a light powdery fluff that seems to be falling very fast, but not sticking to much of anything except the grass. It still looks very pretty, but not as nice as a smooth quilted surface of snow would look, like we had a few weeks ago. Of course, in the city the creamy white never lasts long - there's always a truck splashing grey water, or footprints tracking mud through it. But it's nice while it lasts. I was tickled to note SWOOP's guestbook entry about also being a trifle intimidated by the very learned ladies over on That Other List. She commented kindly on my testicular fortitude (amazing how much discussion about my testicles there has been recently, isn't it? Especially considering that I don't in actual fact have any? I need to obtain a pair of large brass spheres and just carry them around with me, brandishing them at any opportunity). I am a person who likes their critical theory put plainly. I loathe jargon, and I don't altogether buy the argument that in the liberal arts, it's necessary to describe a particular and specific condition. It may take more words to do it, but it will probably be transmitted to your audience in a clearer fashion. Unless, of course, you're in an isolated peer group composed of equally-minded people, which is what That Other List is all about. I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised by the hip-deep verbage, really. It just disappoints me because it limits my participation, and will probably cut into any good stuff I might get from their discussion. For example, my statement was that Peter wasn't emasculated because he was, though frequently a "silly ass" and was described in terms that were not suggestive of strength (not very tall, face like a rabbit, etc) you do eventually get specific scenes describing his physical strength that is hidden under this social facade. Her response was a long lecture on how Peter was a new version of Austen's "gentlemanly" characterization, and how Peter was not in the mode of every other hero of that time, being neither macho, predatory towards females, or prone to walking the streets in search of rakish delights. This could have been interesting, if she hadn't taken that tone of voice (the speaking from on high one) and if she had clarified things instead of tossing off blanket statements about how detective fiction always works. dichroic also had a good comment in the guestbook as well, so pop in there and read it if you get the chance. Anyway, rant over about all that, and I'm sure it's boring the cobbles off of all of you (see, another testicle reference!). Instead, I'm going to wander off and finish writing some loan letters. My next diary entry will probably be a nice fluffy one about what I consider to be the most moving/best encapsulations of Tolkien's words in the two movies we have so far. Because, you know, I am an obsessed fangirlie. 12:16 p.m. - 2003-01-21 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
||||||