Re: Bot Thoughts

1

Silly ogged: bots don't have thoughts!


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 4:47 PM
horizontal rule
2

A gratuitous shot at Timbot in the very first comment? Ouch.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 4:48 PM
horizontal rule
3

But Thott has bots.


Posted by: Lunar Rockette | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 4:53 PM
horizontal rule
4

What exactly do I have to fear if Howley wins? That the next time catherine sees me, she'll punch me?

Actually, that sounds properly fearful. Consider me warned.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 5:18 PM
horizontal rule
5

4: they'll release the video of you and that girl showing off for Saiselgy & the rest of the rooftop partygoers.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 5:36 PM
horizontal rule
6

4: Have you no shame? At long last, have you no shame?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 5:37 PM
horizontal rule
7

w-lfs-n is undead. Howley has sucked out his soul and sold his kidneys.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 5:44 PM
horizontal rule
8

they'll release the video of you and that girl Fontana Labs


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 7:22 PM
horizontal rule
9

8: Come on, *that's* no disincentive.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 7:25 PM
horizontal rule
10

They've already released the photos; I don't see what more harm can be done.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 7:26 PM
horizontal rule
11

8: sniper, please!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-29-07 9:05 PM
horizontal rule
12

11: I think you mean "snipa".


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
13

As a nerd, I was being hyperwhite.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 7:37 AM
horizontal rule
14

Will it burnish my nerd cred if I point out that w-lfs-n has confused "fearful" with "fearsome"?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
15

It would have, if you had been correct.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
16

Cobblers' to you, ogged. w-lfs-n is afraid that catherine will hit him:

she'll punch me.... that sounds properly fearful

It is the prospect of being hit he's describing -- "that" -- and a thing that inspires fear is uniquely described as "fearsome." The person in whom fear is inspired -- w-lfs-n -- is "fearful."

Of course some limp lexicographers may say "fearful" can go either way.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
17

some limp lexicographers may say

Always a bad sign when you have to preemptively deride the dictionary.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
18

I am honored to know that your eagle eye is waiting for me to fail, slol.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
19

limp lexicographers

And William Blake, but who listens to him anymore?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:33 AM
horizontal rule
20

some limp lexicographers may say

That was urbanitese for, "damn, it looks like I'm wrong but I'm going to bluff this out anyway."

Honestly, I never registered "fearful" as a synonym of "fearsome." I abide in awe.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:33 AM
horizontal rule
21

Although I see it's not just me.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
22

I am honored to know that your eagle eye is waiting for me to fail, slol.

He's still trying to get you back for the infamous viz. incident.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
23

The plot thickens. Clearly these words are a complete and utter mess and should be banned.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:38 AM
horizontal rule
24

I'm not, actually, awaiting a w-lfs-n solecism. I just find them amusing, is all.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:40 AM
horizontal rule
25

The very first definition.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:40 AM
horizontal rule
26

So amusing you invent them when they aren't there.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:43 AM
horizontal rule
27

Clearly ben requires less subtlety than I showed in 20. I looked it up in OED before I wrote 16 and realized I was wrong already. I concede the point. I apologize and abase myself. What more do you want?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:43 AM
horizontal rule
28

Titty pictures, naturally.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:44 AM
horizontal rule
29

There, I can't help you.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:45 AM
horizontal rule
30

Who's to say the OED isn't wrong? The logic in 16 in unassailable, dictionaries be damned. So w-lfs-n was, in fact, in error.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:46 AM
horizontal rule
31

29: What, you don't own a camera?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:47 AM
horizontal rule
32

The logic in 16 in unassailable

Yeah, but according to the source in 23, the facts in 16 are wrong -- I said "uniquely," but it apparently ain't so. That was the last straw I could cling to.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:47 AM
horizontal rule
33

What, you don't own a camera?

There are all kinds of "can't," apo.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
34

Clearly ben requires less subtlety than I showed in 20.

I got the idea in 20. I just wanted to pile leafy Pelion on Ossa, as 'twere.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
35

It does look like a classic case of prescriptivists' fingers in the dike. I'm more sympathetic to this one than to the "their" issue, though. You really ought to have two distinct words here.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:50 AM
horizontal rule
36

leafy Pelion on Ossa

Lily-gilder.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:51 AM
horizontal rule
37

32: but the facts as you initially thought they were are the facts as they ought to be. Which are the facts that matter.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:51 AM
horizontal rule
38

the facts as you initially thought they were are the facts as they ought to be. Which are the facts that matter.

True. Also, Iraq is a safe, functioning democracy today.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
39

pile leafy Pelion on Ossa

You know, I'm pretty sure you are using this incorrectly, unless you mean to say that your efforts have been in vain.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
40

as 'twere

Gruntman thought he'd sealed off the tweeverse hermetically forever. MEANWHILE…


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
41

Lily-gilder.

It's "paint the lily," you know.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:01 AM
horizontal rule
42

Well, in the Georgics Virgil recounts the failure of some brothers to pile Ossa on Pelion, and then get Olympus on Ossa, which is the opposite order from Homer ("ter sunt conati imponere Pelio Ossam / scilicet atque Ossae frondosum inuoluere Olympum; / ter pater exstructos disiecit fulmine montis"); I don't have the Homer to hand. I think, though, that in general it just means piling coals on Newcastle these days.

Ogged's right: paint the lily and gild refined gold.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
43

piling coals on Newcastle

It's carrying coals to Newcastle.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:05 AM
horizontal rule
44

I can see why you enjoy this.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:06 AM
horizontal rule
45

43: YHBT, HAND.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:06 AM
horizontal rule
46
The abbreviated form ''gild the lily" has been in circulation for some 200 years, according to the American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms, though it competed with ''paint the lily" well into the 20th century. In recent decades, ''gild the lily" has been the decisive winner in everyday, non-Shakespearean contexts....

Now who's being a prescriptivist loser?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:07 AM
horizontal rule
47

Thank you, LB.

Additionally, ogged, YHL.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:07 AM
horizontal rule
48

I deny it.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:09 AM
horizontal rule
49

as 'twere

Tweeness aside, I've never understood this phrase. I mean, I know what it means: "as it were" means IYKWIMAITYD. But why does that particular aggomeration of words mean that?

Also, it's a kind of tic in the later Henry James, if I remember correctly.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:09 AM
horizontal rule
50

l


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
51

"as it were" doesn't have the connotation of (scandalous!) subtext the way "IYKWIMAITYD" does. "As" is introducing a supposition, expressed by the subjunctive, like "as if" or "as though"; "as it were" = "as if it were so", "as if one might so put it", etc.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:13 AM
horizontal rule
52

"as it were" doesn't have the connotation of (scandalous!) subtext the way "IYKWIMAITYD"

It does though, if used by a person of specific class and education and uttered in the appropriately purring accent -- they use it to signify a double entendre.

You've used it here in a nonliteral sense, by way of saying, oh look, I have made an erudite reference, join me in appreciating it.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
53

Well clearly it can mean that/be used that way. But it's not inappropriate in other contexts, the way IYKWIMAITYD would be.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:19 AM
horizontal rule
54

Actually, I'm not persuaded of that. You're saying, "take notice of and indulge me in my figure of speech, with which by flagging in this wise I signal my own becoming (and entirely fictional) discomfort, while simultaneously inviting your collusion: you know what I mean."


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:24 AM
horizontal rule
55

But "IYKWIMAITYD" is only apt when there's a salacious second meaning.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
56

There's not something salacious about implicating someone in your erudition?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:41 AM
horizontal rule
57

Here's a use from Spencer's Shepherd's Calendar: "The messenger, and as it were, the forerunner of springe." Now, this is a completely appropriate use, I think you'll agree. Even saying something like "this young shoot [here in the garden] is, as it were, the messenger of spring"—totally kosher. But minimal salacity.

There's not something salacious about implicating someone in your erudition?

If only.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:43 AM
horizontal rule
58

"As it were" involves "if it's proper to say so or speak this way"; sometimes the answer is yes, although not really literally ("messenger of spring"), sometimes no (because the subject matter is improper any which way). The latter case is the intersection of "as it were" and "IYKWIMAITYD", and you're trying to assimilate the former to it. But it just won't fly.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:46 AM
horizontal rule
59

Man, you see how easy I whip this junk out (as it were)? I should get paid for this shit.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
60

Hey baby, want to be implicated in my erudition, as it were?


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
61

Proximity to "hey baby" interferes with measurements of salacity.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
62

sometimes the answer is yes, although not really literally ("messenger of spring")

You're making a distinction into a dichotomy. This case is still one in which you're enlisting the collusion of your interlocutor in an indulgence -- which always involves a frisson.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
63

60 should be "Do you want to be, as it were, implicated in my erudition?" or "Do you want to be implication in my, as it were, erudition?"


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
64

61: True.

63: Also true.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
65

I'm not making a distinction into a dichotomy; you're trying to collapse a distinction into nothing. Note that I never said these are two distinct uses of "as it were". Claim that there's a frisson in enlisting collusion into indulgences (my, what a lot of five-dollar words!); I can go along with that. But it's not a salacious frisson—and if you want to claim that all frissons are salacious, then I'll just say that it's not a frisson about something salacious. In cases where "IYKWIM" would be appropriate, there's a twofold frisson: first, you do get me to see what you mean; second, what you mean!.

This case is still one in which you're enlisting the collusion of your interlocutor in an indulgence -- which always involves a frisson.

You've read "Metaphor and the Cultivation of Intimacy", by Ted Cohen, in Critical Inquiry, Vol. 5, No. 1, Special Issue on Metaphor. (Autumn, 1978), pp. 3-12, I take it?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
66

Stable JSTOR URL.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
67

I don't think you know how to flirt, Ben.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
68

But third-personally I think you need "I'd like to be the implication in her erudition." (If a man is talking about a woman.)


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:00 AM
horizontal rule
69

We were flirting? Fuck.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:00 AM
horizontal rule
70

But 67 seems of a piece with your contention that there is no innocent "as it were". Which is bollocks, and which I would have thought my 57 would have lain to rest (as it were).


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
71

We were flirting?

Not us, champ. But your resolute refusal to see anything cozy (5 and dime word!) about enlisting your interlocutor in your little indulgence seems to me to reflect obtuseness on the flirting front.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:04 AM
horizontal rule
72

there is no innocent "as it were"

I'm sticking with it: there is no innocent "as it were." If you're using your metaphor naïvely, you don't flag it like that.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:05 AM
horizontal rule
73

But I've already acknowledged that potential for coziness in 65 supra.

Nevertheless it's true; I'm an extraordinarily bad flirt.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
74

More from Spenser, name misspelled above (mea culpa), drawn from the Calendar:

For if my memory fayle not, Tullie in that booke, wherein he endeuoureth to set forth the paterne of a perfect Oratour, sayth that ofttimes an auncient worde maketh the style seeme graue, and as it were reuerend: no otherwise then we honour and reuerence gray heares for a certein religious regard

For what in most English wryter vseth to be loose, and as it were vngyrt, in this Author it is well grounded, finely framed, and strongly trussed vp together.

They were first of the Greekes the inuentours of them called Æglogaj as it were [aigon] or [aigonomon]. [logoi]. that is Goteheards tales. For although in Virgile and others the speakers be [more shepheards then] Goteheards, yet Theocritus… [he's talking about eclogues]

The matter very well accordeth with the season of the moneth, the yeare now drouping, & as it were, drawing to his last age. [February]

The swallow) which bird vseth to be counted the messenger, as it were, the fore runner of springe.

At whose wonderful gyft al men being astonied and as it were rauished, with delight, thinking (as it was indeede) that he was inspired from aboue, called him vatem:

The braunch) He meaneth Dido, who being, as it were the main braunch now withered the buddes that is beautie (as he sayd afore) can nomore flourish.

Now, as exemplia non multiplicanda sunt praeter necessitam, I'll stop there. If you think those instances, in their contexts, all have in common that they carry greater salacity, frisson, or coziness than metaphors undecorated by "as it were", you're on crack, and there's an end on't.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:16 AM
horizontal rule
75

Spenser: not necessarily reflective of current usage.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:24 AM
horizontal rule
76

But I think we can all agree that those uses of "as it were" are completely acceptable by contemporary standards. Orthographically eccentric, sure, even in his own time, but those are all "as it were"s that we could accept today.

The truth is that I'm only usiny Spenser because he was quoted in the OED for "as it were", and there are online editions of his works, and I have a poor imagination.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:26 AM
horizontal rule
77

I still say if Spenser's using these metaphors entirely innocently, he doesn't need to say "as it were." Is it in there for scansion? Fine, I'm on crack.

And no, I've not read Ted Cohen. I'm just making this stuff up. I should get paid for it.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:45 AM
horizontal rule
78

I didn't think you had. Why don't you? It's an interesting essay, and short.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:47 AM
horizontal rule
79

I will, I will. I'm in the middle of reading something else. (Believe it or not.) In a bit.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:52 AM
horizontal rule
80

If you don't have jstor access, I can email it to you.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 11:54 AM
horizontal rule
81

I have JSTOR access, but thanks.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:00 PM
horizontal rule
82

If you don't have jstor access, I can email it to you.

slol has already said there would be no titty pictures, ben. Don't embarrass yourself.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
83

From Cohen, p. 8.

There is a unique way in which the maker and the appreciator of a metaphor are drawn closer to one another. Three aspects are involved: (1) the speaker issues a kind of concealed invitation; (2) the hearer expends a special effort to accept the invitation; and (3) this transaction constitutes the acknowledgment of a community.

Yes, this is what I was getting at.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
84

Though what you've quoted undermines your claims in two ways: it's supposed to be applicable to all metaphor, and including "as it were" doesn't do much for the concealedness of the concealed invitation, which is important.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:28 PM
horizontal rule
85

Further, from p. 11.

there can be no routine method for ... detecting metaphors when they appear

... unless, of course, the writer flags them by use of the phrase "as it were," which constitutes, per Cohen, an invitation to intimacy. Which is flirting, by any other name.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
86

Did he ever follow up on the paper?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
87

My love for you is like a truck, as it were.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:36 PM
horizontal rule
88

I knew SB agreed with me.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:37 PM
horizontal rule
89

It's like living, as it were, in a powder keg and giving off sparks.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:39 PM
horizontal rule
90

I was just about to qualify 84: including "as it were" makes the fact that there's an invitation there explicit, without yet telling what it's an invitation to: flirtatious.

He's written a fair amount about metaphor, and some of his other writing on aesthetics includes talk about communities and identification. He doesn't, frustratingly, publish often, though. You might look at "Identifying with Metaphor: Metaphors of Personal Identification", "High and Low Thinking about High and Low Art", or "High and Low Art, and High and Low Audiences". The last two have only an attenuated connection but are interesting anyway.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:39 PM
horizontal rule
91

90: I bet he's stopped calling you too, the cad.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:43 PM
horizontal rule
92

I was right about Henry James, too. Here's Ozick parodying HJ's later style. Heh.

May I say, mutatis mutandis, that she may have been getting at me! In point of fact, dear madam, I have in mind rather my unfortunate engagement with your predecessor, an American lady journalist representing the New York Herald, with whom I sat, as it were, for an interview during my American journey in 1904, my maiden voyage, so to speak, into a venture of this kind.

Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:43 PM
horizontal rule
93

But just "an invitation to intimacy" isn't flirting by any name at all, excpet a false one; ordinary metaphors are, by Cohen, invitations to intimacy. But since there can be no general procedure for their discovery (by Cohen), they aren't or aren't always explicit invitations (there not being a general rule is compatible with its being pretty obvious much of the time). What "as it were" (by slol) contributes is pointing out the invitation. I still think that doesn't exhaust correct applications of "as it were", and that we've seen plenty of examples here to prove it, but I'll grant that it's a possibility and that it captures the structure of flirtation, a subject on which I am expert.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:46 PM
horizontal rule
94

"an invitation to intimacy" isn't flirting by any name at all, excpet a false one

Okay, Ben, what exactly do you think flirting is?


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:47 PM
horizontal rule
95

I'll thank you not to joke about that, M/tch. God, you really are callous, aren't you?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:47 PM
horizontal rule
96

The thing about flirting is, the more you analyze it's precise, atomic components and formulaic structure, the more adept you become at moistening the ladies' panties.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:49 PM
horizontal rule
97

Did you read the rest of my comment, slol? If metaphor = invitation to intimacy, then invitation to intimacy ≠ flirting, because metaphor ≠ flirting.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:49 PM
horizontal rule
98

I'm not sure I like your first apostrophe, young lady.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:50 PM
horizontal rule
99

metaphor:flirting::fish:bicycle


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:51 PM
horizontal rule
100

Panty-moistening is beyond the scope of this discussion.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:51 PM
horizontal rule
101

If you had read 90 and 93, you might reach the conclusion that I think flirting involves an invitation to intimacy where the presence of the invitation adverted to even though the precise nature of what it invites is not, in contradistinction to metaphor, where one need not advert to the invitation.

More needs to be said to distinguish the above from so-called innocent as it wereing, which is, I maintain, not flirtatious, but it's a better start than your carrot sticks constituted.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:55 PM
horizontal rule
102

Panty-moistening is beyond the scope of this discussion.

This conversation : the collective ladies' panties :: layering kitty litter : oil spill on the driveway.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:57 PM
horizontal rule
103

the collective ladies' panties

Ah, the Red Diaper folk rear their heads again.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
104

I don't want to moisten the collective ladies' panties, heebie, but only yours and yours alone.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
105

102: You're saying it's effective then?


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
106

105: I think she's saying--"oil spill"--her panties (or the collective Panty) is unbelievably wet. I don't understand the "kitty litter" metaphor, but I'm a notorious prude.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:03 PM
horizontal rule
107

My own panties are still beyond the scope of discussion.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:05 PM
horizontal rule
108

That raises a question for w-lfs-n, I think: we don't really care about the panties (or Panty--I still don't understand the collectivist Panty workings), but the moistness, which doesn't technically require panties. (Or so I've been led to believe.) So I don't think #107 offers much guidance. w-lfs-n?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:14 PM
horizontal rule
109

Worst thread ever?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:15 PM
horizontal rule
110

I care about the panties.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:17 PM
horizontal rule
111

They're all bunched up.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:24 PM
horizontal rule
112

If metaphor = invitation to intimacy, then invitation to intimacy ≠ flirting, because metaphor ≠ flirting.

This makes no sense at all, Ben. If metaphor functions as Cohen says it does in 83, then it is a form of flirting. You're interpreting "concealed" to mean "utterly concealed," but of course this can't be true. It's right out there in the open, it's just in disguise.

And if metaphor is a form of flirting, then appending "as it were" to your metaphor is simply flirting for the unsubtle.

Imagine heebie bats her eyelashes at you. You offer to help her get the gnat out of her eye. She, amused but not surprised by your obtuseness, touches you on the shoulder and giggles while slightly averting her eyes.

eyelash-batting = metaphor; shoulder-touch + giggle + eye-averting = metaphor + "as it were"

Sorry to drag you into this, heebie, but you're the only woman here.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:27 PM
horizontal rule
113

Willing suspension of disbelief.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:30 PM
horizontal rule
114

I did say "imagine."


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:32 PM
horizontal rule
115

So did John Lennon.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:33 PM
horizontal rule
116

And look where that got him.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:33 PM
horizontal rule
117

So did John Lennon.

Not everybody has to
imagine no possessions
for some folks that's exactly what they've got
Just ekin' out a livin'
in a world that's unforgivin'
While the haves are patronizing the have-nots

The great and incomparable Mitch Benn, ladies and gentlemen.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:35 PM
horizontal rule
118

109: I'm hoping for the "as it were" controversy to give way to something exciting, like swimblogging.


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:35 PM
horizontal rule
119

They're all bunched up.

Now mine are moist.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:35 PM
horizontal rule
120

While the haves are patronizing the have-nots

If the haves are patronizing the have-nots, that should generate some income.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:36 PM
horizontal rule
121
And you may say I have no dreams
And perhaps that's how it seems
But in a world this tough
dreams are not enough
Not everybody has to
imagine there's no heaven
When hell on earth is where they live each day
Imagining's a start no doubt
But till we pull our fingers out
and change the world that's how it's gonna stay

Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:42 PM
horizontal rule
122

Just wanted to be completist.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:43 PM
horizontal rule
123

120: Please now imagine a small black child saying "That's imperialist!" on endless loop.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:52 PM
horizontal rule
124

123: Oh, easy. There happens to be one outside my window.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:55 PM
horizontal rule
125

I have it on good authority that heebie is now singing "How Much is That Woggie in the Window". Bad heebie!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 1:57 PM
horizontal rule
126

If metaphor functions as Cohen says it does in 83, then it is a form of flirting.

Slol, it just ain't so:

It is not, however, an invariably friendly thing, nor is it intended to be. Sometimes one draws near another in order to deal a penetrating thrust. When the device is a hostile metaphor or a cruel joke requiring much background and effort to understand, it is all the more painful because the victim has been made a complicitor in his own demise.

Now that's still functioning the same way. I repeat what I've been saying all along, or at least mostly along: you can't focus solely on the means, and, locating a form a intimacy there, ignore the content about which the intimacy is formed, something which could be quite hostile and not the stuff of romantic intimacy at all. Don't equivocate on "intimacy"!

It should be absolutely plain that one can employ a metaphor in speaking to someone and yet not be flirting with that person, or playing at flirting with that person, or doing anything at all in which flirting plays a role however tenuous! Even if one also says "as it were" in the appropriate place (as is, as I continue to think, not the case with "IYKWIMAITYD", if it's properly deployed)! Since that is so, either you're wrong about flirting or Cohen's wrong about metaphor, or both. Since your claims about flirting seem also to involve equivocating on "intimacy", and you were already making these plainly false claims about metaphor and "as it were" prior to having read Cohen, I'm going to say that we ought to go with either option 1 or option 3.

You're interpreting "concealed" to mean "utterly concealed," but of course this can't be true. It's right out there in the open, it's just in disguise.

Basically, you're ignoring entirely the aspect of what the disguise disguises. "Moscow is a cold city". Am I flirting? Is it even obvious that I'm making a metaphor? It's not necessarily out there in the open, in disguise; sometimes it really is disguised effectively. Whether someone is the type to notice the disguise is itself something the use of cryptic ways of talking can determine. It's not utterly concealed, of course, but there are more options than "utterly concealed" and "'concealed' in the open".

What do you think of this sentence? According to Nietzsche, theater teaches the art of regarding oneself as a hero, from a distance and as it were simplified and transfigured. Is "as it were" being employed incorrectly? Is it flirtatious? Isn't it functioning here as if to say "and here's a way of looking at it, why not try this out"?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:02 PM
horizontal rule
127

M/tch, now you made the small child cry. Apologize.



Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:03 PM
horizontal rule
128

Hey, what happened to my <q>s? Did ogged disable them?

The last paragraph should read:

What do you think of this sentence? “According to Nietzsche, theater teaches the ‘art of regarding oneself as a hero, from a distance and as it were simplified and transfigured’.” Is "as it were" being employed incorrectly? Is it flirtatious? Isn't it functioning here as if to say "and here's a way of looking at it, why not try this out"?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:04 PM
horizontal rule
129

I mean, think of all the metaphors you employ every day. Please, tell me you have a more plausible account of what flirting is and what "as it were" does.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
130

Please, won't someone think of the metaphors?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
131

"Moscow is a cold city".

"... so how about we huddle for warmth! rrrOWwrr."


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
132

127: I'm sorry, small child, that you interpreted my innocent reportage of heebie's hurtful behavior as hurtful itself. Feel better!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 2:13 PM
horizontal rule
133

This thread was actually conducted not by w-lfs-n and slol directly, but by their respective bots. That may explain the endless loop feel it had.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 3:31 PM
horizontal rule
134

I'm tired, now, ben, and if you want to win this thread, please go right ahead.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 3:56 PM
horizontal rule
135

Don't think the next meetup won't be a symposium on metaphor and flirtation, slol.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 5:24 PM
horizontal rule
136

SOME BELATED THOUGHTS. First, let's consider 60 and 63 again. In 63 we have (a) "Do you want to be, as it were, implicated in my erudition?"; de-"as it were"ing that, we have (b) "Do you want to be implicated in my erudition?". Now I maintain the following:

1. There is no pure signalling mechanism in speech. That is, there can't be something whose use is solely to signal the presence of something else, and which never means anything else, because anything of that nature could be used to play at that signalling, etc. (This is just an extension of the principle that there's no mark of sincerity, because, of course, actors, not to mention out and out deceptive liars, would use it.) So you can't just say that including the "as it were" entsubtles (b) for the benefit of the clueless. Pretense to the effect that such coarsening is necessary could be part of the whole affair, for example.

2. Whether one wants to consider this an exploitation of the entsubtling (I'm so fond of this utterly pretentious coinage) effects of "as it were" or another way to use it altogether is indifferent to me, but we should note that (a) seems altogether lighter in spirit than (b) (provided, of course, its utterance is given the proper shape). Drawing attention to one's word-japery isn't just a way to make a sharp tool blunt, it's also a way to float above it and make one's commitment to any of its meanings less clear—an ironization maneuver.

Actually, the main point of this comment is "entsubtle".


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:22 PM
horizontal rule
137

its also a way to float above it and make one's commitment to any of it's meanings less clear

There we are.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-30-07 10:26 PM
horizontal rule