1. Have an Interesting Snippet to Share : Click Here
    Dismiss Notice

Love On The Academic Calendar

Discussion in 'Snippets of Life (Non-Fiction)' started by Nonya, Aug 9, 2017.

  1. Iravati

    Iravati Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    I haven't reread Bulgakov or Canetti, so, I don't know how I would feel about their writing now. I won't be surprised if I clawback my earlier praise on them.

    I think there are two kinds of books. First: Books that you stack up with pride on a coffee table giving the impression of a scholarly residence. These books are for display only. You will be surprised to notice that some of these squeaky books have sticky and uncut pages. Then you wonder, how did the patron who had boasted to have read all these acclaimed books scan the fused paper? Second: Books that you stow under your bed for they are easier to retrieve during bedtime indulgence. These are the books you truly read and enjoyed. They are smudged and bear stains of turmeric and toothpaste and cafe con leche. You hauled the book everywhere till you finished it and then stashed it back under the bed as contingency to recover it quickly if you decide to read it again. All coffee table books are tsundoku books that a reader pretends to have read. Any book from the airy collection will be duly transferred to the dingy and cramped space under the bed once it has been read. The placement of a book is telling sign of the readability of a book.

    I have not read many books diligently from start to end. With audio books, I fall asleep whilst several chapters roll by and then resume listening from running chapter when I wake up and try to piece together the missed storyline but never rewind the book. I still have my doubts on a lot of books where such storylines were only inferred but never verified with the actual rewind of the book. I could have gotten a lot of narratives and key moments wrong. There is written fiction and then there is my construed fiction on top of it.

    Re: tastes in books, I am not a great fan of acclaimed books now. Growing up, one is impressionable. Someone uttered Erich Segal's Love Story is a must-read, I hurried up. Then Nicholas Sparks and Danielle Steele and Colleen McCullough. After slightly growing up, and poised to heft more profound books, when someone said, Gone with the Wind, I scampered to read it. Then I would plough for days with such award-winning books, confused and frustrated and anorexic and anaemic for having attempted that leviathan book. I would abandon it midway and swear to myself to never touch any book that goes on forever.

    My comfort books in pre-teens (12-14 age) were Mills and Boon. Because they were slim and I loved the simple English in the text. It is important to develop functional English more than flamboyant English. I love those nifty phrases to capture action: "outstretched arm". In the next page, "outflung arm". I would pull up a dictionary and note the difference between both these usages. When is one arm stretched and another flung. Similarly, I would look up all those 'action' words to describe twist in ankle, bend of arm, raise of brows (quirk, squint, arch, waggle) and when does one lunge and when does one lurch. What is the difference between flump and flop the heroine on the bed. Why is it 'plop' the heroine in the lake. Lancing, coursing, snaking, slithering, rippling! There is a distinctive English of Mills of Boon. You can easily make out women who read MnB as kids. Much later, I was reading this cultured novel with wording "detumescence of the integument". Jeez! No wonder MnB starlets are so easily aroused because they don't confuse themselves with such heightened wordplay.

    Your,
    Off-topic
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2017
    Nonya likes this.
  2. Nonya

    Nonya Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    2,179
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    hahaha...LMAO.
    "detumescence or nonsense, dat eees da koschin...", could be the cartoon Hamlet's conundrum. (delightfully) Off-topic, indeed.
    I will have to reread that... now to launch the bread winner, and deal with the bread machine at home.
     
  3. Iravati

    Iravati Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    The grand d-word is frightful for the timid MnB readers — who rarely chance on twelve-lettered words in the pulpy narrative, when they stray into classy works. But that is only the beginning. MnB readers grow up with naive realism where their heroines always blush or flush in pink like a flamingo. MnB dilettantes in their middle-school biology rarely venture outside known animal kingdom. The writers are familiar with their readership and stay within the bastions of school biology. Hence the heroines "blush in pink like a flamingo". But when you step into Marquez's world, the heroines don't flush. It is too déclassé for their portrayal. They are supposed to be "mantled in pink like a rosefinch". Eh, mantled? Rosefinch? What is wrong with my binky flamingo on which all hews of pink dance. Who is that rosefinch?

    If you aspire for more accomplished writers, you have to wean from this rosefinch even and adopt a pine grosbeak because their heroines are "specked in pink like pine grosbeak". But grosbeaks are grey, no? You are befuddled about this invading family of pine grosbeaks who have usurped the rosy motif in literature. You wonder what happened to your childhood flamingos. What happened to those heroines who used to blush and flush in glorious pink shades found on teddy bears and hair clips. You are not in thrall of the colours of these finches and grosbeaks. You want to revert to your childhood flamingo. But you are reproached by readers who have already crossed over. Finally, you reconcile with the shifting literary idols. They wrench away from you a cherished emotion (blush) in evocative colour (flamingo) and thrust on you a grandiloquent emotion (mantle) in a changeling colour (grosbeak).

    Thus, the brutal ascension of d-word as necessary vocabulary in a grown-up is not as traumatic as the displacement of playful colours/birds and emotions from a wanton childhood.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2017
  4. Nonya

    Nonya Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    2,179
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    Start with Eric Segal's "Love Story" and end with detumescence -- was what made me LOL. I imagined that not too uncommon bedroom skit at the d-situation.
    He: "I am sorry".
    She: "Love means never having to say you're sorry"

    In a world where everything is only six (or less) links away from one another, nothing can be off-topic.
    Authors cannot guess exactly where they start to lose their audience, or even worse, where the readers start asking for that puking bucket. In the span of writing styles from a basic operating manual or a recipe all the way to a magical marquez mineral color show, each author puts out what they think is appropriate. It is the editors who can keep in mind the market demographic, and their tastes, and tumesce or detumesce the text accordingly.
    Henry Miller, and somewhat later, Erica Jong used the d-word a lot in their books. One might even say, they did it with gusto; as if they were on a mission to deprogram the MnB's into adulthood. For the twosomes who want to keep the spark alive, being proactive in dealing with the detumescence (figuratively speaking here :blush:), is the ticket for a longer and a more meaningful, cohabiting life. Obviously, I am back on topic.
     
  5. Iravati

    Iravati Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    Everyone would have picked up that Love Story and its iconic "sorry" trope at some point in life. Today, that catchphrase is trite, not even vintage. When it comes to romance, older readers transcend to intense reads and the baton is passed over to the younger lot to uphold the seasoned reads. When I read the book the first time, I was in tears toward the end. Last week, I watched Tin Drum without batting an eyelid. Have you watched Graveyard of the Flies by Isao Takahata or Max and Mary by Adam Elliot. Both are my favourite movies. I blubbered when I watched them long ago. I must watch them again and verify if I have been indurated.

    In that world mapped through Erdos number, every off-topic is reasonably in reach. The original posts are only frame stories in which the off-topics are the real narratives. I enjoy aimless banter. Especially one with amusing links and tropes. I shall check out the links you have posted in "Transit Date" later.

    True. Editors study the market trends and are more well-versed with the in-vogue* reading habits of their readers. I reason, the manuscript could be amended with author's consent or by virtue of publication's terms and conditions to orient with contemporary readership. I must look up for any Pew report on the reading trends. I read an article few years ago on the death of the novel with bite-sized indulgences of the Twitter– and FB–prone millennials. In few decades from now, we might be discussing - who is reading the overwrought novels now **?

    Wait ..what is the original topic (racking my brain), some Julian and Gregorian Calendar fudge, eh?

    {*} : I dislike the French en vogue.
    {**} : In case, you have missed out: What happened 2017. I just downloaded the 7th Function of Language to force myself to love the Frenchies for once. You know, the Gallic rancour is historical and pathological.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2017
  6. Nonya

    Nonya Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    2,179
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    The original topic was the longevity of infections from college. And we had traversed from the Boston Commons to the Colombian jungles, and come to the conclusion that it is not chronic. Not because we had beat the thing, but over the years, we had become immune to it.
    Thanks for that book lists from 2017. I see that I had not read much of anything in the year. However, I am not dismayed, or anything. It is just the way it is. There is only so much that can go on a calendar. While some would admonish themselves in the new year's resolutions, and want to spend "more time with the family" (what the scandal ridden, soon-to-be-jobless politicos would say) in the new year, I am planning to spend less time with the family and do what else that need to be done.
    The major reasons this thread's topic seems fuzzy are: (1) the six degrees of freedom idea makes everything seem on topic and (2) The Transit Date scheme, the story of Adi and Poorni, seems to tunnel into this now and then.
    My holidays will be filled with travel, gawking at people, and much love. Best wishes to you for an entertaining holiday season.
     
  7. Iravati

    Iravati Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    What if the topic is of seventh degree like the essays of Roxane Gay and Maria Konnikova? Do you want me to post in Gabfest or you are okay to make this thread a fugu and unrecognisable from its initial intent?

    I hear you. I could hardly believe how I was rooted in the past and my mundane reading tastes. Was that me? What kind of thinking was that? I was a hick in a small town. Then, I travelled to the city to imbibe the human philosophy. Soon after, I left the country where my true learning had begun. And then, I met people. People who shaped me. On that note, I find your writing witty and subtle and of substance. You are well-read and striking. I don't meet many enthusiastic women like you in light social gatherings. Least of all, I didn't expect to meet a woman like you in IL. I am glad I did. You are also part of that people now. More later.
     
  8. Nonya

    Nonya Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    2,179
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    If you intend to point your 7th degree at the Gabfest visitors, yes... you must cook your fugu out there. However, it is safe to cook that in here, because as you had said, we are the twin guardians protecting readers from getting poisoned.
    Hahaha.... I wouldn't (expect to ) meet Nonya in a light social gathering either. Nonya and I are different people. Nonya attends to IL, and I go to light social gatherings.... and talk about things that are non-intrusive, genteel, and pointedly vague and general. While Nonya blurts out that a sambar looks "too tamarindy", the same thing on a potluck table would get "me" to go "wow... that seems strong and brown, is it spicy?", and I would let the host volunteer the tamarind overdosing in the dish.
     
  9. Iravati

    Iravati Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Female
    I am the opposite. I am timid and aloof in IL. I am fiendish in real life with my friends. I would strike like a ferocious vampire. Hehe! I am argumentative with my intimate friends as we are chilled folks who can endure a teased out argument. I worked in an aggressive field with only men in the team and hardly a skirt in sight, which means I am wont to sterner provocations and challenges in life. The men I have worked with resolved conflicts in reasoned arguments and impeccable English. Such deliberations were poised not in irascible quips but well-crafted logic. What ever I am today is years of my association with such minds. I was taught very early in my field of work not to get carried away with rhetorics. Besides, as an immigrant, one has to work twice as hard just to match the superior diction of native colleagues and then spot whether that is fluffy rhetorics or fairly reasoned.

    I have conceded to many in the past floored by their eloquence and unprejudiced talk. Hence I emphasise that "people" word. I value people. I value the opinions of those people. It is quite satisfying to yield to a sensible proposition in an argument. That reminds me of one of my favourite excerpts which I saved in my Evernote. Why are you in that "people" now? I cherish your opinion too in our casual banter because I sense that soundness in your method of thinking.

    The below (lengthy) excerpt is from one of my favourite books which is close to my heart. This guideline helped me to stay focused in life and not get rattled with stray opinions. Opinions matter only from people whom you consider worthy to take opinions from. Rest can be ignored. I intend to cook my fugu amongst well-reasoned, and not necessary popular audience, where a pinch of bitterness does not lead to food poisoning. Ooh, with no delay, here's the chapter. I am impressed both with the lucid style and content of the text. You might already be aware of this Socratic dialogue, notwithstanding, a timely recap.

    Excerpt

    Socrates would naturally have conceded that there are times when we are in the wrong and should be made to doubt our views, but he would have added a vital detail to alter our sense of truth’s relation to unpopularity: errors in our thought and way of life can at no point and in no way ever be proven simply by the fact that we have run into opposition. What should worry us is not the number of people who oppose us, but how good their reasons are for doing so. We should therefore divert our attention away from the presence of unpopularity to the explanations for it. It may be frightening to hear that a high proportion of a community holds us to be wrong, but before abandoning our position, we should consider the method by which their conclusions have been reached. It is the soundness of their method of thinking that should determine the weight we give to their disapproval.

    We seem afflicted by the opposite tendency: to listen to everyone, to be upset by every unkind word and sarcastic observation. We fail to ask ourselves the cardinal and most consoling question: on what basis has this dark censure been made? We treat with equal seriousness the objections of the critic who has thought rigorously and honestly and those of the critic who has acted out of misanthropy and envy. We should take time to look behind the criticism. As Socrates had learned, the thinking at its basis, though carefully disguised, may be badly awry. Under the influence of passing moods, our critics may have fumbled towards conclusions. They may have acted from impulse and prejudice, and used their status to ennoble their hunches. They may have built up their thoughts like inebriated amateur potters. Unfortunately, unlike in pottery, it is initially extremely hard to tell a good product of thought from a poor one. It isn’t difficult to identify the pot made by the inebriated craftsman and the one by the sober colleague. It is harder immediately to identify the superior definition. Courage is intelligent endurance. The man who stands in the ranks and fights the enemy is courageous. A bad thought delivered authoritatively, though without evidence of how it was put together, can for a time carry all the weight of a sound one. But we acquire a misplaced respect for others when we concentrate solely on their conclusions – which is why Socrates urged us to dwell on the logic they used to reach them. Even if we cannot escape the consequences of opposition, we will at least be spared the debilitating sense of standing in error.

    True respectability stems not from the will of the majority but from proper reasoning. When we are making vases, we should listen to the advice of those who know about turning glaze into Fe3O4 at 800°C; when we are making a ship, it is the verdict of those who construct triremes that should worry us; and when we are considering ethical matters – how to be happy and courageous and just and good – we should not be intimidated by bad thinking, even if it issues from the lips of teachers of rhetoric, mighty generals and well-dressed aristocrats from Thessaly. It sounded élitist, and it was. Not everyone is worth listening to. Yet Socrates’ élitism had no trace of snobbery or prejudice. He might have discriminated in the views he attended to, but the discrimination operated not on the basis of class or money, nor on the basis of military record or nationality, but on the basis of reason, which was – as he stressed – a faculty accessible to all.

    To follow the Socratic example we should, when faced with criticism, behave like athletes training for the Olympic games. Imagine we’re athletes. Our trainer has suggested an exercise to strengthen our calves for the javelin. It requires us to stand on one leg and lift weights. It looks peculiar to outsiders, who mock and complain that we are throwing away our chances of success. In the baths, we overhear a man explain to another that we are (More interested in showing off a set of calf muscles than helping the city win the games.) Cruel, but no grounds for alarm if we listen to Socrates in conversation with his friend Crito.

    SOCRATES: When a man is … taking [his training] seriously, does he pay attention to all praise and criticism and opinion indiscriminately, or only when it comes from the one qualified person, the actual doctor or trainer?
    CRITO: Only when it comes from the one qualified person.
    SOCRATES: Then he should be afraid of the criticism and welcome the praise of the one qualified person, but not those of the general public.
    CRITO: Obviously.

    SOCRATES: He ought to regulate his actions and exercises and eating and drinking by the judgement of his instructor, who has expert knowledge, not by the opinions of the rest of the public. The value of criticism will depend on the thought processes of critics, not on their number or rank: Don’t you think it a good principle that one shouldn’t respect all human opinions, but only some and not others … that one should respect the good ones, but not the bad ones? … And good ones are those of people with understanding, whereas bad ones are those of people without it … So my good friend, we shouldn’t care all that much about what the populace will say of us, but about what the expert on matters of justice and injustice will say. The jurors on the benches of the Court of the Heliasts were no experts. The only qualifications were citizenship, a sound mind and an absence of debts – though soundness of mind was not judged by Socratic criteria, more the ability to walk in a straight line and produce one’s name when asked. Members of the jury fell asleep during trials, rarely had experience of similar cases or relevant laws, and were given no guidance on how to reach verdicts.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2017
    Nonya likes this.

Share This Page