Re: and another thing. . . :)
Camille Scaysbrook (c_scaysbrook@yahoo.com)
Mon, 09 Aug 1999 11:02:21 +1000
Jim wrote:
> There's no question about motive in the former case. In the latter case,
I
> think you need to consider that a wider range of motives is possible.
See, I
> don't see Elizabeth as being "unoriginal" or "self-congratulatory" in her
> writing in any other way. Which makes me think her use of lower caps
isn't
> "unoriginal or self-congratulatory" either. I think she just doesn't
> perceive herself as a writer so she's not so concerned with fomalities.
There's a line I read in the original script of `Pulp Fiction' that I wish
hadn't been cut that went something like this: `Are you the sort of person
who listens, or waits for a gap so you can talk?'. It seems to me that
email is a medium that seems to favours the gap-waiters - because they are
the only ones we actually hear from - but we forget that there are dozens
of Bananafishers who (God bless their souls) are quite content to just sit
back and read, consider, become edified (or otherwise (: ) You could argue
that, by the very fact that we Posters value our own opinion enough to
believe that others might want to consider it satisfies the criteria of
`self-congratulatory' but surely not `unoriginal'. Surely an opinion is
tendered usually when the tenderer is in passionate disagreement with all
other options offered thus far? I'm not cynical enough to believe that
*all* our `fishers post just because we like the sound of our own fingers
tapping on the keyboard. We do also want to do silly frivolous things like
engender discussion too, you know.
Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com