Re: Second thoughts
erespess@nji.com
Tue, 07 Dec 1999 12:09:26 -0500
>Those bored by questions of ethics (I will mention no names) may
>stop reading after >this summary-sentence:
>I'm in a relevant aspect regretting my careless quotation of
>Ignatius yesterday. We've >talked quite a bit about ethics on this
>list...
> In this example, I'm not satisfied with my own options. I had the option to
>
>a) avoid mentioning my (then secret) joy for the quote
>b) mention it with a comment, a disclaimer stating for example the
>specifics in which it should, according to myself, be interpret and
>judged (and maybe when it should not be used at all)
>c) mention it in itself, leaving every aspect of interpretation to the reader
>d) mention it with exclamation marks
>
>I chose d), and the aftertaste of it is not entirely pleasant.
>
I understand. The funniest thing anyone has ever said to me made use
of an epithet. In the context that the remark was said (by whom and
to whom), it made perfect sense and was not the least bit offensive;
actually, I thought it was mockingly complex and satirical and quite
brilliant. However, there is absolutely no way for me to repeat it
effectively. Either I offend people, or I give it so many
explanations and disclaimers that it loses any trace of humor.
Occasionally, I try again to tell it because it is so freakin'
hilarious that I can't stand not to share it, but it never works.
The retelling of a joke should be amusing the new listener, I
suppose, and it negates the purpose in telling it if no one can hear
it without a nasty taste in their mouth. Maybe it's just a joke that
only he and I will ever be able to appreciate. But I hate that.
So I don't know, Laughing Man. If you ever reach a conclusion, let
me know. I'd love to tell this joke.
Elizabeth