Some have questioned the point of this blog. Some have charged outright that it has no point. Some have claimed "it isn't funny, if that's what it's supposed to be!"
To these doubters and naysayers, I have a thing or two to say. First, they should check out the very second post of this blog, where it is clearly stated that the points of this blog are threefold: to examine the relevance of postmodern thought and theory in an increasingly post-postmodern world, to crusade against the run-on sentence, and on top of that, a third thing. So so much for "no point"!
As to "not funny": I never said it was supposed to be hilarious. But anybody who doesn't find it to be at least intermittently mildly amusing needs to get their amusement bone checked. Because, even though I'm biased, some of this stuff has been pretty decent by most unbiased standards. Even though I'm biased. To substantiate that, maybe I'll figure out how to put some kind of sidebar on, with links to my top 9 favorite posts at all times.
Anyway, a lot of the time I'm not trying to be funny. Like this: Edward G. Robinson is wonderful in Double Indemnity.
Damn right he is. Only a fool would dispute it! Is that funny? Have you seen the film?
I think maybe people ought to just stop criticizing something they know nothing about.
Someone once said, "Mold is disgusting, but it isn't particularly interesting." I think that's a cop-out. I think that the real truth is that we don't want to examine it too closely, for fear of what we'll find!
Just the other day I was wondering, how does the mold know that the bread is ready? And then I realized that's a silly question. The mold can't know. The only possibility is that the mold is everywhere, all over everything already, and it only begins growing once something becomes spoiled enough to support the growth of mold. But the mold is already there. Everything in that refrigerator is already dusted with a fine coating of mold spores.
The point of that little digression should be obvious to anyone.
To these doubters and naysayers, I have a thing or two to say. First, they should check out the very second post of this blog, where it is clearly stated that the points of this blog are threefold: to examine the relevance of postmodern thought and theory in an increasingly post-postmodern world, to crusade against the run-on sentence, and on top of that, a third thing. So so much for "no point"!
As to "not funny": I never said it was supposed to be hilarious. But anybody who doesn't find it to be at least intermittently mildly amusing needs to get their amusement bone checked. Because, even though I'm biased, some of this stuff has been pretty decent by most unbiased standards. Even though I'm biased. To substantiate that, maybe I'll figure out how to put some kind of sidebar on, with links to my top 9 favorite posts at all times.
Anyway, a lot of the time I'm not trying to be funny. Like this: Edward G. Robinson is wonderful in Double Indemnity.
Damn right he is. Only a fool would dispute it! Is that funny? Have you seen the film?
I think maybe people ought to just stop criticizing something they know nothing about.
Someone once said, "Mold is disgusting, but it isn't particularly interesting." I think that's a cop-out. I think that the real truth is that we don't want to examine it too closely, for fear of what we'll find!
Just the other day I was wondering, how does the mold know that the bread is ready? And then I realized that's a silly question. The mold can't know. The only possibility is that the mold is everywhere, all over everything already, and it only begins growing once something becomes spoiled enough to support the growth of mold. But the mold is already there. Everything in that refrigerator is already dusted with a fine coating of mold spores.
The point of that little digression should be obvious to anyone.
Comments