I enjoyed your bonus rant even if I instigated it. Part of my enjoyment of Clive James is the odd logical gap or two covered by a weight of words. Spotting them is all part of the fun in my opinion. Still, I can see how his opinions might irritate from time to time so I’m not the slightest offended by your having different tastes. After all, we have enough tastes in common, not least an appreciation for footnote thingies.

Anyway, I’ve away from the ‘puter thingies to be doing, so I shall head off and do them.

All the Best,

Haldo

P.S. Liked your latest two blogs too and will do some commenting later on, time and your spam-filter willing.

Kurremkarmerruk would be proud of you for your recognition of the importance of naming a thing as a step to being able to deal with that thing.

Heh, I had to google “Kurremkarmerruk”, it’s been that long since I read the Earthsea books.   And actually, google didn’t have it, so I had to trawl Wikipedia, who  did.   :)

Oh the irony of advocating calling things by their specific names, and then not recognising the name of namers?   Or something like that.   I’m sure there’s irony in there somewhere.

Or at the very least, an iron.
 
 

I really take my metaphorical hat off to you for combining both the erudite Mr Fry and Ursula LeGuin’s sublime Earthsea books in one typically thought provoking post. Even if the latter was only in one of your linky-footnote thingies.

Thank you very much!   I accept your metaphorical hat removal, and return the courtesy by doffing my shoe at you.   ;)

I find something strangely satisfying in hiding tidbits of information in the linky-footnote thingies, I’m not sure why.

Maybe because I like the idea that, if people know there are wee surprises and bonuses lurking in the dark corners, they’ll maybe pay more attention, and if they do find them, then I’ll know they were really reading attentively?

Or maybe I just like to make my readers work a little.   ;)

(who says I’m not a sadist?!)
 
 

I’d best not get on to the whole parental flaw thing as I’ve got oodles to say on that. Ideed, I started drafing out a few comments but after I went past the 700 word mark I realised I was only a quarter through and that hi-jacking your blog to post my own opinions might be considered a little rude. Suffice it to say I’m broadly in agreement with you but with some additional reasons.

Ok, now, if you’d been paying attention to all the linky-footnote thingies, then you’ll know right and well that I like rants about families, and want to hear a whole lot more of them.

Also, although the comments of my blog may perhaps not be the most optimal platform for you to get your voice heard about topics of importance to you, it’s hardly rude for you to post your lengthy thoughts there if you want to.   I mean, I could always moderate or something if I didn’t like them.   And also, I would hardly want to hypocrise by pontificating on the merits of brevity, would I.   I mean, 700 words for me is just a quick note dashed off in a moment before rushing off to catch the last train.   :p

If you have so much to say, you might want to consider sorting out that blog thing though.   Have you considered setting up a wordpress blog of your own?
 
 

To finish, I must thank you for drawing my attention to Stephen Fry’s website. I am sure that it will be a great source of amusement and edification for me. To thank you for this, let me pass on to you a site that has offered similar delights, namely http://www.clivejames.com/ I hope you enjoy it as much as I am sure to enjoy Stephen Fry’s site.

You’re entirely welcome, it was my most sincere pleasure.   :)

Thank you for the link to Clive James.   I used to somewhat enjoy his “Saturday Night Clive” sometimes, but since I stopped following almost every kind of professionally broadcast media, I haven’t come across him in a while.

I remembered that he used to bug me, but I couldn’t remember why.   When I went to have a look at his site, I had a read of his The Continuing Insult to the English Language, and then I remembered why he bugged me.

Clive James is fairly erudite, but his logic tends to have yawning great big gaps in it.   I was tempted, after reading that article, to do a post ranting about it, but I’m in the middle of another, more interesting one about dildos and I can’t be bothered at the moment.

I’ve got my priorities, y’know.   :D

The other thing that  really  bugs me about Clive James, is his use of language.   It often leaves me utterly confused.   Most of the time I just can’t follow what he’s saying because his sentences are so convoluted that I have to read each one several times before I figure out what he’s getting at.   And this was also often true (but less often true) when I heard him speak on television or radio.

And I know that my confusion isn’t due to me suffering from what he’s kvetching about in that article.

So frankly, I just don’t have enough interest to wade through and puzzle out the points he’s trying to make, because the few times I bother, I don’t like the point he’s trying to make anyhow.

For example, that rant about people’s use of English – he’s pretty much exclusively referring to written English.   He’s assuming that written English is “The English Language”, and it isn’t at all, of course, it’s only a representation of “The English Language”.   Take that assumption away, and his article makes no sense.

The word “language”, after all, comes from the Latin “lingua”, meaning “tongue”.   Even  I  know that, and Jewish children (including me) aren’t normally taught Latin, you know.   And where’s the “tongue” in written language?

And that’s only one of many major issues I have with it.

So, although I very much appreciate and thank you for sharing what you hoped would be a pleasant experience for me, I must unfortunately decline, on the grounds that I’m unlikely to rise on a cloud of euphoric bliss whilst perusing his pages.

(for “unlikely to rise on a cloud of euphoric bliss”, read “likely to board the express train to rant city!!”)

By the way, thank you for that extra bonus unexpected rant.   :D

Best regards,

Lubyanka.   :)

ps: Your post turned up in spam for some reason, that was why it didn’t appear sooner.

I’d best not get on to the whole parental flaw thing as I’ve got oodles to say on that. Ideed, I started drafing out a few comments but after I went past the 700 word mark I realised I was only a quarter through and that hi-jacking your blog to post my own opinions might be considered a little rude. Suffice it to say I’m broadly in agreement with you but with some additional reasons.

To finish, I must thank you for drawing my attention to Stephen Fry’s website. I am sure that it will be a great source of amusement and edification for me. To thank you for this, let me pass on to you a site that has offered similar delights, namely http://www.clivejames.com/ I hope you enjoy it as much as I am sure to enjoy Stephen Fry’s site.

Best Wishes,

Haldo