longseason Wrote:It's unfortunate that you don't like 'Coconut Cream'....
Why is that unfortunate?
Whose is the misfortune?
It's unfortunate that you're posting drunk tonight. You'll read your tripe in the morning, and feel like a doofus.
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:Why is that unfortunate? Whose is the misfortune?
It's unfortunate for all those who feel the need to skip it while listening to TATH. It's his misfortune who feels that it further unbalances an uneven record.
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:You'll read your tripe in the morning, and feel like a doofus.
Nope. I feel under-caffeinated. Otherwise, I stand by everything I've written.
longseason Wrote:Nope. I feel under-caffeinated. Otherwise, I stand by everything I've written.
You write that badly sober?
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:longseason Wrote:Nope. I feel under-caffeinated. Otherwise, I stand by everything I've written.
You write that badly sober?
Relax, Napoleon, relax. Everything okay with Josephine?
I'm just saying, if I wrote a sentence as incompetent as "Few tragically hip fans have an opinion arrogant enough to relegate another fan's belief as insignificant," I'd be seriously embarrassed.
Yah, well, solecisms and grammar aside, did the sentence impede your understanding? If it did, I'll revise it for you.
But is everything, okay? Really. Is an ad hominem argument the best you can do?
Ad hominem attacks just end up making you look philosophically inept and rhetorically weak because they seem to be your one of your favourite appeals.
longseason Wrote:Yah, well, solecisms and grammar aside, did the sentence impede your understanding?
Do you even know what the sentence says? I figured you were just stringing words together in an effort to sound intelligent.
longseason Wrote:Ad hominem attacks just end up making you look philosophically inept and rhetorically weak because they seem to be your one of your favourite appeals.
Here's another sentence I'd be embarrassed to write.
Do you intend to suggest that the reason that ad hominem attacks make their authors appear weak is ... because the authors favour them?
You've got two separate ideas there: 1 -- ad hominem attacks, in general, make their authors appear weak, and 2: -- I appear weak because I favour them. You need to keep those ideas separate, and write more precisely. This will help you communicate more clearly.
As to your point, I'm not making an argument. I'm simply expressing disgust at your pretentious twaddle. Honestly, I'm surprised that you would write that kind of self-important tripe while sober.
Too fucking much.How do you like that grammar?
Pretentious twaddle? Are you angry because you thought you had the market cornered here on the hipbase?
Perhaps I should proofread my posts — mind and hands aren't always sympatico when I'm posting online. But that's a symptom of the medium as much as it is my laziness.
I'm certainly not embarassed by what I've written. No more than I am embarassed by my day books wherein I write many incorrect and ineffectual sentences.
Perhaps I should be more mindful of grammar and syntax when I post online — the thought certainly does appeal to my sense of vanity.
Once again, if you are having trouble understanding what I've written, I'll be happy to elucidate. But despite my terrible writing, you seem to be following along! Kudos!
So, I'll let the thread speak for itself. The gauntlet was thrown down to prove that 'Coconut Cream' wasn't a throwaway tune. I tried — and you didn't bite, claiming that my interpretation turned the song into:
Quote:A musical Rorschach inkblot with no particular redeeming features, in other words — an inkblot that you declare to be art because you hold its perceived meaning to be important.
Particularly because you didn't like my presumption that the song doesn't reference 'conservatism'. Admittedly tenuous but a contention that I felt could be forgiven in the context of the album's closer — 'Put it off' — which specifically does mention 'the religious right'. You seemed to ignore that context, however. Or does the song exist in a vacuum?
Ad Hominem would be a good name for the next album...
nice avatar joshwayy, :lol:
Look I like Coconut Cream too but damn.
It's not even the best song on TATH, for chrissakes.
Longseason is a fucking hero.
There's just no sence in fighting with some people. You could prove them wrong and they'll just start on something else. You could prove them wrong again and they'll just start on your grammer. You could use correct grammer and they'll just start how you like a song more than they do. You could say that it's just your personal taste and they'll tell you that you're personal taste is wrong.
Some people are just a pain in the ass.
It has nothing to do with whether longseason likes Coconut Cream. He's welcome to it, and his interpretation is as good as any other.
He's the one labelling others' personal taste as wrong, or "unfortunate" -- and that's what I objected to.
And the reason I'm picking on his half-literate writing is that he fancies himself a book editor and writer. Just so it's clear.