Print Story 2007.03.16: cogito ergo sonnet ...
Diary
By BlueOregon (Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 08:56:08 PM EST) (all tags)

When someone drifted off to sleep wondering just what to do with tongs and melted butter, my response was, what can't one do with tongs and butter? Write sonnets, came the reply, but there is no reason that “Your skin is like a red red lob- / -ster cooking in a stovetop pot” could not serve to get the poem underway. It could go well with green eggs and iam-

-bic.

... I think, therefore iamb ...

Inside: GPotD, but no sonnets.



I

“Sommer 1942”

Tag für Tag
Sehe ich die Feigenbäume im Garten
Die rosigen Gesichter der Händler, die Lügen kaufen
Die Schachfiguren auf dem Tisch in der Ecke
Und die Zeitungen mit den Nachrichten
Von den Blutbädern in der Union.

—By Bertolt Brecht

II

Mary had a little iamb ...

Today was the deadline given for MILC abstracts, and you have no idea how difficult it is to write fake linguistics abstracts while sober.

I managed to submit two, one on the excusative case, another on the grammaticalization of diss-, but two I hoped to complete (“A B-tree Approach to Syntactic Deep Structure” by Mandee L. Baum and Rose N. Zweig and “Singular Nasal Optimality Theory” by Lucas M. Brane) remained unfinished. The party, er, conference, is next weekend.

I promised my students that I'd hand back all their old homework, quizzes, and the like on Monday, which means I have a decent amount of grading to get done this weekend. I'd rather watch Torchwood. Last night I finished season 2 of the new Doctor Who, and I'm eagerly awaiting the next season, which begins at the end of March. The surprise for me was that as the season progressed I actually came to like Rose; back in the first season I far too often found her a nuisance.

This afternoon I found myself reading both the language guy and Mr. Verb.

You know, transitioning from Moxy Fruvous to Mr. Bungle is an exercise in, well, dissonance (pick the type).

Back to Torchwoord or to Recurrence ... it's better than I expected.

III

Again, as is so often the case with Brecht's poems from this time, there is little that seems poetic about this verse. It's like a sentence, an observation or two squeezed into a few lines. Yet there is a little play with association that makes this piece at least marginally interesting.

Brecht had to wait for his visa to the US until May of 1941, and by 1942 he was in Los Angeles, where he met other exiles (e.g. Schönberg, Adorno, Thomas Mann) and did work in Hollywood. The “setting” of the poem could well be some location in California, assuming there is any specific location in mind, but the description matches and evokes a Mediterranean marketplace, more specifically something Turkish or North African: figs, chess, merchants, and baths. Yet the baths here—bloodbaths—seem instead to refer to wartime, a feeling strengthened by the reference to the Soviet Union.

The summer of 1942 saw “Operation Blue” (Fall Blau); thereafter, beginning in late August, came the Battle of Stalingrad.

“Summer 1942”

Day by day
I see the fig trees in the garden
The rosy faces of the merchants, who buy lies
The chess figures on the table in the corner
And the papers with news
Of the bloodbaths in the Union.
< Dinner | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
2007.03.16: cogito ergo sonnet ... | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Duh by theantix (2.00 / 0) #1 Fri Mar 16, 2007 at 11:47:58 PM EST
Compared the Eccelston Doctor, Rose was annoying.  But compared to the shitty stupid lame annoying pathetic boring lame tired awful lame ignorant lame Season 2 Doctor, Rose fared much better. 

As you could probably imagine, unlike you I'm not at all interested in season 3.  Let me know when they kill off this doctor and replace him with someone interesting.
____________________________________
I'm sorry, but your facts disagree with my opinion.


this is where ... by BlueOregon (2.00 / 0) #4 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 02:40:47 PM EST

... I'll respectfully disagree.

There were a few mid-season episodes that felt a bit sub-par to me, but the new Doctor grew on me, developed his own personality, and there were some great episodes in there. And it wasn't a matter of "despite the Doctor." The early-season episode (No. 4) "The Girl in the Fireplace" was great, I thought. When I first viewed the Cybermen episodes I thought, "we only need one here, not two," but given the relevance for the end of the season I can understand it. The same, perhaps, with the black hole and 'devil' ... the episodes were well made, but I'm not sure there was 2-episodes-of-story there.

I don't think Rose was annoying early on because of the greatness of Eccleston. She was annoying because she wasn't very bright, she was a kid to whom you'd say "don't touch this" and she'd touch it anyway, and not just out of curiosity but because she was stupid, even though she was an adult. I never liked Micky very much. In the 2nd season/series Rose is more experienced, she thinks for herself, figures things out, and that's why I find her more likable.

_
"The german quoting guy is a little bit out there." (fleece)
[ Parent ]

that doesn't sound very respectful to me by theantix (2.00 / 0) #6 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 09:10:35 PM EST
I agree that he has his own personality -- it's just that I find that personality to be incredibly grating on my nerves.  Tennant's smug arrogance isn't offset by a proper sense of whimsy... so he just comes across as smug and annoying.
____________________________________
I'm sorry, but your facts disagree with my opinion.
[ Parent ]

I find there is whimsy ... by BlueOregon (2.00 / 0) #7 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 09:17:13 PM EST

... it's not, however, the melancholic, manic-depressive whimsy of Eccleston's Doctor -- one of the things I loved about E's D, admittedly. As we discussed before, in the first few episodes Tenant works much in that mold.

I notice a certain whimsy in some of the middle and later episodes, such as the moped-riding episode, but his defining characteristic is this fascination with human curiosity, the fact that humans will do things 'just because they're there.' It is a tad over-the-top at times, but it never seems to be a clown's mask, a mask of happiness to hide sadness, which was Eccleston's approach. And at the same time he does "serious" but never borderline "depressed." I don't read it as smug or arrogant, though.

_
"The german quoting guy is a little bit out there." (fleece)
[ Parent ]

the language guy by Kellnerin (4.00 / 1) #2 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 11:07:20 AM EST
ought to get together with the graphic design guy and realize that white links on a light grey background is teh suxxor. Or that titles of posts that don't announce themselves as outside links until you mouse over them are also seriously laem. How about a handy link back to the front page, somewhere in that huge grey block up top? No? It seems like someone's so focused on the trees of communication that the forest is all a blur.

--
"If a tree is impetuous in the woods, does it make a sound?" -- aethucyn


that's why ... by BlueOregon (2.00 / 0) #3 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 02:19:33 PM EST

... he's the language guy and not the practical/pragmatic semiotics guy.

I must agree with your critique. Hell, until you mentioned it, I hadn't noticed the headlines/post-titles as outside links.

I rarely browse with the mouse and thus with mouse-overs. I just scroll up and down and read what I want, and if I see a link I consider clicking it. No seeing of link, no clicking of link ...

... yeah, I state the obvious.

My site may not be a paragon of web-design-virtue, but I stick with simple blue links, grey already-clicked links, a white background, and black highlights when you mouse-over a link just for good measure.

Actually, if you want to know what annoys me -- not that you do -- it's huge f**king 'index' pages that contain the whole post. Post after post. The whole month or more on a page. Were it only text I could deal, not that I would like it, but we're talking about 1-2MB pages because of the images. I know the "intro" and "body" distinction is a convention, but I prefer that model. Give me the top 10 or so with intro and title, and links to the whole entry. Keep your images in the "body." Etc. I know, I know ... that's where going through RSS feeds, getting titles and intros, etc. helps. Though only if you're dealing with 'subscriptions,' not if you're googling for info. Oh, and it's 2007. If you haven't learned to add height and width attributes to your img tags, get off the IntarWeb.

_
"The german quoting guy is a little bit out there." (fleece)
[ Parent ]

it's 2007 by Kellnerin (2.00 / 0) #5 Sat Mar 17, 2007 at 03:19:58 PM EST
... and the myriad of friendly tools to facilitate blabbering on the Web for the masses means that most of these people wouldn't know an <img> tag if it fell out of the sky onto their heads, angle-bracket down. The world would probably be a better place if those idiot tools automatically resized images. "Why does it look smaller when I post it?" "It's on the Internet now, so it's farther away."

I agree with you about the intro/body, even when there's only text but there's a lot of it. This is but one of the things that bugs me about Blogger and its ilk.

I discovered the headings-as-links only by accident, because they change color onhover. What color do they change to? White, of course! So once you realize it's a link, you can no longer read it (even in the big, bold type -- the contrast is that bad). There's a handy tool tip that appears, but all it says is "external link." Gee, thanks!

At least in 2007, things no longer blink (as much).

--
"If a tree is impetuous in the woods, does it make a sound?" -- aethucyn
[ Parent ]

2007.03.16: cogito ergo sonnet ... | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback