Comments on: The Follies of Emotional Expression http://www.edrants.com/the-follies-of-emotional-expression/ a cultural website in ever-shifting standing Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:01:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: nob http://www.edrants.com/the-follies-of-emotional-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-263221 nob Fri, 11 Feb 2011 06:56:05 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=12933#comment-263221 Rushdie is, as you suggest, a complete cunt. Most writers are but he is one of the biggest cunts since Aristotle and a poor writer, Midnight's Children was crap, it just fooled a few dimwits like you, you cunt.... Rushdie is, as you suggest, a complete cunt. Most writers are but he is one of the biggest cunts since Aristotle and a poor writer, Midnight’s Children was crap, it just fooled a few dimwits like you, you cunt….

]]> By: Shane http://www.edrants.com/the-follies-of-emotional-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-258022 Shane Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:43:46 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=12933#comment-258022 I enjoyed reading this, and you make some very provocative points, but the "asshole" remark by Van Jones had almost nothing to do with his undoing. It made for a nice soundbite, but his associations with Marxism and a 9/11 truther group (as well as being singled out by Glenn Beck) were the reasons for his ousting. Also, I don't see how Obama's opinion of Kanye was ad hominem. West acted a certain way and this act was considered by most to be that of a jackass. Character is the only thing to judge (unless you truly feel Beyonce made one of the best videos of all time). Again, I like a lot of what you have to say, but some of your connections seem a tad dubious. I enjoyed reading this, and you make some very provocative points, but the “asshole” remark by Van Jones had almost nothing to do with his undoing. It made for a nice soundbite, but his associations with Marxism and a 9/11 truther group (as well as being singled out by Glenn Beck) were the reasons for his ousting.

Also, I don’t see how Obama’s opinion of Kanye was ad hominem. West acted a certain way and this act was considered by most to be that of a jackass. Character is the only thing to judge (unless you truly feel Beyonce made one of the best videos of all time).

Again, I like a lot of what you have to say, but some of your connections seem a tad dubious.

]]> By: DrMabuse http://www.edrants.com/the-follies-of-emotional-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-258020 DrMabuse Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:04:23 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=12933#comment-258020 JDF: Thanks very much for your comment and for your very interesting thoughts on being the devil's advocate. Perhaps a solution to this dilemma has to do with trusted middlemen -- that is, particular voices that certain sectors can trust. Not diplomats, per se, but skillful transpositionists working with each other to accurately represent the viewpoints of the unmapped or the disenfranchised. I agree with you that if one is not constantly shifting territory, then a certain calcification can kick in. This was, after all, what attracted everybody to blogs in the first place. And those days are gone. But if the "alternative" has calcified and it's all about superficial gossip or who one knows, then one must remain suspicious of the emotional prohibition that the "alternative" champions. One does not have to agree with the person shooting off straightforward opinion. Assumption is not the goal and groupthink is never healthy. But if we're in the business of uniting a spectrum of viewpoints, and I think to a large degree that we are, then any discourse we maintain must facilitate voices anathema to our own. Maybe that's a half-sufficient alternative to being a devil's advocate. JDF: Thanks very much for your comment and for your very interesting thoughts on being the devil’s advocate. Perhaps a solution to this dilemma has to do with trusted middlemen — that is, particular voices that certain sectors can trust. Not diplomats, per se, but skillful transpositionists working with each other to accurately represent the viewpoints of the unmapped or the disenfranchised. I agree with you that if one is not constantly shifting territory, then a certain calcification can kick in. This was, after all, what attracted everybody to blogs in the first place. And those days are gone. But if the “alternative” has calcified and it’s all about superficial gossip or who one knows, then one must remain suspicious of the emotional prohibition that the “alternative” champions. One does not have to agree with the person shooting off straightforward opinion. Assumption is not the goal and groupthink is never healthy. But if we’re in the business of uniting a spectrum of viewpoints, and I think to a large degree that we are, then any discourse we maintain must facilitate voices anathema to our own. Maybe that’s a half-sufficient alternative to being a devil’s advocate.

]]> By: J.D. Finch http://www.edrants.com/the-follies-of-emotional-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-258019 J.D. Finch Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:47:11 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=12933#comment-258019 Ed, the reason this entry of yours is good is because you have been known as rather extemporaneous and spur of the moment with your opinions, which makes for liveliness but also a bit of backtracking at times, where you further explain your pov. In other words, I feel you are an expert on the topic of eruption of opinion, who has traveled the mean streets of honest expression and not flinched in the face of challenges to your integrity and veracity. (Although where straight opinion is concerned, I am sometimes not in your corner.) I don't believe in being "the devil's advocate" anymore. If one can't even be one's own advocate I don't want my time wasted by some imaginary position or straw man. All over the Internet there are those of limited interests and knowing, who venture into realms basically out of their experience. They waste all our time. For those covering lit online or elsewhere it is interesting when they run off-leash and interact with other areas of culture, but only insofar as they have some valuable information to impart. The gossipy, kissing-up-to types always looking for quid pro quo can disappear into the black hole of 404/Not Found for all I care. You handle multiple venues (film, music, lit) well, but there are others in the blogosphere who for some reason believe that the world is their oyster even as they waste their time trying to produce some ever-elusive pearl of wisdom. What we get from them is noise, not even the somewhat degraded form of communication that is emotional outburst. What does this have to do with your post? Well, if no one is listening one must make more and more noise until attention must be paid. Perhaps what we're witnessing is Anti-Willie Loman Syndrome Syndrome. Ed, the reason this entry of yours is good is because you have been known as rather extemporaneous and spur of the moment with your opinions, which makes for liveliness but also a bit of backtracking at times, where you further explain your pov. In other words, I feel you are an expert on the topic of eruption of opinion, who has traveled the mean streets of honest expression and not flinched in the face of challenges to your integrity and veracity. (Although where straight opinion is concerned, I am sometimes not in your corner.)

I don’t believe in being “the devil’s advocate” anymore. If one can’t even be one’s own advocate I don’t want my time wasted by some imaginary position or straw man. All over the Internet there are those of limited interests and knowing, who venture into realms basically out of their experience. They waste all our time. For those covering lit online or elsewhere it is interesting when they run off-leash and interact with other areas of culture, but only insofar as they have some valuable information to impart. The gossipy, kissing-up-to types always looking for quid pro quo can disappear into the black hole of 404/Not Found for all I care. You handle multiple venues (film, music, lit) well, but there are others in the blogosphere who for some reason believe that the world is their oyster even as they waste their time trying to produce some ever-elusive pearl of wisdom. What we get from them is noise, not even the somewhat degraded form of communication that is emotional outburst. What does this have to do with your post? Well, if no one is listening one must make more and more noise until attention must be paid. Perhaps what we’re witnessing is Anti-Willie Loman Syndrome Syndrome.

]]>