Randomness

[Aquarius]

The nuts and bolts of it are that the text and the text alone supply the meaning; the author's intentions and what the reader brings with her to the table are irrelevant in determining "meaning."

[WarpGirl]

But in poetry that's actually very rare. Because 90% of it relys on symbolism and metaphor I must be too hight to understand. But I'm not sure I'd like this class either. Still I wish you the greatest success.

[Silverbullet]

J. D. Salinger dis at 91. I remmebeer reading "Catcher in the Rye" in HIgh School, before it was banned, Also Read 1984 befire it was banned. Whatever, Catcher in the Rye was an eye opener for a High School Sophmore. Never could undderstand why it was banned. but then I never understood why Twain was banned too.

[Aquarius]

This method of criticism was developed specifically with poetry in mind, though it has since been adapted for other forms.

[Alelou]

J. D. Salinger dis at 91. I remmebeer reading "Catcher in the Rye" in HIgh School, before it was banned, Also Read 1984 befire it was banned. Whatever, Catcher in the Rye was an eye opener for a High School Sophmore. Never could undderstand why it was banned. but then I never understood why Twain was banned too.

They're not banned anymore, that I know of.

Where did you grow up that it had so much book banning?

[Silverbullet]

Oddly, in one of the most Liberal cities in one of the most Liberal States in the U.S. Seattle, Washington. Go Figure.

[Alelou]

No kidding. Though perhaps it was not as liberal then?

I lived there for a year when I was four. Just long enough to experience the quake of 64.

[Distracted]

It amazes me now that there was once a time when the f-word and a little antisocial behavior on the part of a main character could get a book banned from school libraries. Huck Finn got banned because of the n-word and 1984 supposedly was too sexually explicit. Now kids see stuff like that on primetime television.

[Alelou]

1984 sexually explicit? I wish I could remember that. And I think I read that book at least twice.

It's not just primetime. Commercials for KY jelly arousing jell are running during 4pm shows (my husband is a fan of Judge Judy). Viagra and Cialis commercials and those warnings about four-hour erections run during all the news shows. I guess kids may not know what it's about, but I kind of doubt it. It used to be kids were kept away from this stuff because it was all in books. We're reverting back to the ethos of the middle ages, when everyone lived in the same room and childhood was generally reckoned to end around age 8 or so.

(That's not an original thought -- it's from Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death.)

[Silverbullet]

Alelou, there wa a time when NOTHING at all suggestive could be shown much less something so stark as Ky Jelly, viagra, etc. Toilet Paper was "Bathroom tissue"

It was all right if Commercials flat out lied to you or implied something that wasn't deliverd. That was Okay, but Skin? Nah, any body functions Nope, except sneezing. June cleaver wasn't the only one who did Housework in Pearls and High Heels.

While we have come some ways. commercials still lie, mislead, imply. what gets me is the amount of commercial time these days. At lest 20 minutes of an hour is devoted to commericals and the rest (maybe) is proram.

It is a truism that TV's role is to sell Advertisiing and the Programs are the Kootch Girl who draws in the suckers.

[Alelou]

Oh, no doubt, but if we viewers had to float the full cost of those programs, we might have spent the golden age of television with one channel run by the government, and maybe a couple of others you could subscribe to. Star Trek would have had the production values of the old Dr. Who, assuming ST was even made, which is doubtful. (Though I suppose they might have thought it made good propaganda -- which it might have become.)

Advertising needs regulating as much as anything. Having worked in the biz, I can tell you that reputable companies take great pains to avoid saying anything that is really untrue -- if only because the government can take a dim view of that. At the same time, enormous effort is taken to link one's product with happiness, love, sex, or whatever the great benefit might be, using whatever visual or auditory cues can do that without outright lying. That's often enough for dumb/uneducated people, unfortunately.

There's a reason why the most outrageous claims you see on commercials are from companies that disappear and then reappear with new names -- they get cease and desists from the government, so they just dissolve those companies, rename their product and reappear, until somebody finally nails the people behind it (or scares them offshore). This is the case with your basic fat-burning pill commercial, and at least every other 'debt solutions' commercial.

[Silverbullet]

Alelou, two commercials stand out in my mid for being Misleading.

One a female is extrollling a product. It is Orange Colored and is a Beverage. Looks Like Orange Juice. but she never says it is Orange Juice. Instad she hold it up and says "Tastes just like Fresh." Never says Fresh what but people would think that she means Orange Juice.

The other is a guy also extolling a product. Dog food. He says it has great big beefy Chuncks. He hadn't said breat big chucks of Beef. But people would think that was what he w s implying. Beefy in this case is an Ajective. But many would miss that. entrely misleading in both cases.

[Bether6074]

The book that appalled me during school was "Lord of the Flies". As a middle-schooler the story made me sick. I could never, for the life of me, understand why we were reading this stuff.

[Alelou]

Alelou, two commercials stand out in my mid for being Misleading.

One a female is extrollling a product. It is Orange Colored and is a Beverage. Looks Like Orange Juice. but she never says it is Orange Juice. Instad she hold it up and says "Tastes just like Fresh." Never says Fresh what but people would think that she means Orange Juice.

The other is a guy also extolling a product. Dog food. He says it has great big beefy Chuncks. He hadn't said breat big chucks of Beef. But people would think that was what he w s implying. Beefy in this case is an Ajective. But many would miss that. entrely misleading in both cases.

Yes, misleading, but not lying. Thus, legal. Thus, you need to have a sharp ear.

Also, however, those companies seriously risk offending customers who realize they've been had. Some companies care more about that than others. I suppose it may depend on how long management expects to stick around or whether they're just looking for a quick uptick in market share before they run for the hills.

[Silverbullet]

Alelou, you know that you sound a tad cynical. wonder why.