LET'S THROW GRAMMAR IN THE GARBAGE! User NameRemember Me?Password
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/
Thread Tools
Yesterday, 12:53 AM wolflarsen vbmenu_register("postmenu_667897", true);
Esteemed New Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5
LET'S THROW GRAMMAR IN THE GARBAGE!
An Essay by Wolf Larsen
Writers, poets, and playwrights should mold and bash language into whatever art form they wish to create. Traditional Grammar in creative works is unnecessary, and can often be an obstacle to the creative impulses of the writer. The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar. The writer must do with language as he pleases. The writer should help destroy “standard” English, at least within the realm of contemporary literature.
Language must be the servant of the writer, and the writer must be a god over the realm of words. The role of language is to lie down in front of the writer and beg to be ravished by him. In order to create a higher literary art the writer should throw off the straightjacket of grammar whenever necessary. The writer must create with the intensity and passion of a freed madman rampaging on the streets.
Traditional grammar is not necessary in creative works. Take note that poetry and music are cousins. Literature often has a rhythm that makes grammar unnecessary, just as good verse has a natural flow that has made the rhyme obsolete. Many of the traditional rules of grammar are destined to go the way of the rhyme in poetry, at least in creative works.
Writers should think of their literary creations in much the same why they think of sex. Correctly obeying all the rules of grammar while in the throes of literary creation is like having sex with your clothes on. An artist of words should write with the same intensity as passionate sex. All boundaries to expression should be smashed open with pens that crash through everything like sledgehammers.
Grammar lends legitimacy to “standard” English, which is the spoken and written medium of communication of the elite. Of course, how convenient for the upper classes that their way of talking and writing is considered “standard”.
Why should the mode of speaking of the most privileged members of our society be considered “standard” English? Why shouldn’t the rich and constantly evolving language of poor blacks in the ghetto be considered “standard English” instead? People from all over the world do not crowd in giant concerts or tune into their radios to hear the privileged members of our society recite “standard” English. There is a worldwide fascination with hip-hop for good reason. Hip-hop glorifies the “standard” English of the black American ghetto, which is far more exciting and rich in contemporary culture than the “standard” English of Park Avenue. Take note that rap music has brought a resurgence of interest in poetry.
Standard English is constantly under siege from the influences of the black ghetto and immigration. Writers should stop defending “standard” English and should participate in its downfall. Gutting “standard” English and its rules of grammar will free the writer to express himself more freely than ever!
Another reason to throw “standard” English in the garbage is that it is not worth saving. The English language originates from invading barbarians of different tribes and races all babbling and babbling to each other for thousands of years on the British isles. This of course helps explain why English is such a course and ugly language in comparison with the romance languages. If it wasn’t for the civilizing influence of the French language brought over by the Normans English would probably sound as ugly as German.
The defenders of “standard” English who obsess over its grammar are obstacles in the necessary evolvement in what has become the most important language of the world. Instead of rejecting the growing international and cosmopolitan influences of an evolving language we should embrace these changes. The further that English evolves away from its barbaric Anglo-Saxon heritage the better. If purists and traditionalists want a language with unchanging rules of grammar then let them learn Latin.
More than ever the time is ripe for a rebellion against grammar and tradition. With the invention of word processing there is no excuse for literature to remain one of the most backward areas of the art world. Word processing, because it makes change, experimentation, and innovation easier, is an important development that can help writers, poets, and playwrights to free literature from its chains. Look at how painting has constantly revolutionized itself over the past one hundred and twenty years. Artists of the written word should do the same!
When we have sex most of us do not invent a bunch of rules to make the experience less enjoyable. Why not eliminate the rules in literature? Why shouldn’t literature be as exciting and decadent as sex? Let us free literature from the constraints of grammar like two lovers throwing off their clothes and diving into a natural frenzy of joy!
Established rules of music, painting, and sculpture have been thrown in the garbage by innovators like Stravinsky, Picasso, and Rodin. The result has been a constantly changing art that is exciting and fresh. Painters and sculptors deposed of a rigid faithfulness to representation, and the result has been an explosion of artistic brilliance. Just as the painters deposed of rigid representation creative writers should depose of grammar whenever it gets in the way of expression. One obstacle to artists of the written word is the straightjacket of grammar, and its anal obsession with the placement of commas, colons, semicolons, etc. Who cares if a sentence is a fragment? Who cares if a sentence is a run-on? I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence. I slashed and cut it down to seventy-thousand words. It’s called The Exclamation Point! The idea of writing a run-on sentence occurred to me while I was sitting in a café in Amsterdam, Holland. I would never have dreamed up such a wild book if I had been loyal to the rules of grammar.
Writers should do with language whatever they please. Any obstruction to expression must be obliterated into dust with the sledgehammers of our pens. Imagine that while you’re trying to make love to someone an old grammar teacher is yelling at you, “PUT A COMMA THERE! AND CHANGE THAT COLON TO A SEMI-COLON! OH NO! THAT SENTENCE IS A FRAGMENT!” It would be terrible, wouldn’t it? Why do you write under the same circumstances?
Copyright 2005 by Wolf Larsen. All Rights Reserved
wolflarsenView Public ProfileSend a private message to wolflarsenSend email to wolflarsenVisit wolflarsen's homepage!Find More Posts by wolflarsen
Yesterday, 01:06 AM three seven vbmenu_register("postmenu_667913", true);
Token English villain
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar.
May I just say how grammatically splendid your essay... oh.
Quote:
The idea of writing a run-on sentence occurred to me while I was sitting in a café in Amsterdam
You don't say.
Sorry, I just came in off a nightshift, so I'm tired and humourless. You'll just have to tell me if this is a joke.
three sevenView Public ProfileSend a private message to three sevenSend email to three sevenFind More Posts by three seven
Yesterday, 01:18 AM reph vbmenu_register("postmenu_667930", true);
Dances with Words
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chair
Posts: 4,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Why shouldn’t literature be as exciting and decadent as sex?
Did sex become decadent this week? I confess I haven't had the news on.
rephView Public ProfileSend a private message to rephFind More Posts by reph
Yesterday, 01:24 AM poetinahat vbmenu_register("postmenu_667931", true);
Buck up, champion!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bring on the Azzurri. Bring 'em on.
Posts: 5,563
Quote:
The writer must create with the intensity and passion of a freed madman rampaging on the streets.
One or two rampaging madmen will do it for me. Then it gets, at best, boring; at worst, it's just not worth the effort to comprehend the mess.
There's no need to be a slave to arcane convention, but cacophony isn't all that appealing more than once. If the streets teem with madmen, the world will yearn for well-mannered, clever urbanity.
How many John Cage albums do you want to sit through before you just want to hear something that swings?
__________________
Grammar is the bones of language.
-- Medievalist
poetinahatView Public ProfileSend a private message to poetinahatSend email to poetinahatFind More Posts by poetinahat
Yesterday, 01:28 AM three seven vbmenu_register("postmenu_667934", true);
Token English villain
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,911
Excellent. Not only a well thought-out response, but a strong practical attempt to disprove the OP's argument. High five!
three sevenView Public ProfileSend a private message to three sevenSend email to three sevenFind More Posts by three seven
Yesterday, 02:25 AM Mac H. vbmenu_register("postmenu_667955", true);
Board Visitor
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence ...
... and it was so effective at communicating your point that you chose to use the 'traditional' rules when writing this ...
(Yeah, I'm sure it was just meant to be an advertisement for your book, but I can't resist taking it as a serious point of discussion.)
Mac
Last edited by Mac H. : Yesterday at 02:32 AM.
Mac H.View Public ProfileSend a private message to Mac H.Find More Posts by Mac H.
Yesterday, 03:24 AM pianoman5 vbmenu_register("postmenu_667974", true);
Means well
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Painters and sculptors deposed of a rigid faithfulness to representation, and the result has been an explosion of artistic brilliance.
Owing to your non-traditional usage of the verb 'depose', we can only guess what you're trying to say here, Wolf. But if you mean what I think you mean, there could be some argument about the 'explosion of artistic brilliance' you mention. Especially if you're thinking of the pretentious w*nkers who can't be bothered to learn to draw or paint and crap on about expressing themselves through their dead-cow-with-custard 'art', which only attracts the jeers of an unconvinced public
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence. I slashed and cut it down to seventy-thousand words.
You may well find an audience for this among the artistically brilliant deposers you believe are your peers. Whether or not they'll be gripped by your story, they'll be obliged to marvel, like us, at your editing genius in being able to trim a gargantuan sentence down to a mere 70K words.
Last edited by pianoman5 : Yesterday at 03:31 AM.
pianoman5View Public ProfileSend a private message to pianoman5Send email to pianoman5Find More Posts by pianoman5
Yesterday, 04:13 AM Medievalist vbmenu_register("postmenu_667987", true);
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by reph
Did sex become decadent this week?
Only when the practioners are inept.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
MedievalistView Public ProfileSend a private message to MedievalistSend email to MedievalistVisit Medievalist's homepage!Find More Posts by Medievalist
Yesterday, 04:31 AM Medievalist vbmenu_register("postmenu_667996", true);
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
As hyt ys y-knowe hou3 meny maner people buþ in þis ylond, þer buþ also of so meny people longages and tonges; noþeles Walschmen and Scottes, þat buþ no3t ymelled wiþ oþer nacions, holdeþ wel ny3 here furste longage and speche, bote 3ef Scottes, þat were som tyme confederat and wonede wiþ þe Pictes, drawe somwhat after here speche. Bote þe Flemmynges, þat woneþ in þe west syde of Wales, habbeþ y-left here strange speche and spekeþ Saxonlych y-now. Also Englischmen, þey3 hy hadde fram þe bygynnyng þre maner speche, Souþeron, Norþeron, and Myddel speche (in þe myddel of þe lond), as hy come of þre maner people of Germania, noþeles, by commyxstion and mellyng furst wiþ Danes and afterward wiþ Normans, in menye þe contray longafge ys apeyred, and som useþ strange wlaffyng, chyteryng, harryng and garryng, grisbittyng. Þis apeyryng of þe burþ-tonge ys bycause of twey þinges. On ys, for chyldern in scole, a3enes þe usage and manere of al oþer nacions, buþ compelled for to leve here oune longage, and for to construe here lessons and here þinges a Freynsch, and habbeþ, suþthe þe Normans come furst into Engelond. Also, gentilmen children buþ y-tau3t for to speke Freynsch fram tyme þat a buþ y-rokked in here cradel, and conneþ speke and playe wiþ a child hys brouch; and oplondysch men wol lykne hamsylf to gentilmen, and fondeþ wiþ gret gysynes for to speke Freynsch for to be more y- told of. (John of Trevisa 1326–1412; translation of Ranulph Higden's Polychronicon)
And for ther is so gret diversite
In Englissh and in writyng of oure tonge,
So prey I God that non myswrite the,
Ne the mysmetre for defaute of tonge;
And red wherso thow be, or elles songe,
That thow be understonde, God I biseche!
(Chaucer. Troilus and Criseyde. Book V ll. 1793-98).
Ye knowe ek, that in forme of speche is chaunge
Withinne a thousand yere, and wordes tho
That hadden pris, now wonder nyce and straunge
Us thinketh hem, and yit they spake hem so
(Chaucer Troilus and Criseyde. Book II ll. 22-25).
For God's sake hold your tongue, and let me love,
Or chide my palsy, or my gout,
My five grey hairs, or ruin'd fortune flout,
With wealth your state, your mind with arts improve,
Take you a course, get you a place,
Observe his Honour, or his Grace,
Or the King's real, or his stamped face
Contemplate, what you will, approve,
So you will let me love.
Sir Tristram, violer d'amores, fr'over the short sea, had passen core rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor had topsawyer's rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse to Laurens County's gorgios while they went doublin their mumper all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to tauftauf thuartpeatrick: not yet, though venissoon after, had a kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all's fair in vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe. Rot a peck of pa's malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface (Jamess Joyce. Finnegan's Wake. I.i).
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
MedievalistView Public ProfileSend a private message to MedievalistSend email to MedievalistVisit Medievalist's homepage!Find More Posts by Medievalist
Yesterday, 04:32 AM MacAllister vbmenu_register("postmenu_667997", true);
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
So...what you're saying, Medievalist, is Wolf is trying to set English back a thousand years or so?
Good luck with that, Wolf.
__________________
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
MacAllisterView Public ProfileSend a private message to MacAllisterSend email to MacAllisterVisit MacAllister's homepage!Find More Posts by MacAllister
Yesterday, 04:43 AM Medievalist vbmenu_register("postmenu_668002", true);
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
I'm saying that Wolf doesn't have a clue. I don't think Wolf knows what grammar means--he never defines his terms. The clue to cluelessness is that Wolf refers to "traditional grammar."
Err what? Whose traditional grammar? I probably should have stuck in some Anglo-Saxon, too.
Here's a a clue.
1a. The study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences. b. The study of structural relationships in language or in a language, sometimes including pronunciation, meaning, and linguistic history. 2a. The system of inflections, syntax, and word formation of a language. b. The system of rules implicit in a language, viewed as a mechanism for generating all sentences possible in that language. 3a. A normative or prescriptive set of rules setting forth the current standard of usage for pedagogical or reference purposes. b. Writing or speech judged with regard to such a set of rules. 4. A book containing the morphologic, syntactic, and semantic rules for a specific language. 5a. The basic principles of an area of knowledge: the grammar of music. b. A book dealing with such principles.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
Last edited by Medievalist : Yesterday at 05:00 AM.
MedievalistView Public ProfileSend a private message to MedievalistSend email to MedievalistVisit Medievalist's homepage!Find More Posts by Medievalist
Yesterday, 04:57 AM MacAllister vbmenu_register("postmenu_668007", true);
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
Ah! I wish you had.
Anglo-Saxon always makes me feel all goosebumpy, like there's about to be a thunderstorm.
__________________
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
Last edited by MacAllister : Yesterday at 05:08 AM.
MacAllisterView Public ProfileSend a private message to MacAllisterSend email to MacAllisterVisit MacAllister's homepage!Find More Posts by MacAllister
Yesterday, 05:36 AM seuratdeveloping vbmenu_register("postmenu_668019", true);
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 73
Quote:
Traditional Grammar in creative works is unnecessary, and can often be an obstacle to the creative impulses of the writer. The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar.
Nonsense.
The writer should write plainly and specifically. Grammar is a tool, and deliberately misusing it can be confusing. It has nothing to do with "art."
__________________
http://seuratdeveloping.blogspot.com
seuratdevelopingView Public ProfileSend a private message to seuratdevelopingVisit seuratdeveloping's homepage!Find More Posts by seuratdeveloping
Yesterday, 07:02 AM LeslieB vbmenu_register("postmenu_668066", true);
Geek Unique
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 112
Two points. One is that grammar is just a tool. It is knowing how to move your fingers on the flute to produce the proper notes, not the music itself. Grammar is knowing how to blend certain paints to produce the exact look you want, not the subject of the painting. A badly structured sentence will grate on my eye as surely as a sour note will on my ear, no matter how artistic the attempt.
Second... I confess a strong loathing to the whole writing-as-ART-and-don't-you-forget-it style of writing. When I read prose, I want clear communication and an engaging idea. I don't want to have to spend the entire time trying to decode what the writer is trying to say.
You see, language isn't the servant of the writer. The writer is the servant of the reader. And if the writer does not use language to the reader's liking, then he has done nothing more than create a work like that "dress made of rotting meat" museum piece. Something vaguely interesting from a distance, but rather nauseating when examined too closely.
__________________
"I'm your worst nightmare, a computer geek with a badge."
"This is beyond my ken... and my Barbie and all my other action figures."
LeslieBView Public ProfileSend a private message to LeslieBSend email to LeslieBFind More Posts by LeslieB
Yesterday, 07:33 AM Puma vbmenu_register("postmenu_668099", true);
Board fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: near Columbus Ohio
Posts: 177
Why am I reminded of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire? Could it be decadence and the throwing off of traditional values and norms?
To my way of thinking -
Poetry isn't poetry anymore - it's a mish mash of words put together by people too lazy to understand and use the art form.
Art (Paintings, sculptures, ect.) aren't art anymore - modern thrown paint art conveys a message only to those willing to be taken in by the creator's announcement of what the piece depicts.
Music is all but dead (and lyrics are just as bad) - dissonance and cacophany aren't pleasing to anyone with a clear head.
We've been duped by artists, writers, and musicians who don't have the ability and willingness to work that should be required to create something that will endure the test of time - and, people don't want to spend the time needed to do any creative work right. Quick and dirty - the battle cry of artisans in the twentieth century.
So, literature with its maintenance of the requirement for proper grammar is still standing in the way of the obliterators. Thank God! Puma
Puma</B>View Public ProfileSend a private message to Puma</B>Find More Posts by Puma</B>
Yesterday, 07:35 AM poetinahat vbmenu_register("postmenu_668105", true);
Buck up, champion!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bring on the Azzurri. Bring 'em on.
Posts: 5,563
Quote:
Gutting “standard” English and its rules of grammar will free the writer to express himself more freely than ever!
And no one will know what the hell he's trying to say. Least of all him. Try it -- write down anything you want without any regard to structure or grammar rules. Put it away for two weeks. Pick it up and read it again. Any idea what you were saying? Maybe, but I bet you wish it weren't such hard work remembering.
Rules don't impede expression; they facilitate expression. As Leslie says above, grammar's a tool. Use it, bend it, but if you throw it away, you're not going to be a freer musician by smashing all your instruments.
Quote:
Another reason to throw “standard” English in the garbage is that it is not worth saving. The English language originates from invading barbarians of different tribes and races all babbling and babbling to each other for thousands of years on the British isles. This of course helps explain why English is such a course and ugly language in comparison with the romance languages. If it wasn’t for the civilizing influence of the French language brought over by the Normans English would probably sound as ugly as German.
First, this argument is irrelevant to your main premise. It's rhetorical 'piling on', and it waters down your assertion. Your argument is for anarchy, and you bring in an argument on aesthetics and language purity -- the very thing you advocate destroying.
Second, this argument of a corrupted, barbarian language saved only by an injection of Norman invaders is itself crude. It wins no friends and adds no rational support to your thesis. Good luck winning over the English, much less the Germans.
As an aesthete, would you advocate ridding the world of 'ugly' languages? Doubleplusungood.
__________________
Grammar is the bones of language.
-- Medievalist
poetinahatView Public ProfileSend a private message to poetinahatSend email to poetinahatFind More Posts by poetinahat
Yesterday, 07:45 AM Unique vbmenu_register("postmenu_668110", true);
moo moo to you, too
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rodent Runner
Posts: 4,859
I'm rather fond of grammar.
It keeps the masses in their places while also keeping dreck off the bookshelves.
Works for me.
__________________
Blowing Smoke - (You can Kick Me here)
Classical Madness
UniqueView Public ProfileSend a private message to UniqueSend email to UniqueFind More Posts by Unique
Yesterday, 07:46 AM MacAllister vbmenu_register("postmenu_668113", true);
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
*contemplating English as a "course" language....I've taught a couple of those courses, come to think of it.
__________________
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
MacAllisterView Public ProfileSend a private message to MacAllisterSend email to MacAllisterVisit MacAllister's homepage!Find More Posts by MacAllister
Yesterday, 09:37 AM Medievalist vbmenu_register("postmenu_668251", true);
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
Grammar isn't a series of arbitrary rules and restrictions. That's usage, or possibly style.
Grammar is the bones of language. Grammar is part of how and why a language works.
That rant, while less than original, is largely grammatical; Wolf doesn't even violate the sacred cows of the nineteenth century grammarians.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
MedievalistView Public ProfileSend a private message to MedievalistSend email to MedievalistVisit Medievalist's homepage!Find More Posts by Medievalist
Yesterday, 10:02 AM rekirts vbmenu_register("postmenu_668291", true);
NOooooo!!!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Land of Living Skies
Posts: 712
Wow! I won't bother adding my 2 cents because you all covered it brilliantly. Thanks.
__________________
I Took The 2006 Rejection Pledge 1/10
rekirtsView Public ProfileSend a private message to rekirtsFind More Posts by rekirts
Yesterday, 10:24 AM innkeeper04 vbmenu_register("postmenu_668329", true);
Would anyone like a fat cat?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Elizabethville, Pennsylvania
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Grammar lends legitimacy to “standard” English, which is the spoken and written medium of communication of the elite. Of course, how convenient for the upper classes that their way of talking and writing is considered “standard”.
Rubbish!
Every country needs a standardized language to facilitate communication. While touring Scotland, I once had a guide who told me about his daughter who had recently graduated from a school of engineering and applied for a job at a well known engineering company based in London. The woman participated in a group interview with four of her fellow graduates. Towards the end of the interview, a difficult technical question was posed by the interviewing panel.
The first applicant replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The second applicant replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The third and fourth applicants replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The young woman in question replied, "I'm sorry, but I don't understand."
With all applicants being otherwise equal in terms of their academic standing and backgrounds, the company decided to hire the young woman. The reason they gave was simple. The engineering company in question served the entire United Kingdom and not just Scotland. The company preferred applicants who spoke, "The Queen's English."
In the United States, the use of Midwestern English appears to be the national norm.
I come from an immigrant family. My father was a Chinese refugee during WWII. He arrived in the United States at the age of 11, not speaking a word of English.
My grandfather could have emmulated many immigrants and remained in the comfortable cultural surroundings of Chinatown in New York City. He chose to live in Brooklyn. My father was the ONLY ethnic Chinese in his graduating class.
My father studied hard, worked his way through college, and became a doctor. One of the cornerstones of his success was learning the "standard" English of his adopted country. His fluency is such that he doesn't even have a Chinese accent.
The use of the "standard" English that you decry helped my father escape a life of abject poverty.
innkeeper04View Public ProfileSend a private message to innkeeper04Visit innkeeper04's homepage!Find More Posts by innkeeper04
Yesterday, 11:40 AM Jamesaritchie vbmenu_register("postmenu_668484", true);
Board fanatic
Absolute Sage
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,426
grammar
Whoever wrote that article seemed to have a solid handle on good grammar. But I guess articles about grammar aren't considered creative.
As an editor, I routinely see manuscripts wherein the writer abolished the rules of grammar, and completely destroyed punctuation.
I can't say this ever made me think, "Wow, a work of art." My first thought i susually, "Why did he ruin all this perfectly good paper?"
But it is good to know I'm now upper class.
I am surprised to learn that Egnlish is uglier than French. Especially when many French writers greatly prefer English because Frech is such a small, limiting language.
As for learning Latin, at least this poster got one thing right. Latin is the mother language of good writing. But I suppose hip-hop has repleaced it in the hearts and minds of my countrymen.
And I would love to know how much you were paid for that run-on sentence, how many people have read it, and whether any of them are still sane. Of course, sanity is a serious concern for anyone who would write such a sentence, let alone read it.
In fact, the entire post, and the article, sound like the work of some very strong, and highly illegal, mind-altering drugs.
JamesaritchieView Public ProfileSend a private message to JamesaritchieSend email to JamesaritchieFind More Posts by Jamesaritchie
Yesterday, 01:04 PM reph vbmenu_register("postmenu_668728", true);
Dances with Words
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chair
Posts: 4,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesaritchie
In fact, the entire post, and the article, sound like the work of some very strong, and highly illegal, mind-altering drugs.
The reference to Amsterdam didn't surprise me at all. The drug laws are different there.
rephView Public ProfileSend a private message to rephFind More Posts by reph
Yesterday, 01:08 PM veinglory vbmenu_register("postmenu_668735", true);
heifericious
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 2,885
e e cummings is dead. Long live grammar and punctuation.
__________________
VEINGLORY.COM: all the veinglory that's fit to print....
veingloryView Public ProfileSend a private message to veinglorySend email to veingloryVisit veinglory's homepage!Find More Posts by veinglory
Yesterday, 01:52 PM JennaGlatzer vbmenu_register("postmenu_668801", true);
Moo if you love Dawno
Runs the joint
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Everybody knows the burrow owl lives in a hole in the ground
Posts: 5,298
I read the list of new posts very quickly. I thought the title of this one was:
LET'S THROW GRANDMA IN THE GARAGE!
Swear. I thought it was a very rude idea.
__________________
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/
Thread Tools
Esteemed New Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5
LET'S THROW GRAMMAR IN THE GARBAGE!
Who Needs the Queen’s English?
Let’s Throw Grammar into the Garbage Can!
(Originally published by the Dana Society Journal in February, 2006)
Let’s Throw Grammar into the Garbage Can!
(Originally published by the Dana Society Journal in February, 2006)
Writers, poets, and playwrights should mold and bash language into whatever art form they wish to create. Traditional Grammar in creative works is unnecessary, and can often be an obstacle to the creative impulses of the writer. The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar. The writer must do with language as he pleases. The writer should help destroy “standard” English, at least within the realm of contemporary literature.
Language must be the servant of the writer, and the writer must be a god over the realm of words. The role of language is to lie down in front of the writer and beg to be ravished by him. In order to create a higher literary art the writer should throw off the straightjacket of grammar whenever necessary. The writer must create with the intensity and passion of a freed madman rampaging on the streets.
Traditional grammar is not necessary in creative works. Take note that poetry and music are cousins. Literature often has a rhythm that makes grammar unnecessary, just as good verse has a natural flow that has made the rhyme obsolete. Many of the traditional rules of grammar are destined to go the way of the rhyme in poetry, at least in creative works.
Writers should think of their literary creations in much the same why they think of sex. Correctly obeying all the rules of grammar while in the throes of literary creation is like having sex with your clothes on. An artist of words should write with the same intensity as passionate sex. All boundaries to expression should be smashed open with pens that crash through everything like sledgehammers.
Grammar lends legitimacy to “standard” English, which is the spoken and written medium of communication of the elite. Of course, how convenient for the upper classes that their way of talking and writing is considered “standard”.
Why should the mode of speaking of the most privileged members of our society be considered “standard” English? Why shouldn’t the rich and constantly evolving language of poor blacks in the ghetto be considered “standard English” instead? People from all over the world do not crowd in giant concerts or tune into their radios to hear the privileged members of our society recite “standard” English. There is a worldwide fascination with hip-hop for good reason. Hip-hop glorifies the “standard” English of the black American ghetto, which is far more exciting and rich in contemporary culture than the “standard” English of Park Avenue. Take note that rap music has brought a resurgence of interest in poetry.
Standard English is constantly under siege from the influences of the black ghetto and immigration. Writers should stop defending “standard” English and should participate in its downfall. Gutting “standard” English and its rules of grammar will free the writer to express himself more freely than ever!
Another reason to throw “standard” English in the garbage is that it is not worth saving. The English language originates from invading barbarians of different tribes and races all babbling and babbling to each other for thousands of years on the British isles. This of course helps explain why English is such a course and ugly language in comparison with the romance languages. If it wasn’t for the civilizing influence of the French language brought over by the Normans English would probably sound as ugly as German.
The defenders of “standard” English who obsess over its grammar are obstacles in the necessary evolvement in what has become the most important language of the world. Instead of rejecting the growing international and cosmopolitan influences of an evolving language we should embrace these changes. The further that English evolves away from its barbaric Anglo-Saxon heritage the better. If purists and traditionalists want a language with unchanging rules of grammar then let them learn Latin.
More than ever the time is ripe for a rebellion against grammar and tradition. With the invention of word processing there is no excuse for literature to remain one of the most backward areas of the art world. Word processing, because it makes change, experimentation, and innovation easier, is an important development that can help writers, poets, and playwrights to free literature from its chains. Look at how painting has constantly revolutionized itself over the past one hundred and twenty years. Artists of the written word should do the same!
When we have sex most of us do not invent a bunch of rules to make the experience less enjoyable. Why not eliminate the rules in literature? Why shouldn’t literature be as exciting and decadent as sex? Let us free literature from the constraints of grammar like two lovers throwing off their clothes and diving into a natural frenzy of joy!
Established rules of music, painting, and sculpture have been thrown in the garbage by innovators like Stravinsky, Picasso, and Rodin. The result has been a constantly changing art that is exciting and fresh. Painters and sculptors deposed of a rigid faithfulness to representation, and the result has been an explosion of artistic brilliance. Just as the painters deposed of rigid representation creative writers should depose of grammar whenever it gets in the way of expression. One obstacle to artists of the written word is the straightjacket of grammar, and its anal obsession with the placement of commas, colons, semicolons, etc. Who cares if a sentence is a fragment? Who cares if a sentence is a run-on? I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence. I slashed and cut it down to seventy-thousand words. It’s called The Exclamation Point! The idea of writing a run-on sentence occurred to me while I was sitting in a café in Amsterdam, Holland. I would never have dreamed up such a wild book if I had been loyal to the rules of grammar.
Writers should do with language whatever they please. Any obstruction to expression must be obliterated into dust with the sledgehammers of our pens. Imagine that while you’re trying to make love to someone an old grammar teacher is yelling at you, “PUT A COMMA THERE! AND CHANGE THAT COLON TO A SEMI-COLON! OH NO! THAT SENTENCE IS A FRAGMENT!” It would be terrible, wouldn’t it? Why do you write under the same circumstances?
Copyright 2005 by Wolf Larsen. All Rights Reserved
Token English villain
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar.
May I just say how grammatically splendid your essay... oh.
Quote:
The idea of writing a run-on sentence occurred to me while I was sitting in a café in Amsterdam
You don't say.
Sorry, I just came in off a nightshift, so I'm tired and humourless. You'll just have to tell me if this is a joke.
Dances with Words
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chair
Posts: 4,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Why shouldn’t literature be as exciting and decadent as sex?
Did sex become decadent this week? I confess I haven't had the news on.
Buck up, champion!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bring on the Azzurri. Bring 'em on.
Posts: 5,563
Quote:
The writer must create with the intensity and passion of a freed madman rampaging on the streets.
One or two rampaging madmen will do it for me. Then it gets, at best, boring; at worst, it's just not worth the effort to comprehend the mess.
There's no need to be a slave to arcane convention, but cacophony isn't all that appealing more than once. If the streets teem with madmen, the world will yearn for well-mannered, clever urbanity.
How many John Cage albums do you want to sit through before you just want to hear something that swings?
__________________
Grammar is the bones of language.
-- Medievalist
Token English villain
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,911
Excellent. Not only a well thought-out response, but a strong practical attempt to disprove the OP's argument. High five!
Board Visitor
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence ...
... and it was so effective at communicating your point that you chose to use the 'traditional' rules when writing this ...
(Yeah, I'm sure it was just meant to be an advertisement for your book, but I can't resist taking it as a serious point of discussion.)
Mac
Last edited by Mac H. : Yesterday at 02:32 AM.
Means well
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Painters and sculptors deposed of a rigid faithfulness to representation, and the result has been an explosion of artistic brilliance.
Owing to your non-traditional usage of the verb 'depose', we can only guess what you're trying to say here, Wolf. But if you mean what I think you mean, there could be some argument about the 'explosion of artistic brilliance' you mention. Especially if you're thinking of the pretentious w*nkers who can't be bothered to learn to draw or paint and crap on about expressing themselves through their dead-cow-with-custard 'art', which only attracts the jeers of an unconvinced public
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
I wrote a 200,000 word run-on sentence. I slashed and cut it down to seventy-thousand words.
You may well find an audience for this among the artistically brilliant deposers you believe are your peers. Whether or not they'll be gripped by your story, they'll be obliged to marvel, like us, at your editing genius in being able to trim a gargantuan sentence down to a mere 70K words.
Last edited by pianoman5 : Yesterday at 03:31 AM.
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by reph
Did sex become decadent this week?
Only when the practioners are inept.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
As hyt ys y-knowe hou3 meny maner people buþ in þis ylond, þer buþ also of so meny people longages and tonges; noþeles Walschmen and Scottes, þat buþ no3t ymelled wiþ oþer nacions, holdeþ wel ny3 here furste longage and speche, bote 3ef Scottes, þat were som tyme confederat and wonede wiþ þe Pictes, drawe somwhat after here speche. Bote þe Flemmynges, þat woneþ in þe west syde of Wales, habbeþ y-left here strange speche and spekeþ Saxonlych y-now. Also Englischmen, þey3 hy hadde fram þe bygynnyng þre maner speche, Souþeron, Norþeron, and Myddel speche (in þe myddel of þe lond), as hy come of þre maner people of Germania, noþeles, by commyxstion and mellyng furst wiþ Danes and afterward wiþ Normans, in menye þe contray longafge ys apeyred, and som useþ strange wlaffyng, chyteryng, harryng and garryng, grisbittyng. Þis apeyryng of þe burþ-tonge ys bycause of twey þinges. On ys, for chyldern in scole, a3enes þe usage and manere of al oþer nacions, buþ compelled for to leve here oune longage, and for to construe here lessons and here þinges a Freynsch, and habbeþ, suþthe þe Normans come furst into Engelond. Also, gentilmen children buþ y-tau3t for to speke Freynsch fram tyme þat a buþ y-rokked in here cradel, and conneþ speke and playe wiþ a child hys brouch; and oplondysch men wol lykne hamsylf to gentilmen, and fondeþ wiþ gret gysynes for to speke Freynsch for to be more y- told of. (John of Trevisa 1326–1412; translation of Ranulph Higden's Polychronicon)
And for ther is so gret diversite
In Englissh and in writyng of oure tonge,
So prey I God that non myswrite the,
Ne the mysmetre for defaute of tonge;
And red wherso thow be, or elles songe,
That thow be understonde, God I biseche!
(Chaucer. Troilus and Criseyde. Book V ll. 1793-98).
Ye knowe ek, that in forme of speche is chaunge
Withinne a thousand yere, and wordes tho
That hadden pris, now wonder nyce and straunge
Us thinketh hem, and yit they spake hem so
(Chaucer Troilus and Criseyde. Book II ll. 22-25).
For God's sake hold your tongue, and let me love,
Or chide my palsy, or my gout,
My five grey hairs, or ruin'd fortune flout,
With wealth your state, your mind with arts improve,
Take you a course, get you a place,
Observe his Honour, or his Grace,
Or the King's real, or his stamped face
Contemplate, what you will, approve,
So you will let me love.
Sir Tristram, violer d'amores, fr'over the short sea, had passen core rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor had topsawyer's rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse to Laurens County's gorgios while they went doublin their mumper all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to tauftauf thuartpeatrick: not yet, though venissoon after, had a kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all's fair in vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe. Rot a peck of pa's malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface (Jamess Joyce. Finnegan's Wake. I.i).
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
So...what you're saying, Medievalist, is Wolf is trying to set English back a thousand years or so?
Good luck with that, Wolf.
__________________
SUPPORT AW's REBUILDING/LEGAL FUND!
Buy a cool button or
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
I'm saying that Wolf doesn't have a clue. I don't think Wolf knows what grammar means--he never defines his terms. The clue to cluelessness is that Wolf refers to "traditional grammar."
Err what? Whose traditional grammar? I probably should have stuck in some Anglo-Saxon, too.
Here's a a clue.
1a. The study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences. b. The study of structural relationships in language or in a language, sometimes including pronunciation, meaning, and linguistic history. 2a. The system of inflections, syntax, and word formation of a language. b. The system of rules implicit in a language, viewed as a mechanism for generating all sentences possible in that language. 3a. A normative or prescriptive set of rules setting forth the current standard of usage for pedagogical or reference purposes. b. Writing or speech judged with regard to such a set of rules. 4. A book containing the morphologic, syntactic, and semantic rules for a specific language. 5a. The basic principles of an area of knowledge: the grammar of music. b. A book dealing with such principles.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
Last edited by Medievalist : Yesterday at 05:00 AM.
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
Ah! I wish you had.
Anglo-Saxon always makes me feel all goosebumpy, like there's about to be a thunderstorm.
__________________
SUPPORT AW's REBUILDING/LEGAL FUND!
Buy a cool button or
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
Last edited by MacAllister : Yesterday at 05:08 AM.
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 73
Quote:
Traditional Grammar in creative works is unnecessary, and can often be an obstacle to the creative impulses of the writer. The writer should concern himself more with creativity, and less with correct grammar.
Nonsense.
The writer should write plainly and specifically. Grammar is a tool, and deliberately misusing it can be confusing. It has nothing to do with "art."
__________________
http://seuratdeveloping.blogspot.com
Geek Unique
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 112
Two points. One is that grammar is just a tool. It is knowing how to move your fingers on the flute to produce the proper notes, not the music itself. Grammar is knowing how to blend certain paints to produce the exact look you want, not the subject of the painting. A badly structured sentence will grate on my eye as surely as a sour note will on my ear, no matter how artistic the attempt.
Second... I confess a strong loathing to the whole writing-as-ART-and-don't-you-forget-it style of writing. When I read prose, I want clear communication and an engaging idea. I don't want to have to spend the entire time trying to decode what the writer is trying to say.
You see, language isn't the servant of the writer. The writer is the servant of the reader. And if the writer does not use language to the reader's liking, then he has done nothing more than create a work like that "dress made of rotting meat" museum piece. Something vaguely interesting from a distance, but rather nauseating when examined too closely.
__________________
"I'm your worst nightmare, a computer geek with a badge."
"This is beyond my ken... and my Barbie and all my other action figures."
Board fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: near Columbus Ohio
Posts: 177
Why am I reminded of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire? Could it be decadence and the throwing off of traditional values and norms?
To my way of thinking -
Poetry isn't poetry anymore - it's a mish mash of words put together by people too lazy to understand and use the art form.
Art (Paintings, sculptures, ect.) aren't art anymore - modern thrown paint art conveys a message only to those willing to be taken in by the creator's announcement of what the piece depicts.
Music is all but dead (and lyrics are just as bad) - dissonance and cacophany aren't pleasing to anyone with a clear head.
We've been duped by artists, writers, and musicians who don't have the ability and willingness to work that should be required to create something that will endure the test of time - and, people don't want to spend the time needed to do any creative work right. Quick and dirty - the battle cry of artisans in the twentieth century.
So, literature with its maintenance of the requirement for proper grammar is still standing in the way of the obliterators. Thank God! Puma
Buck up, champion!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bring on the Azzurri. Bring 'em on.
Posts: 5,563
Quote:
Gutting “standard” English and its rules of grammar will free the writer to express himself more freely than ever!
And no one will know what the hell he's trying to say. Least of all him. Try it -- write down anything you want without any regard to structure or grammar rules. Put it away for two weeks. Pick it up and read it again. Any idea what you were saying? Maybe, but I bet you wish it weren't such hard work remembering.
Rules don't impede expression; they facilitate expression. As Leslie says above, grammar's a tool. Use it, bend it, but if you throw it away, you're not going to be a freer musician by smashing all your instruments.
Quote:
Another reason to throw “standard” English in the garbage is that it is not worth saving. The English language originates from invading barbarians of different tribes and races all babbling and babbling to each other for thousands of years on the British isles. This of course helps explain why English is such a course and ugly language in comparison with the romance languages. If it wasn’t for the civilizing influence of the French language brought over by the Normans English would probably sound as ugly as German.
First, this argument is irrelevant to your main premise. It's rhetorical 'piling on', and it waters down your assertion. Your argument is for anarchy, and you bring in an argument on aesthetics and language purity -- the very thing you advocate destroying.
Second, this argument of a corrupted, barbarian language saved only by an injection of Norman invaders is itself crude. It wins no friends and adds no rational support to your thesis. Good luck winning over the English, much less the Germans.
As an aesthete, would you advocate ridding the world of 'ugly' languages? Doubleplusungood.
__________________
Grammar is the bones of language.
-- Medievalist
moo moo to you, too
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rodent Runner
Posts: 4,859
I'm rather fond of grammar.
It keeps the masses in their places while also keeping dreck off the bookshelves.
Works for me.
__________________
Blowing Smoke - (You can Kick Me here)
Classical Madness
Dawnolyte Acolyte
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning"
Posts: 5,165
*contemplating English as a "course" language....I've taught a couple of those courses, come to think of it.
__________________
SUPPORT AW's REBUILDING/LEGAL FUND!
Buy a cool button or
Links Roundup for How to Donate
__________________________
Sometimes I blog
Dawnolite Bovine Admiration
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: State of Decay
Posts: 1,772
Grammar isn't a series of arbitrary rules and restrictions. That's usage, or possibly style.
Grammar is the bones of language. Grammar is part of how and why a language works.
That rant, while less than original, is largely grammatical; Wolf doesn't even violate the sacred cows of the nineteenth century grammarians.
__________________
Lisa L. Spangenberg | Digital Medievalist
Please Help Jenna | Donate to Absolute Write
My opinions are my own.| Who else would want them?
NOooooo!!!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Land of Living Skies
Posts: 712
Wow! I won't bother adding my 2 cents because you all covered it brilliantly. Thanks.
__________________
I Took The 2006 Rejection Pledge 1/10
Would anyone like a fat cat?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Elizabethville, Pennsylvania
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolflarsen
Grammar lends legitimacy to “standard” English, which is the spoken and written medium of communication of the elite. Of course, how convenient for the upper classes that their way of talking and writing is considered “standard”.
Rubbish!
Every country needs a standardized language to facilitate communication. While touring Scotland, I once had a guide who told me about his daughter who had recently graduated from a school of engineering and applied for a job at a well known engineering company based in London. The woman participated in a group interview with four of her fellow graduates. Towards the end of the interview, a difficult technical question was posed by the interviewing panel.
The first applicant replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The second applicant replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The third and fourth applicants replied, "Ah dinnae ken."
The young woman in question replied, "I'm sorry, but I don't understand."
With all applicants being otherwise equal in terms of their academic standing and backgrounds, the company decided to hire the young woman. The reason they gave was simple. The engineering company in question served the entire United Kingdom and not just Scotland. The company preferred applicants who spoke, "The Queen's English."
In the United States, the use of Midwestern English appears to be the national norm.
I come from an immigrant family. My father was a Chinese refugee during WWII. He arrived in the United States at the age of 11, not speaking a word of English.
My grandfather could have emmulated many immigrants and remained in the comfortable cultural surroundings of Chinatown in New York City. He chose to live in Brooklyn. My father was the ONLY ethnic Chinese in his graduating class.
My father studied hard, worked his way through college, and became a doctor. One of the cornerstones of his success was learning the "standard" English of his adopted country. His fluency is such that he doesn't even have a Chinese accent.
The use of the "standard" English that you decry helped my father escape a life of abject poverty.
Board fanatic
Absolute Sage
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,426
grammar
Whoever wrote that article seemed to have a solid handle on good grammar. But I guess articles about grammar aren't considered creative.
As an editor, I routinely see manuscripts wherein the writer abolished the rules of grammar, and completely destroyed punctuation.
I can't say this ever made me think, "Wow, a work of art." My first thought i susually, "Why did he ruin all this perfectly good paper?"
But it is good to know I'm now upper class.
I am surprised to learn that Egnlish is uglier than French. Especially when many French writers greatly prefer English because Frech is such a small, limiting language.
As for learning Latin, at least this poster got one thing right. Latin is the mother language of good writing. But I suppose hip-hop has repleaced it in the hearts and minds of my countrymen.
And I would love to know how much you were paid for that run-on sentence, how many people have read it, and whether any of them are still sane. Of course, sanity is a serious concern for anyone who would write such a sentence, let alone read it.
In fact, the entire post, and the article, sound like the work of some very strong, and highly illegal, mind-altering drugs.
Dances with Words
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chair
Posts: 4,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesaritchie
In fact, the entire post, and the article, sound like the work of some very strong, and highly illegal, mind-altering drugs.
The reference to Amsterdam didn't surprise me at all. The drug laws are different there.
heifericious
Mod Squad Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 2,885
e e cummings is dead. Long live grammar and punctuation.
__________________
VEINGLORY.COM: all the veinglory that's fit to print....
Moo if you love Dawno
Runs the joint
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Everybody knows the burrow owl lives in a hole in the ground
Posts: 5,298
I read the list of new posts very quickly. I thought the title of this one was:
LET'S THROW GRANDMA IN THE GARAGE!
Swear. I thought it was a very rude idea.
__________________
