Nothing in this blog can be believed. If you think that anything in this blog is true or factual, you'll need to verify it from another source. Do you understand? No? Then read it again, and repeat this process, until you understand that you cannot sue me for anything you read here. Also, having been sucked into taking part in the mass-murder of more than 3 million Vietnamese people on behalf of U.S. Big Business "interests", I'm as mad as a cut snake (and broke) so it might be a bit silly to try to sue me anyway...

Thursday, April 14, 2005

it's a worry...

It was a mistake. I know. I should never have gone to his blog. I should not have read this:
At skimming or fast reading speed, five minutes gives you 5000 words, which is more than enough to conclude that a writer is guilty of gross logical or factual errors, pretentious or illiterate prose, repetition of tired and long-refuted arguments, or simple inanity.
He's obviously been here, hasn't he? He's read this blog, hasn't he? I mean, who else could he be talking about, right?

That Quiggin... He's good isn't he?


Anonymous Theo said...

Hmm, Quiggin although having some good arguements he is somewhat sterile.

OTOH your blog although I am not in agreement with many of your conclusions shows an emotional involvement and spurts of quality comparable with van Gogh.

IOW a good dose of drivel interspersed with highlights.

All artists need the self doubt and introspection to produce good art, writers are no different.

Keep the ear on.



April 15, 2005 8:23 AM  
Blogger Gerry said...

The thing with academics, and I'm not accusing Quiggin of being one, mind, is that they cease to exist if bad things happen to their "credibility", and so they can't afford to ever say or write anything which is "poorly expressed" or which can be successfully debunked.

This leads to an incurable psychiatric condition called academic paranoia. It turns perfectly interesting people into the most to god-awful bores on earth.

You can't have a conversation with them because they never let their guard down and actually say what they may be thinking. They'll equivocate ad nauseam rather than answer a simple question. They can never say anything which may be flawed. They must never be "wrong". Hence they will pussy-foot around whatever you're saying, or, shock, horror (and this is by far the worse thing), they'll browbeat you with whatever they think is the current dominant "position" on the subject under discussion.

You could create a software bot that would do the same thing. Put two of these bots in the same room, stand back and watch the fun! Now that would be a spectator sport! You might call it Academic Jelly Wrestling.

My rantings viewed as art? Yeah, it's called Vogon prose...

Thanks for sharing, Theo... :-)

April 15, 2005 11:53 AM  
Blogger Gerry said...

A Google search for the term "academic jelly wrestling" produced zero results. This term is henceforth subject to copyright, its provenance being the previous comment. :-)

April 15, 2005 12:01 PM  
Blogger the urban fox said...

You are SO right on that, Gerry. Ha. This post should be pinned to university staffroom walls.

April 15, 2005 9:17 PM  
Blogger Gerry said...

Thanks Fox. I'll owe you a pint...

April 16, 2005 1:00 AM  
Anonymous Theo said...

Vogon? Don't sell yourself short, writing is an art, an art that requires exponents to throw bits of themselves in the ring, (maybe even ears).

You practised it since you entered LTUA and you are getting bloody good at it.

As far as academics go you are dead right, academic constraints put a damper on things, but there are pseudonims available, although Asimov for example got by handsomely without one.

One of the examples that springs to my mind was one of the Dutch writers.
His prodiguous output stopped cold when he finished his studies and was appointed pastor at some small black stocking church or other.

To call it academic yelly wrestling was excellent, do expand it with academic table dancing and academic pole dancing and you got the market captured:-)

(In NSW the strippers can spend a bloody hour collecting money without getting to the point of actually showing anything.
In hindsight maybe reserve these phrases for solicitors)


April 16, 2005 8:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quiggin is a good bloke and you, Gerry, are the person that is paranoid. To imagine that he is speaking to you, when he talks about skimming information is self-indulgent.
While a wanker, you have an interesting point of view. Academics/intellectuals, similarly wank. J.Q. is brave enough to spout
his stuff on internet and I enjoy his site.
Gotta go for a wank....

April 16, 2005 6:46 PM  
Blogger Gerry said...

Anonymous, me old mate... Where did I say Quiggin is not a good bloke? And yes, I'm paranoid, but that has nothing to do with this post. Quiggin talking to me? You thought I was serious? Your ability to detect humour is impaired? Of did my bit of a laff fail?

April 16, 2005 10:10 PM  
Blogger Gerry said...

Theo, you keep stroking my ego. I thank you. So does my ego. :-)

April 16, 2005 10:13 PM  
Blogger John said...

Well I had a good laugh, and even if anonymous missed the joke I'm glad s/he likes my site

April 20, 2005 10:30 PM  
Blogger Gerry said...

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you get Quiggin to come over to your blog
and say nice things. :-)

Thanks for dropping by Prof, glad you enjoyed it. I couldn't help myself. The devil made me do it. Honest... :-)

I promise to behave now..

April 21, 2005 12:07 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<<<<< Home