|
|
|
| 18 July 2002 |
|
Great article here by Rod Dreher of National Review: Birkenstocked Burkeans
I highly recommend it.
There's a very good reason I, for the longest time, thought that I tended toward the left. I don't normally think in terms of politics--or at least, until more recently. My brain focuses on the cultural, the life-oriented. Hell, I'm a writer and poet, a lover of nature--these are not conservative things, are they? Conservatives are the money-grubbers, the uptight, rich white people who'll cut down a tree just to see if they can make it scream, right? Alas, the preconceptions. Yes, I was duped by the media. A love of the beauty of a free market society is not money-grubbing. If trees don't get cut down, it'll be a bit hard for me to be a writer, lest I learn to make use of papyrus or the old reliable--stone tablets. But let's face it, I am a long-winded lad, and those options just aren't options. E-book, you say? Pshaw. It's all fine and dandy to have e-books, but frankly, I want people to hold a bound copy of my book in their grubby little hands. Books should be held. I need speak no further.
But anyway, the traditions and morals on which conservatives stand and the natural, earthiness of the neo-hippies need not be mutually exclusive. I really like the phrase "crunchy right." It works. I dabble in herbalism--not because I'm a wanna-blessed-be, but because it's a cost-effective way to treat certain ailments and so forth, and frankly, I like not having to subject my body to the excess chemicals of OTC drugs. Hey, if I can cure that cough with a cup tea (unpleasant though it may taste) for what likely amounts to a few cents instead of buying a package of pills for close to $8 that will knock me out and possibly make me feel even worse for a few days, I'm all for the tea.
The point (and I'm merely elaborating on Dreher here, 'cause frankly, I think he says it all) is that the whole naturalism movement that is a defining element of the liberals need not be theirs and theirs alone. And we who tend toward the right need not be ashamed of liking tofu, or wearing open-toed shoes. Hey, I've got my Jesus-shoes, and I'm proud to wear them! Now, if only it was easier to find fresh veggies around here....
|
Jelly Pinched Wolf 4:36 PM
Email the Wolf |
| 17 July 2002 |
|
As I am often going on about proper English usage, I should point out something a friend brought up to me regarding a post from yesterday.
I said, "I do not want to hear about your loser children which you cannot control."
Yes, I did intend the use of "which" instead of "whom." I debated "whom" for a moment, and though it is correct, there is just something about children of this sort that makes them seem less like people. And it's the parents' fault, for the most part, but that doesn't change the fact that these children (and I do use that word loosely) are far more deserving of a which than a whom.
Thanks to Jonathon for the insight. Says he, "After all, the absence of civility tends to dehumanize us all, maybe to the point of cruelty...." |
Jelly Pinched Wolf 4:29 PM
Email the Wolf |
| 16 July 2002 |
|
More notes from yesterday:
Okay, I realise that a corporate break room is something of a common room, and one should not expect any amount of privacy or quiet in such a place, but why cannot people show a certain amount of respect for the presence of others? Go ahead, have your conversation filled with a million and two exclamations of "Girl!" as well as countless violations of the rules of English grammar. But for the love of disco, don't shout it! You're sitting right across from one another--I'm sure she can hear you if speak in a normal tone of voice. And for crying out loud, get to your bloody point. Restarting your sentence fifty times with "Listen to this..." or "Check this out..." will get you nowhere.
And if you want to have a private conversation (this is presuming, of course, that discussing whether or not you should run back into the arms of one deadbeat boyfriend or an entirely different deadbeat boyriend is not something you wish to be common knowledge), then either don't shout at the top of your lungs, or go somewhere, oh, I don't know, private. Is that so unreasonable a request? I do not want to hear about your bad boyfriends. I do not want to hear about your loser children which you cannot control. I don't want to hear about your diet, or the Rapture, or whatever other inane topics are polluting the folds of your brain.
It's called a reasonable tone of voice. Try it. |
Jelly Pinched Wolf 4:20 PM
Email the Wolf |
| 10 July 2002 |
|
I realise that it's been forever since I've posted anything, but besides work being particularly lame of late, I frankly haven't had much to blather on about. Today, however, our system is once more down, and I am bored out of my mind. So, I says to myself, why not go ahead and write up something to post, once (if ever) the system comes back up? Jolly good idea, myself says back to me (myself apparently being British for some bizarre reason). And here we all are, blogging once more.
In case you haven't noticed, there's a new link over on the side there (no, on the other side--sheesh!). 'Tis the blog of me wife, going by the name Earth Kid Malady. Check it out, if you've not already done so. She's much better about updating than I, but then, she also wasn't a Rock Stupid Student. Her posts are much fun and I highly recommend them.
System's back, much work to do. Blarg. Will try to post further, far more interesting things later. Bloody work, anyway. |
Jelly Pinched Wolf 11:10 AM
Email the Wolf |
|
