The one serious argument I've ever had with my
girlfriend--with real, actual blood boiling and passions at a
fevered pitch, with the fate of our relationship coming into
the balance and being endangered--was over MLA-style.
I was applying to grad schools, and I've never cared much
about where the underlines go, or the date goes on the
inside or outside of the parentheses in the works cited list,
or whether the period goes inside the quotes or after the
parenthetical citation--hell, I think parenthetical citation is
a signpost along the road of scholastic disintegration--and
my girlfriend, caring that I get _into_ a grad school, was
hammering me on doing what I need to do to get in, and I
said if they let my footnotes get in the way of my amazing,
absolute, obvious brilliance and don't invite me in because
of that, then I don't want to be there...blah, blah, etc., etc.
Twice we've had this fight, twice we've almost broken up,
and twice neither of us budged from our stance, though
both of us are right.
When I say "professional," I mean it like James means, "truth
is whatever is good in the way of belief." Professional is as
the professionals do--you'll see a lot of professionals acting
in ways that seem "unprofessional" under the normal guise
of the term. What I mean by "professional-looking" is
whatever the people you want to convince of something
(the "professionals") will let you get away with.
Antiprofessionalist rhetoric can be interestingly deployed.
It just looks silly sometimes. And I apologize if my
even-tempered approach doesn't divulge enough of where
I'm coming from, doesn't articulate the fact that I don't
care whether people do or do not write "professional-looking"
stuff, or whether I even think I do all the time, and when
and where and why I choose one rhetorical style over
another--but we can't say everything, just like we can't
read everything. You gotta' do what you gotta' do, but if
you make no concessions to the audience you want to
convince, then you have to live with the
consequences--and if you are okay with the consequences,
then everything's peachy-keen, right? Antiprofessionalist
rhetoric just makes somebody look like they want to have
it both ways--they want to steer the conversation without
taking part in the conversation.
Matt
> I agree completely. In fact, that's gonna be my new mantra. I agree
> completely. If acceptance is predicated upon conformity and agreeableness,
> then it's a simple matter I guess to just go along with the mainstream of
> philosophy and academia and media and politics with a chipper attitude and
> if I feel I have something to say in the future, I'll make sure it's really
> well-thought out in the right professional format, with proper footnotes, a
> bibliography in the back, and a nod from Jon Stewart bequeathing celebrity
> acceptance.
>
>
> No more whining from me! Heck no.
>
>
> Chipper John
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
