Gould took more heat for his Mozart interps than for maybe anything else he did. Love what he has to say about it.
(On the other hand, not sure what is up with that 'pureness' tag. Oy.)
Seize the day and then some
Gould took more heat for his Mozart interps than for maybe anything else he did. Love what he has to say about it.
(On the other hand, not sure what is up with that 'pureness' tag. Oy.)
Posted by
mick
at
11:24 AM
0
comments
So now that's she's Secretary of State, I guess we're back to Hillary Rodham Clinton. I could be wrong, but wasn't it usually just "Hillary Clinton" when she was running for President?
Speaking of the Presidential middle names, looks like we'll be hearing more of Obama's middle name too. As implied in the article linked above, it would seem to be an asset in talks with Middle Eastern Nations. Which talks, it is widely acknowledged, are poised to be more positive and productive than they've been in 30+ years. This is for a variety of reasons, including economic factors, but even James Earl Carter, Jr. (you know, Jimmy) said on the Daily Show the other night that the President's name will turn out to be helpful in negotiating a settlement in Israel (which by the way, he thinks is more doable now than ever. Wouldn't it be great if he were right?)
Of course, Obama's name has fueled and will continue to fuel ire among the terrormongers (I have to work hard to restrain myself from calling them 'terrorists') who make such splendid arguments as "moving detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the American Mainland will create a target in every city they're placed!" and "I, for one, don't want these men anywhere near MY town!!" As if they'd be hanging out at the Piggly Wiggly, not, um, behind bars in maximum security.
That's my move in the Name Game for today.
Well, ok, I'll also ask: how might things be different for Blagojevich if his name were Smith? Cohen? D'Angelo? Kennedy?
The premise here is that if you have a blog and leave a comment on this post, I’ll assign you a letter. You take that letter and make a list of 10 things you love that begin with that letter. Then, you pass on the letter love to the bloggers who make comments on your post. (Or, if you don't have a blog, comment or email me and we'll go from there.) It’s creative and social!
I got this from walkalong, and the letter I got is Y.
SOOOOoooooo.... In no particular order:
1) Yo La Tengo -
One of the baddest and bitchinest bands out there. Not surprising that they made the list.
3) The Yes Men - both the movie and (especially) the performing/activist group.
4) You. Yes, you! You know who you are.
5) Yo Yo Ma - Cellist extarordinaire. Great work in many genres.
This installment has been brought to you by the letter Y.
Posted by
mick
at
3:51 PM
8
comments
Ok, I found this to be kind of funny, and interesting on a couple levels.
Last week we ordered breakfast from a deli down the road - got someone on the phone we hadn't spoken to before. Took a little extra time to place the order, and when the food came, we knew why. Here's what was written on the check:
Pina barh yeli sogui bret
Egg chis tos rol
Egui beiquen chis rap
Peanut butter and jelly on whole wheat bread
Egg and cheese on a toasted roll
Egg, bacon and cheese wrap
To me, this is fascinating. I mean, leaving aside the fact that I couldn't begin to function taking food orders in Spanish (much less Korean) I think that this shows the organic side of language in a way we sometimes forget about. Having just finished a Shakespeare play, I may be more attuned to this than usual - there was almost no standardized spelling and vocabulary in Shakespeare's time; in fact we owe a lot of our 'proper' English spelling to Shakespeare, for better or for worse. (Is 'Achilles' really better than the closer-to-the-Greek 'Akhilleus'? You tell me.)
Seems to me that it also points out the, um, challenges of spelling and pronunciation in English. This is nothing new to anyone, but take a quick look at these words:
through
though
thought
rough
trough
plough
I dare you to come up with a quick answer to the question of how 'ough' is to be pronounced.
Even though you may have to google a couple words, I bet you understand that I can go to the bodega with my bff in k-town and get an empanada, some kim chee and a 40. And when my cholo texts me something that makes me rotflmao, I'm reminded that language really is a living thing.
In other, much sadder news, Don LaFontaine has shuffled off this mortal coil at the age of 68. Or as he might have put it: "In a world with the heroes of all time, Don LaFontaine announces coming attractions to the angels."
Posted by
mick
at
3:18 PM
0
comments
Labels: food, language, shakespeare
One word I have been especially fond of lately is 'reckon.' Which usually elicits a laugh whether I want it to or not. A perfectly useful and noble term, featured prominently in tomes as lofty as the Bible (as in "Day of Reckoning"), it now seems always to connote a cowboy or a hillbilly, junegrass in teeth, lazily supposing sum'n or other. All I'm saying is: it's a word to be reckoned with.
Which brings me to a somewhat fun party game from NYE, courtesy one of the guest's 8 year-old nephew: What do you think is the word with the most definitions in the English language? Don't cheat, now! I'll give you a hint: the Oxford English Dictionary has well over 300 definitions for this word; dictionary.com has over 100.
Posted by
mick
at
4:22 PM
2
comments
And it's a small point, but...
Flaunting is not flouting. And vice versa.
Guess it doesn't come up all that often, in general, but a couple times in the last week or so, I've heard a commentator or interviewee on NPR misuse the term, saying "flaunt" (to display ostentatiously) when he means "flout" (to disregard blatantly). And NPR is supposed to represent the smart guys, right?
For instance, I heard someone being interviewed yesterday say, "Sudan is flaunting the U.N. arms embargo."
No they're not. If they were flaunting it, they'd be waving it around on a flag and yelling "Hey check out this bitchen arms embargo - we are totally LOVING enforcing these rules!" rather than, um, keeping the trade in illicit arms going strong, keeping up the violence in Darfur, and thus violating, or flouting, said embargo.
Once again, kids: You flaunt your wealth by spending $1,100 on fuck-me boots. Then you flout traffic laws by using those boots to cross the street in the middle of the block (the boots were, after all, made for walking).
The fact that the president says 'nucular' instead of 'nuclear,' and comes up with terms like 'strategery' is not a good reason to get mixed up language-wise. In fact, it might be true that simply because he revels in these types of errors (intentionally?) it's not a good idea to get this sort of thing wrong too often.
I'm just sayin'.
Posted by
mick
at
10:11 PM
0
comments