| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AmericanExile
Joined: 04 May 2009
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bondrock wrote: |
...call me AmericanExile.
Do we really need 3 threads about this one issue? |
That's off topic. It is interesting to me that people feel it is okay to violate norms in an attempt to enforce norms. There's a word for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tacitus14
Joined: 10 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To American Exile,
I have only followed the thread that you imported here.
But I can't understand your arguments exactly. You say that you don't like the first line of Moby Dick because it's terrible and boring. So everyone else who likes it must be sheep for saying the same thing that their 12th grade English teacher said. Is that the argument you're making?
Go back to that first set of first lines that everyone choose and find out how many first lines deal with the topic of alienation, exiles and outcasts.
Just from my recollection of the posters favorites I can think of
Notes from the underground, L'Etranger, Tropic of Cancer...
All those first lines seek to open a literary space for the narrator exactly like the first lines of Moby Dick do. Melville does it in three words. And uses a name that reinforces his standing within the judeo-christian tradition and places him outside of it.
Just cause you don't get it don't call other people sheep. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Again, the interest lies in the name. All other reasons are a distant second and more or less pedantic. Voice, foot, illocution, whatever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let's look at the mechanics, not the subjectivity.
You disagree with someone. Instead of PM'ing them, as would be necessary to perpetuate a pointless private conversation, you create a thread wholly different with no content other than that they disagreed with you.
The purpose of this thread, and its clone, serves no purpose than to gratify your ego. The purpose is not "discussion," but ridicule.
I'll give you points for opening yourself up for an equal amount of criticism. You will have to accept this as collateral.
The attraction to "Call me Ishmael" has nothing to do with the name "Ishmael." It could indeed be "Call me Bob." And it would be no less significant for it.
The aesthetic approach of characterization by direct dialogue (as opposed to indirect which was fashionable at the time and times previous) and by soliloquy as a method of narration (and not a dependent part of the overall dramatic narrative) is what makes the line significant. To belittle a revolutionary work of literature because it is popular among English teachers (a field driven by literature and study) and to claim that your intelligence allows you to supercede a century and a half of research and reflection, for the mere fact that you disagree, is arrogant and pointless.
This is not about Moby Dick. This is about Moby Ego. You're not special because you live near a northward flowing river. Gravity ensured it long before you arrived. But you're not in Kansas anymore. Lose the chip on your shoulder and accept the fact that your opinion doesn't make you special, nor does it make you sufficiently superior to belittle the opinions of the properly educated based upon presumptions of "conformity," and you will be much happier.
There is are more than one great reasons why the opening line to Moby Dick is extraordinary. If you cannot bother yourself to read the novel and study its context, then you would better serve those unfortunate enough to listen to you to keep your opinions to yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
The attraction to "Call me Ishmael" has nothing to do with the name "Ishmael." It could indeed be "Call me Bob." And it would be no less significant for it.
The aesthetic approach of characterization by direct dialogue (as opposed to indirect which was fashionable at the time and times previous) and by soliloquy as a method of narration (and not a dependent part of the overall dramatic narrative) is what makes the line significant. |
Hello .38 Special. Are you so inconversant with the Bible? Do you know what 'significant' means? Call me Bob would have been completely insignificant. The 'aesthetic approach' signifies nothing beyond itself; the name Ishmael has a deeper meaning, is actually significant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tacitus14
Joined: 10 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Koveras,
Where is this angry thread where you've managed to enrage this fellow. And maybe several others.
Of course it's all about the name. The opening is three words and that's the only major signifier. It's heavy one and a good one.
But this was about the quality of the line and some bone-head saying that everybody's been tricked into thinking the line was good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AmericanExile
Joined: 04 May 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tacitus14 wrote: |
All those first lines seek to open a literary space for the narrator exactly like the first lines of Moby Dick do. Melville does it in three words. And uses a name that reinforces his standing within the judeo-christian tradition and places him outside of it.
Just cause you don't get it don't call other people sheep. |
Don't get it? Okay. Here's something I get. Statistical significance is imaginary. Entire sectors of our world are based on SS and it simply isn't real. Oh, there are equations, some using impressive math, that claim to reach a conclusion about SS. The problem is the number something has to reach to be statistically significant is arbitrary. It isn't consistent across disciplines. The number always seems to be set at a point that allows SS to be found enough to justify academic jobs.
What does that have to do with this topic? Literary space. It is another made up idea. It's a made up goal. A goal you claim CMI achieves, but you don't even have the math to fake a good justification. Spurious.
Yes, it is a biblical name and Melville lived in a time when using such names was common. The bible was and still is the big book of allusions. Given who Ishmael is in the bible it is an interesting choice. I have already said in a previous post that the name is to a degree interesting. I still maintain it is not interesting enough to overcome this bad line.
A book doesn't live or die by its first line. A first simply has the first chance to place a readers interest on the spectrum between being drawn in or alienated. This line alienates me. It is a good way to introduce yourself if your an actual person talking to an actual person. Simple, honest, useful. What a real person can get away with a character in a book can't because they aren't real. It interferes with suspension of disbelief. Some books want that. They play with it. Moby Dick relies on suspension of disbelief. It requires it, so breaking it is bad. "Call me Ishmael." I can't your a character in a book. Whoops.
Even in real life a simple introduction is only a set up for what must be an interesting follow up if you wish the conversation to continue. That is what Melville gives us. "Some years ago�never mind how long precisely�having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world." Fantastic. "Sail about a little." I love that. Too bad I'm currently thinking about how this is all fake.
I take it from responses so far that I am the only person who has considered the effect of the first line on the second. What can be surmised about Melville's intentions when you read these two lines together is that CMI was never meant to be a great line. It is the feint that sets up the big right. He kept it short so you would walk into that big right quickly. Then he has you.
It isn't great. It was never meant to be. It fails in what it tries to achieve. It's terrible.
Oh, and I never called anyone a sheep. I made the word choices I made for a reason. I did not choose the word sheep because it does not fit my intent. And you think you're qualified to tell me what I get? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tacitus14
Joined: 10 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
On these message boreds I've tried to provoke... but this is the first time I got what I wanted...
I baited you and that was fun for me. I highly recommend Typee, and if you think you're in a journey across the ocean read Redburn. If you don't like it I'll knock you out like Billy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AmericanExile
Joined: 04 May 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tacitus14 wrote: |
On these message boreds I've tried to provoke... but this is the first time I got what I wanted...
I baited you and that was fun for me. I highly recommend Typee, and if you think you're in a journey across the ocean read Redburn. If you don't like it I'll knock you out like Billy! |
Good for you. My assumption is a large percentage of people on any site like this are lying. If I wasn't sick and stuck at home bored I wouldn't having this conversation. You gave me what I wanted also: a distraction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| .38 Special wrote: |
The attraction to "Call me Ishmael" has nothing to do with the name "Ishmael." It could indeed be "Call me Bob." And it would be no less significant for it.
The aesthetic approach of characterization by direct dialogue (as opposed to indirect which was fashionable at the time and times previous) and by soliloquy as a method of narration (and not a dependent part of the overall dramatic narrative) is what makes the line significant. |
Hello .38 Special. Are you so inconversant with the Bible? Do you know what 'significant' means? Call me Bob would have been completely insignificant. The 'aesthetic approach' signifies nothing beyond itself; the name Ishmael has a deeper meaning, is actually significant. |
I can't argue with that, chief, although I think you're missing the point. You're referring to a symbol that is significant within the context of the novel. A great many novels -- most of them, at that time -- refer to Judeo-Christian motifs through symbols and parallelism, and some do this better than others. The name is significant, but the name isn't all that it is. There is more to it. It is stylistically and aesthetically significant as well, marking the utility a hitherto neglected dramatic form.
| Quote: |
| I take it from responses so far that I am the only person who has considered the effect of the first line on the second. What can be surmised about Melville's intentions when you read these two lines together is that CMI was never meant to be a great line. It is the feint that sets up the big right. He kept it short so you would walk into that big right quickly. Then he has you. |
A.Exile, you're absolutely right. Damned shame it took you this long to start talking sense. However, I will disagree a little, and say that, while "CMI" was never intended to be a "great first line," it does introduce a narrative structure that acts as a sort of frame for the rest of the narrative, much of which operates in the mode of the second line.
And you're not the first one to consider "the effect of the first line on the second," you're just the first one not to consider the effect of talking about the second line in a thread about first lines  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DWAEJIMORIGUKBAP
Joined: 28 May 2009
Location: Electron cloud
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All of your opinons are dull, vapid and 2 dimensional cliches.
Start conforming to mine instead, they are better. They are like a ray of blinding light shot through a murky pond. They lift the veil from the eyes of the half seeing, they grab you by your opposable thumbs and yank you out through the entrance of the cave into the light. They are to yours what Quantum Dynamics is to Newtonion Laws of motion.
They are like R-teacher's Norraebang videos and his discovery of Krishna's teachings.
If you don't agree, there is something wrong with you. What the hell is wrong with you?!
Wanna fight about it?!!!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiknkorea
Joined: 16 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DWAEJIMORIGUKBAP wrote: |
All of your opinons are dull, vapid and 2 dimensional cliches.
Start conforming to mine instead, they are better. They are like a ray of blinding light shot through a murky pond. They lift the veil from the eyes of the half seeing, they grab you by your opposable thumbs and yank you out through the entrance of the cave into the light. They are to yours what Quantum Dynamics is to Newtonion Laws of motion.
They are like R-teacher's Norraebang videos and his discovery of Krishna's teachings.
If you don't agree, there is something wrong with you. What the hell is wrong with you?!
Wanna fight about it?!!!!
|
Good stuff!
I'm curious now.
Do you have a link to R-teacher's videos? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DWAEJIMORIGUKBAP
Joined: 28 May 2009
Location: Electron cloud
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kiknkorea wrote: |
| DWAEJIMORIGUKBAP wrote: |
All of your opinons are dull, vapid and 2 dimensional cliches.
Start conforming to mine instead, they are better. They are like a ray of blinding light shot through a murky pond. They lift the veil from the eyes of the half seeing, they grab you by your opposable thumbs and yank you out through the entrance of the cave into the light. They are to yours what Quantum Dynamics is to Newtonion Laws of motion.
They are like R-teacher's Norraebang videos and his discovery of Krishna's teachings.
If you don't agree, there is something wrong with you. What the hell is wrong with you?!
Wanna fight about it?!!!!
|
Good stuff!
I'm curious now.
Do you have a link to R-teacher's videos? |
You know what, I don't... He used to post links to them in the 'let's bash theists' thread, but it was pulled. You could 'search for poster' and then pm him.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
