Thursday, December 30, 2004

On NO you didn't!!!

I think this speaks for itself. A witty rejoinder by f/k/a to my comments in the post below this one. I'm so hurt...wait, no...I'm :( .

update [7 PM]: Special (Legal) Ed? In addition to emoticons, Energy Spatula seems fail gray s:
to need captions explaining the topic being covered. Apparently, I should have said
(slowly, with tiny words): "I am not talking about whether AL is funny or likeable
or good at what he's doing. The topic of this blurb is whether a satirist agrees with the conduct described."

I guess I can console myself with the thought that, even though I didn't get into Harvard, at least I can crochet. And also, one time I got to go to explosives training in the Air Force and blow some shit up...that was pretty cool. And I make a mean snickerdoodle. Take that!

If anyone cares, here's the exact text of David's comment at Notes from the (Legal) Underground:

This morning, I am not willintg to think very hard about the definitional nuances of "satire". It seems to me that AL falls in that category, which to me includes using hyperbole and focusing on the faults rather than virtues of the subject institution. That said, I am always amazed at otherwise intelligent people who believe that the writer of satire condones the conduct described. I guess we live in a world where authors need to use lots of emoticons to keep the readers in tune.

I'm also tired hearing from lawyers [who for a living often select facts to make their client look good and the opponent look bad, in the service of advocacy] complain when the faults of the profession are depicted. Admitting the faults is a lot more likely to gain public respect than covering them up or imposing Omerta.
The context of the comment is a post by Evan regarding different senses of humor and why some people think AL is very funny and some don't think it's so great. The comment itself is directed (I believe -- I have no empirical evidence for this belief, but I still have it anyway, I'm illogical like that, if that's even a word) at Larry's post regarding her thoughts on AL. And, once again, I *believe* that the comment seems to say that "otherwise intelligent people" can't understand a blog like AL as satire because we (the "otherwise intelligent" readers) are unable to understand the subtle satirical stylings of AL without some emoticons to help us out.

See, I get it. I still don't think it's funny. :( If I did think it was funny I would do this so my "otherwise intelligent" readers would know... :) And, if I wanted to flirt with my readers I would do this... ;) Sometimes it's not enough to wear a lowcut shirt and try to look satirical. You guys sometimes need help, and that's what I'm here for.

Why can't we all just get along?
This blog is sponsored by The Reeves Law Group at 515 South Flower Street, 36th Floor. Los Angeles CA 90071. (213) 271-9318