I happen to be reading Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio (for American literature II) and Joyce’s Dubliners (for textual analysis and interpretation) simultaneously. Both books are sort of melding into one in my mind, becoming distinguishable mainly by local colour and the authors’ writing styles — Anderson being short, sharp, and simple, and Joyce, well, writing very Jocyian.

My comments have done run off with my audience. C’est la vie. This morning, in the line of duty, Miles Davis played In a Silent Way, Radiobead drew in the crowds with The Hends, and Belle and Sebastian will get some airtime for The Boy with the Arab Strap, if they behave themselves.

Raise your glasses high and toast the future. No matter what they say, it’s worth living for.

Quote of the evening:

When I have a daughter, I shall name her Margarita. When people ask me if she is named after the drink, I shall lie and say no.

First, you need to remember that plainly expressed language is out of the question. It is too realist, modernist and obvious. Postmodern language requires that one uses play, parody and indeterminacy as critical techniques to point this out. Often this is quite a difficult requirement, so obscurity is a well-acknowledged substitute. For example, let’s imagine you want to say something like, “We should listen to the views of people outside of Western society in order to learn about the cultural biases that affect us”. This is honest but dull. Take the word “views”. Postmodernspeak would change that to “voices”, or better, “vocalities”, or even better, “multivocalities”. Add an adjective like “intertextual”, and you’re covered. “People outside” is also too plain. How about “postcolonial others”? To speak postmodern properly one must master a bevy of biases besides the familiar racism, sexism, ageism, etc. For example, phallogocentricism (male-centredness combined with rationalistic forms of binary logic). Finally “affect us” sounds like plaid pajamas. Use more obscure verbs and phrases, like “mediate our identities”. So, the final statement should say, “We should listen to the intertextual, multivocalities of postcolonial others outside of Western culture in order to learn about the phallogocentric biases that mediate our identities”. Now you’re talking postmodern!

Saddam Hussein wants to debate Bush II? Brilliant and hilarious move on Hussein’s part, totally in line with North Korea proclaiming to the world that they reserve the right of a preemptive strike on America. Cracks me up when little fellers tell the U.S. to buzz off.