On 07-Oct-10 6:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
The same with me. I cant treat music I like as useful background noise when
I get on with other work, and I detest people gossiping about saree prices
and daughter in laws at a concert on the rare occasions I do go to those
Here's someone
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
Here's someone who agrees with you:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20015642-47.html
Oh, EVERYONE detests the gossipers; everyone is an utter devotee of the
music none more than the gossipers themselves, when
vtms = middle aged women wearing diamond earrings.
culture vultures, I've heard another type described .. you know,
aggressively ethnic fabindia clothes, a bindi as large as a manhole cover,
consciously (over)use bharatnatyam mudras even in normal conversation over
dinner etc. Detest them
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
sur...@hserus.netwrote:
culture vultures, I've heard another type described .. you know,
aggressively ethnic fabindia clothes, a bindi as large as a manhole cover,
consciously (over)use bharatnatyam mudras even in normal conversation over
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-radical-pessimists-guide-to-the-next-10-years/article1750609/print/
Douglas Coupland
A radical pessimist's guide to the next 10 years
A radical American pessimist's guide
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
On 08-Oct-10 9:46 AM, Sruthi Krishnan wrote:
But serious listening is different -- it becomes a task in itself (of
course, a very pleasurable one).
Indeed. I'd also claim that single-task listening to music and
Deepa Mohan [13/10/10 15:00 +0530]:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
sur...@hserus.netwrote:
culture vultures, I've heard another type described .. you know,
aggressively ethnic fabindia clothes, a bindi as large as a manhole cover,
consciously (over)use bharatnatyam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHH4ALRFHw
I don't want to call things I don't understand names, but this talk
smells so strongly of BS I have to ask this online collective what
they think. Anyone who begins a talk with lashing out at critics, and
then taking every opportunity to feather one's
On 13-Oct-10 5:45 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHH4ALRFHw
I don't want to call things I don't understand names, but this talk
smells so strongly of BS I have to ask this online collective what
they think. Anyone who begins a talk with lashing out at critics,
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
Much as I love you, Cheeni, I'm not going to watch this.
What fascinates me is this: the speaker and her listeners are clearly
educated (maybe a little too much, they have the air of people who
have only hung around in
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:43:31AM +0200, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
A radical American pessimist's guide to the next 10 years I think. The
Of course. (Though radical he's not).
author seems to have confused the concept of the world and USA, I have
It's quite obvious that he's writing about
Of course I don't understand the specific Indian implications of this
thread, but worldwide I find overintellectualised BS particularly
unpalatable.
Cheers
Giancarlo
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Giancarlo Livraghi g...@gandalf.it wrote:
Of course I don't understand the specific Indian implications of this
thread, but worldwide I find overintellectualised BS particularly
unpalatable.
She claims she isn't Indian in her thought - and anyone calling her
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
Title: The Trajectory of the Subaltern in My Work
Length: 1hr 28min 55sec
I just completed listening and occasionally watching the entire video
in the background while doing other things of course. I have the
following
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:16 AM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote:
Overcriminalization of society already exists (in many places). The criminals
stay out of jail. The world will feel like jail for anyone who doesn't belong
I guess.
In the US it's a particular aberration of the free markets - they
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote:
story in the NYT and many blogs mostly with other Bengalis (!) are
s/mostly with other Bengalis/mostly by other Bengalis/
Or more generally, I come across the Bengali (it is usually a Bengali)
literary critic / thinker who spouts incomprehensible sentences such
as homeopathy of self abstraction and I think to myself - what a
wanker. I'm perhaps wrong because these are clearly educated and
intelligent people who
On 13-10-2010 18:48, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
Ergo I expect to see a lot of shit flying around on the Internet
criticizing this lady (who inexplicably hangs onto the last name of a
man from many marriages back), but there isn't? All the heuristics
This may be a professional decision, so that
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Aadisht Khanna li...@aadisht.net wrote:
On 13-10-2010 18:48, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
Ergo I expect to see a lot of shit flying around on the Internet
criticizing this lady (who inexplicably hangs onto the last name of a
man from many marriages back), but
Post modernist pretentiousness strikes again. Possibly the one thing more bogus
is science studies, I guess
--Original Message--
From: Srini RamaKrishnan
Sender: silklist-bounces+suresh=hserus@lists.hserus.net
To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
ReplyTo: silklist@lists.hserus.net
Subject:
On 13-Oct-10 6:55 PM, Sruthi Krishnan wrote:
This kinda obscure stuff is what post-modern stuff is usually about.
Post-modernism was built on the might of intellectuals such as
Derrida, who relied on neologisms. Derrida's prose was referred to by
Foucault as obscurantisme terroriste. The text
(Apologies for top-posting, via phone)
If a lay reader's criticism of a theorist's language is legitimate, is a
layperson equally right to criticise technical language in a scientific
discussion that her education has not equipped her to follow, as obtuse?
If so, can I bring up the criticism
On 13-Oct-10 7:21 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Post modernist pretentiousness strikes again. Possibly the one thing more
bogus is science studies, I guess
Flamebait for Chris Kelty. Where are you, Herr Doktor?
Udhay
--
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
If not, why not? Is it because cultural theory owes it to laypeople to be
less academic, or to adopt more egalitarian stances?
I think that in technology and science, jargon has a precise
definition -- a two or three line explanation that has no room for
ambiguity.
On the other hand take some
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Sruthi Krishnan srukr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Aadisht Khanna li...@aadisht.net wrote:
On 13-10-2010 18:48, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
Ergo I expect to see a lot of shit flying around on the Internet
criticizing this lady (who
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote:
- only talks about her work3/4th of the way into her talk
Oh and also what's with the incessant name dropping? As I was saying
to xxx the other day, and yyy was there too - really, this is relevant
to a technical talk
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:56 PM, supriya.n...@gmail.com wrote:
If a lay reader's criticism of a theorist's language is legitimate, is a
layperson equally right to criticise technical language in a scientific
discussion that her education has not equipped her to follow, as obtuse?
I'm not
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Aadisht Khanna li...@aadisht.net wrote:
This may be a professional decision, so that work published throughout
her career is given citations under the same name.
I hope so - I was so annoyed at the end of the talk I was going for
attention whore, but you may be
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Sruthi Krishnan srukr...@gmail.com wrote:
This kinda obscure stuff is what post-modern stuff is usually about.
Post-modernism was built on the might of intellectuals such as
Derrida, who relied on neologisms. Derrida's prose was referred to by
Foucault as
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Sruthi Krishnan srukr...@gmail.com wrote:
By being obscure, the cultural theorist is making a statement about
the nature of language itself. For a layperson to understand this,
does take some reading beyond two or three line definitions. Hence the
impatience
On Wednesday 13 Oct 2010 5:45:34 pm Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHH4ALRFHw
I don't want to call things I don't understand names, but this talk
smells so strongly of BS I have to ask this online collective what
they think. Anyone who begins a talk with lashing
On Wednesday 13 Oct 2010 6:18:59 pm Udhay Shankar N wrote:
Much as I love you, Cheeni, I'm not going to watch this.
Udhay. I know you like books and you are an avid reader. I don't want you to
be disappointeed.
Here. A whole book on Gayatri Chk Spk
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
insert obligatory mention of Chip Morningstar piece [1]
Very useful - thanks Udhay, so my hunch was right (Chip's description
of the entire field can be summed up as pretentious wankers).
Cheeni
Oh, come.
Let's not give Derrida-ish wankers the same rights as us humans.
On 13 Oct 2010 19:30, supriya.n...@gmail.com wrote:
(Apologies for top-posting, via phone)
If a lay reader's criticism of a theorist's language is legitimate, is a
layperson equally right to criticise technical language
On 13-Oct-10 11:07 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
Very useful - thanks Udhay, so my hunch was right (Chip's description
of the entire field can be summed up as pretentious wankers).
Not the entire field, but some members of it, certainly (which is fine,
recalling that 90% of *everything* is
Udhay Shankar N [14/10/10 06:54 +0530]:
Not the entire field, but some members of it, certainly (which is fine,
recalling that 90% of *everything* is crap)
It is marked by intellectual dishonesty such as the use of logical
fallacies, ad hominem rather than debate .. you name it. Shines through
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Sruthi Krishnan srukr...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that in technology and science, jargon has a precise
definition -- a two or three line explanation that has no room for
ambiguity.
On the other hand take some cultural theory that invents new language
to
I'm not alone in calling her language obtuse - her fellow
post-modernists (I don't think it's very nice to take a commonly
understood term like modern and overlay it with a specific technical
meaning, I hate this about Agile programmers too, who I usually abhor,
but that's for another thread)
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Udhay Shankar N ud...@pobox.com wrote:
Title: The Trajectory of the Subaltern in My Work
Length: 1hr 28min 55sec
I just completed listening and occasionally watching the entire video
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote:
I hate this about Agile programmers too, who I usually abhor
Um ... why?
-- b
it might come across as name -dropping but your reference to Eagleton
reminded me of the recently departed Frank Kermode [1] and his consistent
attempts at introducing 'theory' within the Leavisite bastions of Cambridge.
Kermode's own work always remained a brilliant example of accessibility that
41 matches
Mail list logo
