one o’clock study session

5 04 2005

pdxstraycat: i’m a pacifist. like the ocean.
tyratae: what are you talking about?
spoonboy514 (giggling): he’s outstupiding me.
pdxstraycat: i’m trying to make him laugh. which is really easy. because it’s that time of night.
spoonboy514: ow! there goes my eye again. damn!
pdxstraycat: well, you put your finger in it!

(while i’m doing this, they’ve delved into a very serious conversation about the appropriate ways to & not to bring african rhetorical traditions into the existing rhetoric curriculum in ways that don’t alienate or stir resistance in white students, that work against colonization without colonizing anyone. and causal relationships between aristotle–with his incongruous nonathenean power-differential–cicero, & bacon in the western rhetorical tradition. we can’t even goof off convincingly for more than a few minutes here or there.)

spoonboy514: i guess i can put those away now.
pdxstraycat: yeah. quit attacking me with your quotefingers.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

13 responses

5 04 2005
tamnonlinear

Recently seen in an icon: It’s only fun until someone loses an eye. Then it’s fun without depth perception.
I hope you got some sleep.

5 04 2005
tyra

a little. πŸ™‚
i bought my brother a t-shirt for christmas that said “it’s all fun & games until somebody loses an eye. and then it’s like, hey, free eyeball!” i also got him a candy eyeball to go ahead & make the point material. it got (predictably) flung around in front of the tree.
depth perception is way smarter, though!

5 04 2005
cheshirrrecat

you people need to stop deluding yourselves into thinking youre studying.
and im beginning to wonder if people can be too smart for their own good. every so often, you should try discussing the perfect construction of a smore through a mouthful of partially melted marshmallow. no quotes needed, no alienation or resistance or dire political necessity. just straight up stickiness.
:}

5 04 2005
tyra

marshmallows are an oppressive function of the institutionalized capitalist system trying to sell us unhealthy food to keep the poor people sick & ill-nourished on cheap garbage! and also they’re WHITE!
oh, wait, sorry. i was channelling there for a second. i’m better now.

5 04 2005
cheshirrrecat

*laughs and shakes her head at you*
bad doctoral student! no biscuit! (or are they evil too because theyre from the south and therefore representative of the perpetuation of the racist social structure? or something. nevermind) ;}

5 04 2005
tyra

omg!
you can TOTALLY play this game! you were holding out on us!!!
as long as they’re part of southern LIT, biscuits are still an important recuperative work. especially if they’re made by women. white women in the south get a special dispensation when it comes to literature. anything else, though? burn them!

5 04 2005
cheshirrrecat

Re: omg!
but burnt biscuits dont taste good! and they make the house all smokey!
πŸ˜€

5 04 2005
robotapocalypse

S’mores are diversity itself. There’s the white marshmallow (although it is in the center. . . that’s a little hegemonic), the dark brown chocolate, and the lighter brown graham cracker. They all go together as one tasty treat that preserves the different tastes of all three ingredients. S’mores are like the mosaic or salad bowl metaphor, only tastier and without all the vegetables (and bits of glass).
Moreover, s’mores are best when cooked over a campfire, which makes s’more eating like a religious event. Shared meals are common in religions and not unique to any particularly evil and oppressive culture. There’s the fire = light = wisdom thing (which is nearly universal), plus the mysterious night thing (again, nearly universal), and if we go with traditional gendering found in both Eastern and Western thought, the night is feminine and the fire masculine. S’mores over an open fire represent the harmonious enwisdoming of everyone without erasing difference.

6 04 2005
cheshirrrecat

enwisdoming?
that, was impressive.
frightening, but impressive.
:}
*beans you with a marshmallow anyway*

7 04 2005
1dioscuri

only, the structure (and consistency) of the parts change when put together. cannot maintain the original state in the consumption — the unavoidable violence of western culture.

7 04 2005
tyra

or an application of the cognitive-theory notion of blending. πŸ˜›

8 04 2005
1dioscuri

πŸ™‚ mmmm… blending… yes, if we take seriously the un-fixed self. what does cognitive theory have to say about the social, though? i’m not familiar with the school of thought, other than in passing — i.e., for my comps. πŸ™‚

8 04 2005
robotapocalypse

S’mores absolutely do not require any blending at all. You put the chocolate on the graham cracker and the marshmallow on the chocolate (Daring people might make a sandwich of cracker-chocolate-marshmallow-chocolate-cracker!) and then you heat it up. There’s a campfire or an oven or a microwave involved, but no blender.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: