Re: "found" TW humor (low)

Subject: Re: "found" TW humor (low)
From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:43:43 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:33:18 -0400,
eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com wrote:

> As we are trying to analyse the authors intent with
> little to go on I'd say we
> are treading on very thin ice.
> >>2. There is no premise whatsoever for her metaphor
> *except* the word "bang".
> >>That's my entire point. Only an interpretation of
> word in that way allows
> >>for the metaphor.
> Was this interpretation meant by the author or read
> into the text by the reader?
> I've included M-W's definitions below, but acceptable
> definitions of child are
> descendent, product, and result. The 'love-child'
> reference may be an innocent
> reference to the fact there was only one parent.

I can see nothing in the text whatsoever except "bang"
that would even invite a reference to a "child", love
or otherwise.

As I said, there's nothing except the word "bang" to
denote generation of life. If I've missed something
else, Eric, be kind enough point it out.

> to see an absolutely
> non-sexual interpretation. Therefor there is a
> possibility for more than one
> interpretation.
> >>3. I do not "enjoy" reading material that uses base
> sexual slang as the
> >>premise for its misguided plays on language (unless
> am aware of the possible
> >>content beforehand).
> I find it worrying that more often than not, those
> complain the loudest
> about sexual innuendo, slurs, or other insult often
> find fault where none was
> intended. Often the complaints reveal more about the
> complainer's insecurities
> and personality than the evil ways of the world or the
> particular
> 'transgressor'. Unfortunately in this case, unless
> evidence of author's
> intent is shown, I can only conclude that it is over
> reaction and over
> sensitivity that is the cause of complaint in this

The only evidence is that the only reference to
generating life is the word "bang". I cannot say it any
more clearly than that, Eric.


Purchase RoboHelp X3 in April and receive a $100 mail-in
rebate, plus FREE RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.
Order here:

Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: "found" TW humor (low)
Next by Author: Re: "found" TW humor (low)
Previous by Thread: RE: "found" TW humor (low)
Next by Thread: Re: "found" TW humor (low)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads