...then comes my interpretation of intent...
Submitted by tj on June 12 2000 22:08:35
In reply to In Context submitted by Ford Prefect on June 12 2000 19:39:23
|
hEya fP, the net is, in general, such a poor communication conduit. had dUnston told me this story to my face with the added bonus of having heard some of his "previous comments", I'd be far less quick to assign him "any posting intent". but the net-surfer who allows the words, and the words alone, to dictate any of the possible interpretational angles is doing so unwisely. IMHO! one's visual, aural, and other sensory cues are working overtime when soemone is telling you "stories". on the net I find I do the same thing as I do IRL, fill in the interpretational holes that other known facets or channels of communication can augment. and dUnston, newbie or not, crossed the line into his own interpretational "limbo" when he told a story with a clear moral and then didn't tell us what the moral was. he left the "moral assignation" up to us. and some of us did find "a moral" that he either didn't intend or didn't expect us to use! when words have an "accusatory ring", there are usually only several possibilities... ...i'm "over interpreting" with my typical bL paranoia ...a guilty conscience is causing me "under-interpretation" woes... ...there actually is an accusatory ring in his words which, typically, "religious types" rarely can never hear in their own voices despite how clearly they hear the "lack of faith" in ours'! lvoe, tj |
Follow ups: