[lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- From: david ritchie <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 20:21:19 -0700
In this era of everyone stripping off for charity--gardener's clubs,
Finnish Actor's Widows, The Nepalese Liberation Army Gun and Bun Fund
(everyone seems to see quite old flesh as a kind of gold mine)-- the
title is fair game. (I thought "The Tourist Heart" was pretty good,
but no one responded to that post so maybe I was wrong. I shall be
sure to recycle the title when the right project arises.)
The reason for calling this post, "Naked Gentlemen" is that Mike
Geary's interesting question could get lost in a thread about the NYT.
"How does one make it known that a joke is intended?" is not a small
issue in e-mail. One can do things with tone and vocabulary, or
establish a reputation as a joker, but what if the urge to be funny
comes but rarely? On the other side of the equation, I have found
that the chief problem with writing funny stuff is that people assume
everything you write is some sort of joke. Feste is not allowed to
be serious.
I think Eric's fictional suggestion--when he wrote of code-- that
there could be some e-mail signal equivalent to an eye twinkle, had
merit. Would color do it, I wonder? Could responses that were
intended to be humorous be in, say, blue? This wouldn't give away
anything more than the twinkle does. It would allow us to relax
though, knowing that someone who seemed trustworthy hasn't turned
into a nettle-sucking fiend.
Do all computers now register color?
David Ritchie
Portland, Oregon
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
- Follow-Ups:
- [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- From: Peter D. Junger
- [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- From: david ritchie
- References:
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Phil Enns
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Eric Yost
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Mike Geary
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- From: Peter D. Junger
- [lit-ideas] Re: Naked Gentlemen
- From: david ritchie
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Phil Enns
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Eric Yost
- [lit-ideas] Re: NYT in the news again
- From: Mike Geary