Let us compare mythologies and movies

[Bêthberry]

.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

?

[Thenamir]

.
?!

[Son of Númenor]

Let us indeed! Who'd like to start?

:smokin:

[Beleg Cuthalion]

Ummm...???

[Finduilas]

I'm confused... :confused:

[Folwren]

I think the question mark is better.

[Finduilas]

I think the question mark is better.

My sentence was a statement, not a comment, therefore, for once in my life, I was gramatically(sp) correct(whatever Foley may think :D ).

[The Sixth Wizard]

(sigh) Get thine thread going already! :rolleyes:

F.ex.

Eragon = Pretty good for a 15 year old author but copied Tolkien a bit.

Eragon Movies = RUBBISH.

Someone elaborate on that. :smokin:

[The Might]

One thing I like here is the close relationship between J.K.Rowling and the HP movie-makers. She was always consulted and also pointed out what things should definitely be shown, and which not. Of course this was no longer possible when the New Line films were made, but even when Mr. Zimmerman made his version, Tolkien wasn't consulted, as can be noticed in the Letters where he points out many mistakes made. I'm not such a great HP fan, but I definitely like the fact the movies depict the world created by JKR so well.
As far as mythologies are concerned...maybe you can make yourself a bit more clear...not really sure what you mean.

[Thenamir]

In my humble opinion, '?' is to be preferred, leaving as it does a sense of the mystery, of searching out the unknown, of the pursuit of further knowledge. By contrast '.' is almost an obscenity, declaring as it does that there is no more to be said, a prejudicial epithet to the yearning of the human psyche to discover, to explore.

While '.' carries the ultimate simplicity of a full-stop, the elegance of a single point in space, it is nevertheless the cold finality of the finishing of a thought expressed, allowing no extension and brooking no opposition. '?' leaves open the possibility of a '.' to be had in the future, perhaps at the end of all things, but to assert '.' from our limited perspective at present is mere presumption.

[Finduilas]

In my humble opinion, '?' is to be preferred, leaving as it does a sense of the mystery, of searching out the unknown, of the pursuit of further knowledge. By contrast '.' is almost an obscenity, declaring as it does that there is no more to be said, a prejudicial epithet to the yearning of the human psyche to discover, to explore.

While '.' carries the ultimate simplicity of a full-stop, the elegance of a single point in space, it is nevertheless the cold finality of the finishing of a thought expressed, allowing no extension and brooking no opposition. '?' leaves open the possibility of a '.' to be had in the future, perhaps at the end of all things, but to assert '.' from our limited perspective at present is mere presumption.

Was that addressed to me? Or Bethberry?

Oh, and back up there, I meant question not comment. So sorry... :o

[Thenamir]

<sigh> The fine art of sarcasm is lost.

[Finduilas]

<sigh> The fine art of sarcasm is lost.

:D Only over the internet. But really, when you are sarcastic, your sarcasm is usually pointed towards someone, and was yours directed towards me, Bethberry, or Folwren?

[The Saucepan Man]

In my humble opinion, '?' is to be preferred, leaving as it does a sense of the mystery, of searching out the unknown, of the pursuit of further knowledge. By contrast '.' is almost an obscenity, declaring as it does that there is no more to be said, a prejudicial epithet to the yearning of the human psyche to discover, to explore.I quite agree with you, but you should follow your own counsel. While Eomer's contribution conveys a piquant sense of loss, while at the same time expressing a sense of hope that answers may yet be found, your addition of the "!" exagerrates the essential tone of the original statement by introducing a sense of bravado, outrage even, which punctuates the fragile mystery and thus brings the poignancy of the moment crashing brutally down in an exclamatory cacophony of despair.

[Beleg Cuthalion]

I had no idea this thread would turn out to be so interesting. http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/grinser/grinning-smiley-018.gif















~Beleg

[Bêthberry]

. . .

I've often thought that Downers would be quite capable of carrying on extensive, convoluted conversations about nothing, and be quite entertaining in the process. And now my little "dot" proves it. :Merisu:

"." is, of course, not only grammatically a period or full stop for a sentence, but is also an enabling mark--"dot"--in extending names, titles and URLs on computers and the Internet. Thus, it is not a dead end or cold finality. It's probably closer to a hand shake in this use, linking people through introductions, greetings, beginnings, endings, middles. I am very pleased it has produced such a pleasant, interesting little thread. :)

[The Sixth Wizard]

. . .

I've often thought that Downers would be quite capable of carrying on extensive, convoluted conversations about nothing, and be quite entertaining in the process. And now my little "dot" proves it.

"." is, of course, not only grammatically a period or full stop for a sentence, but is also an enabling mark--"dot"--in extending names, titles and URLs on computers and the Internet. Thus, it is not a dead end or cold finality. It's probably closer to a hand shake in this use, linking people through introductions, greetings, beginnings, endings, middles. I am very pleased it has produced such a pleasant, interesting little thread.

In other words, start discussing stuff! :mad: :)

[Folwren]

Thenamir hit the nail on the head. I think he said exactly what I was thinking when I chose the question mark.

[The Might]

I must confess that the fact that everyone has simply seemed to not take notice of my post, but instead talks about the proper use of dots and question marks doesn't really make much sense to me.
Perhaps a moderator would be so kind so as to delete my post, since it clearly doesn't fit in with your discussion.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

TM, you can delete your own posts. Just click on the "edit" icon in the post you want to delete, then check "delete message", then click on the "delete this message" box.

[Finduilas]

Seeing as The Might's post is the only one that is worthy of staying, why delete it?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Finduilas, he asked a moderator to delete it; my reply was simply to give him the responsibility himself - if he thinks it should be deleted, he can do so himself. I do not think it needs to be deleted, but each member can choose what s/he wishes to happen to her/his own posts.

[Thenamir]

Obviously, Finduilas, you have not been here long enough to appreciate the finer points of the fluff and frippery in which we occasionally engage ourselves.

While Eomer's contribution conveys a piquant sense of loss, while at the same time expressing a sense of hope that answers may yet be found, your addition of the "!" exaggerates the essential tone of the original statement by introducing a sense of bravado, outrage even, which punctuates the fragile mystery and thus brings the poignancy of the moment crashing brutally down in an exclamatory cacophony of despair.

Indeed, SpM, i was caught up in the exuberance of the moment, and perhaps my excesses can be forgiven. However, my “!” proceeded not from a sense of outrage, but rather a vehement agreement with Eomer’s initial sortie.

And while our dear Bb is to be commended for her proper amendations to my initial criticisms, I would suggest that perhaps a further amendment of her opening gambit, from “.” to perhaps a softer “…” might have stayed my perhaps overcritical mal mot. As can plainly be seen if viewed in context, “…” could have been taken as an implicit “?”, leaving open the possibility of concepts unspoken to the imaginations of the reader, even of a grand denouement left hidden, hanging in a deft display of a kind of authorial “cliff hanger”, as it were.

Nevertheless, I believe it can be demonstrated that the asymmetrical nature of “?”, appearing as it does unbalanced and almost ready to topple, provides a more succinct expression than “…”, but that either is quite superior to the “.”.

[The Might]

No, actually I never intended to, I believed that it would be taken as an ironical remark and not a true wish, though I seem to have been wrong.

[Finduilas]

Alright. Point taken to heart.

Doesn't this thread belong in the Mirth area? Just asking, so please don't snap my head off :D


P.S. That "snap my head off" wasn't meant as disrespect to any moderator, or anyone who has told me I was wrong.

[Bêthberry]

. . . As can plainly be seen if viewed in context, “…” could have been taken as an implicit “?”, leaving open the possibility of concepts unspoken to the imaginations of the reader, even of a grand denouement left hidden, hanging in a deft display of a kind of authorial “cliff hanger”, as it were.

Nevertheless, I believe it can be demonstrated that the asymmetrical nature of “?”, appearing as it does unbalanced and almost ready to topple, provides a more succinct expression than “…”, but that either is quite superior to the “.”.

Most intriguing and imaginative theory, Thena. However, as you yourself note, the "?" is unstable--really, it's a bit of a unicycle, a self-referring bit of circular argument that could threaten to create a rut more than a wide avenue for going forth with the topic.

". . ." does have the virtue of implying yet more unstated. However, it has the drawback of requiring a beginning, an introduction, a preliminary elaboration of the subject. For that reason, I decided initially to go with the "." as an opening gambit. The dot has the virtue of signifying landfall, as in "here beginneth a discussion", "at this point", "this spot flagged for further development." A little dot will do it.

[ ] speaking, TM, I see your ironic comment as most welcome. You could say it is a , _______ and ■ for you seem to have made a few catches.

The grammar of mythologies is a most intriguing topic, isn't it?

[The Might]

Well, since I notice that it's pretty pointless to post anything making sense, I'd like to say that it's this $ + € that really matters. :)

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Is popcorn the answer? No-one eats popcorn with their myths.

[Thinlómien]

This thread amuses me.

Just because this is the only thread you can talk about anything you wish and you don't need to be afraid of the chat skrewls. :Merisu:

[The Sixth Wizard]

I'm sure it can't last... Anyone want a bet on how long it will be until a mod swoops down on us?


No, I was only joking, ...argh, help I'm being simultaneously banned by The Barrow Wight, Estelyn, Legolas, Child, Rimbaud, mormegil and Pio!... :p

[Thenamir]

I am a mod, as is Bb, and we would have to ban ourselves -- an interesting mental picture to be sure.

Exceptions, in moderation (no mod pun intended), can be amusing and entertaining, but this is not a thread about nothing, nor a thread anout anything. SpM, Bb, and I are carrying on comparing bizarre ideas in true Downs fashion, though our parodic fashion taste may be perceived as somewhat skewed.

Towards that end, I'd like to address the value judgements being introduced to this conversation by The Might:I'd like to say that it's this $ + € that really matters. Being One-Who-Speaks-Only-One-Language-Fluently, i.e. an American, one might find it strange that I would object to the omission of "£", but as it has been around far longer than "$", and shows no sign of kowtowing to the upstart "€", the fierce independence of "£" is certainly worthy not only of mention but even of prominence. However, we are descending into mere speculation and opinion, since the relative values of $, €, and £ are subject to change almost moment-by-moment.

the "?" is unstable--really, it's a bit of a unicycle, a self-referring bit of circular argument that could threaten to create a rut more than a wide avenue for going forth with the topic.

Your point is well taken, but seriously, Bb, you can't preclude the legitimate use of something just because some choose to abuse it. The fact that the Downs has been one preeminent locus of circumlocution on the internet should not preclude those of mens sano who exercise their "?" (and even, in certain circumstances, a sparingly-used "?!") in proper order to prevent the rut from becoming a grave. Indeed, that which had been the shovel by which one might erringly excavate his/her own interring could indeed become the ladder by which one might effect an escape from the dreaded ditch.

Nevertheless, we must be ever the more watchful, as Bb rightly implies, lest our unsorted sorties become sordid.

The dot has the virtue of signifying landfall, as in "here beginneth a discussion", "at this point", "this spot flagged for further development." A little dot will do it.And all this time I thought it was "x" that marked the spot. :D

EDIT: I am lately made aware by the fair Miss Bb that she is no longer a mod. Which means I could admonish her for replying in kind to my semi-silliness, but with that pointed finger there would be at least three pointing back at me, and not on my own hand.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

And all this time I thought it was "x" that marked the spot.

'Tis a matter of interpretation, Master Thenamir. There are those who would contend that Xs are kisses...


(Just adding an additional mod voice to this "discussion", and no, I will not move it to 'Mirth' - this are serious thread, and we is serious mods!) :Merisu:

[piosenniel]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b261/kajedanimal/SquirrelBirthday.gif

Party on, dudes!

~*~ Pio ♥ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s63kzk9-RSc)

[alatar]

°

Unlike the solid period, the degree symbol is open, circular but unfulfilled, open to possibility. It exists above the baseline, above the everyday mundane and mud. Typed next to a number, the symbol can connote thermal energies, or the lack thereof. Or where we are, a pointer, on this arc called life.

Revolution!

Stacking two together, one above and below, we get the numeral 8, which, as we all know is just ∞ standing up, commanding attention, ready to move.

[The Might]

τηε μιγητ


I just had to do it. :)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

τηε μιγητ


I just had to do it. :)
Nice! Though actually, hmm, in reality it would be needed to be written somehow like "θε μιγχτ" (or this is the best I can think of) since "θ" is "th" and "η" is generally "é". But anyway, nice... *applause*

Uh-huh! Now mentioning it... what about * ? I wonder why no one mentioned it... of course... there are many and many associations with it, sure, many may be quite misleading, but... I just think it's something that deserves to be mentioned. I can't see why you avoided it so long... unless you were afraid? But why? Why should you worry to use it?

[Aiwendil]

And what of the pilcrow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilcrow), the solidus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidus_%28punctuation%29), the therefore sign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therefore_sign), and that strangest of newfangled punctuation marks, the interrobang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang)?

As for the startlingly insightful discussion so far on this thread, I can only add:

&

[Bêthberry]

And all this time I thought it was "x" that marked the spot.



'Tis a matter of interpretation, Master Thenamir. There are those who would contend that Xs are kisses...


Why, just so, and how right that our Mistress of Historical Romance would think of that interpretation. For my part, I contemplated the X but with a shrug rejected it, as I was sure that no one who remembers my five years here on the Downs would in any way take seriously a mark from me signifying illiteracy.

And I must generously thank our Modess pio for her Squirrel the Grey, as greys abound in my home town and are most socialable.


Stacking two ° together, one above and below, we get the numeral 8, which, as we all know is just ∞ standing up, commanding attention, ready to move.

That's looking more like a unicycle built for two, and there we are back again at Ms Zesty's kisses.


And what of the pilcrow, the solidus, the therefore sign, and that strangest of newfangled punctuation marks, the interrobang?



My siggie notwithstanding, I wouldn't stroke any key that produces an interrobang, at least not here at family-friendly BD, although possibly that is something Master Thena could handle.


Uh-huh! Now mentioning it... what about *

Say that three times in a row with a straight face. :D


τηε μιγητ


http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/edoom/cussing.gif :D


°


Now if I had used the degree symbol, people would have thought I was going for bellylaughs, with such a belly button sign, and then everyone would have been asking Fordim for a poll to see how many Downers have innies and how many have outies. Come to think of it, do you suppose the first elves had bellybuttons? or Aule's dwarves? or, even, the Ainur?

There, I think I've quite successfully brought this back to a right proper Tolkien topic.

[Finduilas]

For the first time on the BD I'm totally weirded out... AUGH!!!!!! :p

Okay, I do think that this thread is awesome, but I can't take it. So long!

OH! Before I leave, Bethberry, they are not "innies or outies" they are bellybuttons, or bellyditches.

[alatar]

That's looking more like a unicycle built for two, and there we are back again at Ms Zesty's kisses.
Note that, by definition, a unicycle has one wheel, a bicycle two, and two riders ride one tandem, unless we are speaking of the circus, then anything goes in the three rings, which brings us back 'round again.


Now if I had used the degree symbol, people would have thought I was going for bellylaughs, with such a belly button sign, and then everyone would have been asking Fordim for a poll to see how many Downers have innies and how many have outies.
How tall are you?!? :eek: If you see a superscript as being in the mid range, then the rest of us, or at least me, are hobbit-heighted in comparison. It's not like I subscripted the superscripted O, but placed it in its lofty perch at the top of the line, and yet you still look down upon it.


Come to think of it, do you suppose the first elves had bellybuttons?Yes. What else could Elu Thingol and Melian have been doing, standing there for a year, other than be happily navel-gazing?

[Holbytlass]

OH! Before I leave, Bethberry, they are not "innies or outies" they are bellybuttons, or bellyditches.
Bellyditches?! Eeww. That just sounds so wrong! My apologies to those who are accustomed to that term but it conjurs up a mental picture of abnormalacies that go way beyond even "outies" :D. Even Dictionary.com agrees with me in that ditches are "long, narrow excavations..." unless there is something going on, on the other side of the world, that even Discovery Health won't touch!

[Finduilas]

Bellyditches?! Eeww. That just sounds so wrong! My apologies to those who are accustomed to that term but it conjurs up a mental picture of abnormalacies that go way beyond even "outies" :D. Even Dictionary.com agrees with me in that ditches are "long, narrow excavations..." unless there is something going on, on the other side of the world, that even Discovery Health won't touch!

Lol. I thought it sounded better than bellyholes or bellypits

[Thenamir]

Since I weigh something close to the equivalent of two smallish adults (three, if they're petite women), mine might be more accurately described as a bellycavern. Most bellybuttons have lint -- mine has sheep.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/images/chatskwerl.jpg

I have allowed this thread some leniency, but the current subject is so far off-topic that I must draw a line!

[Thenamir]

I must draw a line!

Perfectly understandable, Esty. Perhaps _____? or maybe a dashed -----? Or you could be even more emphatic and do a double, ======?

Feel free to draw whatever line you choose -- several, if you've the notion.

[Lhunardawen]

But Esty can always go for more...princessy lines, such as this: ~~~~~

[the guy who be short]

I have to attack the prevailing prejudice against verticals, without which such important things as cartography and mechanics could not exist.

¦ |
¦ |
¦ |
¦ |
¦ |

Would be just as good. But let us not forget diagonals, with which Esty could demonstrate the potential trajectory of anybody to be expelled from this thread.

........./.........\
......./.............\
...../.................\
.../.....................\
./.........................\

And who said a line has to be straight anyway?

./..........................___
|........................./......\
.\.......^...............\__
...\__/....\__^............\
....................\....____/
......................\/


Is not only just as good, but expresses an unpredictability that, coupled with a threat, would be sure to strike fear into the hearts of those who dare chat.

[Aiwendil]

And who said a line has to be straight anyway?

Euclid.

[Thenamir]

the current subject is so far off-topic... Hmmm...I guess to bring the thread back on topic, I'd have to respond as follows:

??

[Bêthberry]

And who said a line has to be straight anyway?


Euclid.

Memory's a bit dim of my math days, but didn't he merely define a line rather than prove its nature?


Hmmm...I guess to bring the thread back on topic, I'd have to respond as follows:

??

I suspect that the attempted Tolkien subtopic of bellybuttons was getting too close to the delicate condition of our Moddess's most famous Tolkien RPG character, MeriSue, who is, as some Downers may not know, in a certain condition. Perhaps we may combine both the original topic and my attempted Tolkien related topic (which is a very serious question, as it has concerned generations of historians of Western Art in their deliberations over the depictions of Adam and Eve).

I bet in her current condition MeriSue's bellybutton would look so:

(*)

[alatar]

Hmmm...I guess to bring the thread back on topic, I'd have to respond as follows:

??
Don't you mean ?????, as, technically, there were five Istari - men with staves, or crooks.

But, as an update, maybe we should have ?¿¬¬¬ , as only Gandalf stayed true, Saruman's dead, and no one knows what happened to the two true blue or the brownie.

With that said, what would ! be?

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

~

[The Saucepan Man]

To take this thread off at a slight tangent, but on a point nevertheless referable to the original post, if one points one's mouse at the title of this thread on the Active Topics page (assuming the standard mouse pointer scheme), one can give one's link select pointer a nice cuff with a cufflink. Make it dressed up for dinner as 'twere.

Just thought that I'd mention it, in case anyone found it relevant to the topic ...

;)

[Aiwendil]

Memory's a bit dim of my math days, but didn't he merely define a line rather than prove its nature?


Exactly.

[Thenamir]

Vote now! "∞", "?", "." ---- Defend your position! This poll is public, and you will be called on to support your choice!

[Rumil]

Im surprised that only one other person has voted on this poll so far

I went for ... which to me symbolises to be continued repesenting hope for the future and therefore optimism perhaps we could mount a campaign to change ... to estel but an environmental impact assessment would undoubtedly find that excessive use of ink is associated with estel in comparison with ... so I have abjured any alternative use of punctuation in favour of ... for this missive

[Folwren]

The question mark is best. If people were to ask more questions, perhaps more people would have answers. Certainly more people would get answers. As it is, no one asks. And when no one asks, no one can answer.

-- Folwren

[the phantom]

#

[alatar]

The question mark is best. If people were to ask more questions, perhaps more people would have answers. Certainly more people would get answers. As it is, no one asks. And when no one asks, no one can answer.
Much agreed, but I'm still sticking with ¿, as who wants to get the standard set of questions which have been answered many times already anyway...

"To crooked eyes truth may wear a wry face," ergo to uncrooked eyes truth may face rye.

[Bêthberry]

I think we missed one, Thena.

@

[Folwren]

"This is where it's at" is incorrect grammar - you are aware of that, aren't you?

[Thenamir]

It should be "This is the place at which it is."

[Bêthberry]

In the immortal words of Winston Churchill, "That is a comment up with which I will not put."

[The Sixth Wizard]

In the immortal words of Winston Churchill, "That is a comment up with which I will not put."

That reference to Winston reminded me of something my father told me... Something along the lines of "the first person to mention Hitler automatically loses the argument".

:D:D:D

Oh and I went for "?!" because the mixture of alarm and confusion always triggers something in me.

[Hilde Bracegirdle]

Mythologies = ∞
Movie = *$ & !*

I'd opt for ∞ as I'm in a more laid back frame of mind just now, despite the perpetual motion inherent in it.

****<*)))><

More fun with character mapping. Aiwendel, many thanks for introducing a new host of names to go with some familiar and some not so familiar characters. Solidus (/) and his brother Virgule (\) I imagine would feel right at home among the Noldor, slashing away beneath the Thangordrim....

And as far as lines go, I doubt that Euclid had to stand in one at an amusement park, (were they are seldom completely straight), or traveled along the railroad line, or had to hold the line. But that isn't his fault, now is it? Does ignorance of these things make for purer mathematics?

[Rikae]

~ I have to second Fordim's vote for "~"
It is graceful and balanced, having a delicate radial symmetry and the continuously but gently shifting directions that Burke used to define the beautiful (as opposed to the sublime, which is better represented by %$$^$%).
It diplomatically offers the possibility that there may be more to be said, but does not interrogate like "?", or tease the reader like the evasive "...", and it sets off the text in a decorative and artistic fashion ~

[Rikae]

While '.' carries the ultimate simplicity of a full-stop, the elegance of a single point in space, it is nevertheless the cold finality of the finishing of a thought expressed, allowing no extension and brooking no opposition. '?' leaves open the possibility of a '.' to be had in the future, perhaps at the end of all things, but to assert '.' from our limited perspective at present is mere presumption.

Is that your final statement?

[alatar]

~ I have to second Fordim's vote for "~"
It is graceful and balanced, having a delicate radial symmetry and the continuously but gently shifting directions that Burke used to define the beautiful (as opposed to the sublime, which is better represented by %$$^$%).
It diplomatically offers the possibility that there may be more to be said, but does not interrogate like "?", or tease the reader like the evasive "...", and it sets off the text in a decorative and artistic fashion ~

Are you serious?!?! Have you considered the far-reaching implications of such a choice? Sure, it looks pretty, but it oscillates up and down, and as soon as it breaks free from the delicate bounds of that radial symmetry, then what? What will that wildly vibrating tilda do when it grows up and looks to walk beyond the asymptotic fences that keep us all safe? And the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics practically guarantees that this will happen.

Wild speculation? I typed ~ into Google and nothing happened. Nothing! I almost typed ~~, but thankfully did not - we all may not be here if I did.

I hope that you reconsider your choice.

;)

[Thenamir]

Is that your final statement?Maybe?

I am glad to see that the "?" is leading the poll.

[Firefoot]

?!

^My reaction to this thread... :p

It's much more interesting than a plain ? - it implies more emotion, whether excitement, shock, outrage, a new breakthrough...

Although personally, I think it is aesthetically more pleasing written as "!?".

[Folwren]

You surprise me, Firefoot. Being such a great writer as you are, surely you know that "?!" is not legal, so far as grammar and its laws are concerned?

I guess it's a little better than "!!", though not by much.

-- Foley

[Bêthberry]

This being post # 72 on this thread, such evidence would, I think, put to rest Thenamir's objections to my original . .

In my humble opinion, '?' is to be preferred, leaving as it does a sense of the mystery, of searching out the unknown, of the pursuit of further knowledge. By contrast '.' is almost an obscenity, declaring as it does that there is no more to be said, a prejudicial epithet to the yearning of the human psyche to discover, to explore.

While '.' carries the ultimate simplicity of a full-stop, the elegance of a single point in space, it is nevertheless the cold finality of the finishing of a thought expressed, allowing no extension and brooking no opposition. '?' leaves open the possibility of a '.' to be had in the future, perhaps at the end of all things, but to assert '.' from our limited perspective at present is mere presumption.

Just look at the plethora of positions, points of view, and punctuation pecadillos which that . prompted to explanation and elaboration and extenuation. Proof positive that there is no finality, no limit upon the ingenuity of Downers who never leave a thought finished.

Truly we Dead do belong to the endlessness of Infinity.


:D

[alatar]

Truly we Dead do belong to the endlessness of Infinity.
All that flowery language aside, you forgot to factor in the facility for a few of we Dead to flog hoary failed fallen fathers of foals. ;)

And !? looks too much like a futuristic 'R' for my endorsement.

[Firefoot]

You surprise me, Firefoot. Being such a great writer as you are, surely you know that "?!" is not legal, so far as grammar and its laws are concerned?
Of course. But grammar has also always been frightfully dull to me... sometimes informal illegalities are needed to spice it up. See, look at this post - "of course" is a fragment, and the next sentence starts with a conjunction. "!?" fits nicely into that little club.

[Rikae]

:DAre you serious?!?! Have you considered the far-reaching implications of such a choice? Sure, it looks pretty, but it oscillates up and down, and as soon as it breaks free from the delicate bounds of that radial symmetry, then what? What will that wildly vibrating tilda do when it grows up and looks to walk beyond the asymptotic fences that keep us all safe? And the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics practically guarantees that this will happen.

Wild speculation? I typed ~ into Google and nothing happened. Nothing! I almost typed ~~, but thankfully did not - we all may not be here if I did.

I hope that you reconsider your choice.

;)

You have only made me more convinced! "~" clearly represents the dynamic feminine archetype, a necessary counterbalance to the stagnation of the static masculine ".", the aggressive dynamic masculine "?", and the static feminine degree sign (which my keyboard lacks; making me feel like a motherless child...), and all the more necessary in the unfairly static, musty and patriarchical atmosphere that has been erroneously asssociated with "mythology". That "vibration" is a creative force, without which motion, time, space and life could not exist.
I wonder, Alatar, if your unease about my unpredictable "~" has anything to do with your earlier implication that I could be the destructive being which appeared in your dream...:D

By the way, Google is overrated!

[alatar]

and the static feminine degree sign (which my keyboard lacks; making me feel like a motherless child...),
° ° ° ° ° ;)
It's not on my keyboard either, but Google does provide the answer...

That "vibration" is a creative force, without which motion, time, space and life could not exist.
That 'vibration' would be quantum mechanics or a very bad hard drive in the computer on your desk; I wonder just how many times you need to type your beloved tilda before you reboot time, space and life as we know it.

I wonder, Alatar, if your unease about my unpredictable "~" has anything to do with your earlier implication that I could be the destructive being which appeared in your dream...:D

Please continue to implicate yourself...conscience getting the best of you perhaps? (typical behaviour for tildaphiles - commit the crime on the downswing then 'fess up when curving positively). ;)

[Bêthberry]

All that flowery language aside, you forgot to factor in the facility for a few of we Dead to flog hoary failed fallen fathers of foals. ;)

And !? looks too much like a futuristic 'R' for my endorsement.


There is, of course, always a caveat to such flogging. When it is done creatively and imaginatively it will fulfil the prime edict of comedy, which is to provide the unexpected, the unanticipated, the unforeseen, a shock which wakes up the old failed fallen fathers of foals and gets them moving again. A veritable ؛ ؛


However, when it tends to ride that fallen father of foals as an aged hobby horse, ad finitum, well, then of course it does create the yawning gap of tedium whereby the one trick pony doubtless would be better off in a glue factory. Such a symbol would indeed be a black hole, aka, a bullet in the brain of delight •

[tar-ancalime]

You surprise me, Firefoot. Being such a great writer as you are, surely you know that "?!" is not legal, so far as grammar and its laws are concerned?

I guess it's a little better than "!!", though not by much.

-- Foley

It's a perfectly acceptable form of punctuation! It even has a name, which is my favorite thing about it:

It's called the INTERROBANG ?!

[Thenamir]

Now that the poll is closed, I am quite pleased to see that my initial favorite, the '?' did indeed win the overall poll, but with a mere plurality of 25%. All hail the Question Mark -- Herald of Answers-Yet-To-Be! :D