To what extent are TBM/Apologist tastes Brethren-directed?

[_Paul Osborne]

Come on. You know my tastes better than anybody else on the planet does. You know that my preferences in music, art, literature, drama, humor, and film are spoon-fed to me by the Brethren, and that I'm an unadventurous cultural dinosaur who belongs back in the days of Ozzie and Harriet. This should be child's play for an omniscient genius such as yourself.

Wow. Lo, I say if Scratch can do this you must proclaim him to be a prophet. He can start a new church in which you will pay 10%. Deal?



Paul O

[_Gadianton]

That really, really rankles you, I take it. To be still smarting from it, years after the fact, is pretty sad.

Absolutely. Yes, I felt a great deal of class envy because of this. And you might be right that I've taken it too seriously and carried around the rocks too long. However, your entire response, right that it might be in this case, was a sly change of subject.

You asked if any of the other apologists had revealed their cultural dinosaurary through a long campaign of "safe", Brethren-friendly name and place dropping. And I simply pointed out that as filtered through your representation of them here, most certainly they have. I guess you didn't have a good counter to the direct answer I gave to your question.

Anyway, while it might not be much to offer in comparison to your usual entertainment options, you and your Mopologist friends are welcome to stop by on Thursday night for chamber music at my home. My harpsichord has been repaired and is sounding fantastic.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Well, congratulations, Dr. Peterson. You *own* the film! Well, that certainly clinches it for you! I'll bet that you went out and bought it after I mentioned it. Either that, or your special "journal of artistic and literary criticism" told you that you should like it, and so you did.

Nope. And, again, nope. We've owned it for a while now.

Behold, Edgy-and-Scratchy, the perils of pretend mind-reading and of making things up.

Now, Edgy-and-Scratchy, back to my questions:

1) Based on your intimate and damning knowledge of my musical preferences, describe the three musical works that my wife and I have commissioned. (Hint: Two of them were completed several years ago. The third is nearly finished.)

2) Based on your intimate personal knowledge of my tastes and my aesthetic, name the journal of artistic and literary criticism to which I subscribe. If you would like, I will happily send its title to somebody else on the message board, so that you won't have to fear my manipulation of the answer.

Come on. You know my tastes better than anybody else on the planet does. You know that my preferences in music, art, literature, drama, humor, and film are spoon-fed to me by the Brethren, and that I'm an unadventurous cultural dinosaur who belongs back in the days of Ozzie and Harriet. This should be child's play for an omniscient genius such as yourself.

For the journal, Liz has suggested Entertainment Weekly. Is she right?

Hello there, Dr. Peterson.

Imagine my surprise when, after clicking on the thread to read the new post from Dr. Robbers, I discovered that you'd written up quite an addition to what was, initially, just a little jab from you! At first, the sum of your post was:

Nope. And, again, nope. We've owned it for a while now.

Behold, Edgy-and-Scratchy, the perils of pretend mind-reading and of making things up.

I wonder what possessed you to type out the additional questions? In any event, I'm not dumb enough to play your silly games. We both know the answer, which is that in both cases, the works in question are Church-friendly and Brethren-sanctioned. The very fact that you want to try and play a guessing game with this only cements my point. Sure, you may want to own "edgy" "indie" films like In Bruges so that you can *feel* like you are participating in the larger culture, but the truth is that you have to "enjoy" these things surreptitiously. You wouldn't dare name-drop these sorts of things publicly on the boards, because it would be tantamount to openly defying the Brethren. The situation is rather like how, when you're dining out, you have to ask the sommelier which will pair better with the fish course: the Chateau 7-Up, or the Domaine de la Diet Coke. It's fine and dandy to pretend that one "gets" the culture; but pretending is just that---pretending.

In any event, I'm off to attend the Christopher Marlowe Festival, after which I plan on retiring to my study, where I shall stand before my mirror, practicing my affectations. (Here's a tip: when saying, "Pip! Pip!" one should always thrust one's chin slightly forward.) Once I move past the beginning stage, I plan on teaching myself to make my face go slackly truculent whenever I make solemn mention of the seriousness of Mopologetics.

[_Daniel Peterson]

In any event, I'm not dumb enough to play your silly games.

Because, of course, despite your posing, you don't actually know much at all about what I read, look at, listen to, watch, attend, collect, laugh at. You just make things up. And, as sheer chance would have it, everything you make up casts me in a negative light. What a surprise!

You couldn't begin to guess which journal I subscribe to, or say anything about the three pieces that my wife and I have commissioned. Yet, somehow, despite your virtually complete ignorance about what I actually like, you feel qualified to judge my taste in music, literature, drama, humor, and art.

We both know the answer, which is that in both cases, the works in question are Church-friendly and Brethren-sanctioned.

How, pray tell, have the Brethren "sanctioned" them?

What journal of literary and artistic criticism have the Brethren "sanctioned," O Hip One?

You continue to make things up.

The very fact that you want to try and play a guessing game with this only cements my point.

Sure it does, Edgy-'n-Scratchy.

Sure, you may want to own "edgy" "indie" films like In Bruges so that you can *feel* like you are participating in the larger culture

If you can really read minds, Edgy-'n-Scratchy, why don't you prove it by naming the journal of artistic and literary criticism to which I subscribe?

I watched a foreign-language film tonight, O Sophisticated One. What language was it in? What was its title? I watched a foreign-language film on Saturday night, too. Can you name it? Can you identify its language? How about just identifying the language of one of the two?

You see, Edgy-'n-Scratchy? You don't even know what films I watch. Yet (because -- drum roll -- you've seen In Bruges, with those exotic, radical, countercultural, actors Colin Farrell and Ralph Fiennes!!!) you nonetheless presume to judge my taste in movies. You simply make things up. That might not seem nuts to you, but I'm reasonably confident that it will seem crazy to any normal, rational person who reads this exchange -- if any such person ever does.

but the truth is that you have to "enjoy" these things surreptitiously.

Well, it's true that I've never had skywriters proclaim any of this in the air above General Conference. Is that what you mean?

Or do you mean, by surreptitiously, that none of your creepy network of anonymous "informants" have been able to provide you with any files on these things? Even going through my trash cans wouldn't help you, poor Cool One, because I don't throw them away.

You wouldn't dare name-drop these sorts of things publicly on the boards, because it would be tantamount to openly defying the Brethren.

And how, exactly, would it do that?

Do you seriously want to suggest that, if I were to reveal that I had commissioned an atonal chamber concerto or that I subscribe to Cahiers du cinéma, one of the Brethren's fifteen million message board monitors would see it and report it, and the Brethren would feel betrayed?

This is nuthouse territory, Edgy-'n-Scratchy.

pretending is just that---pretending.

Indeed.

In words that a memorable musical prophecy of the 1950s placed in your mouth:

"Oh yes, I'm the great pretender
Pretending that I'm doing well
My need is such, I pretend too much
I'm lonely but no one can tell."

[_Yoda]

Sure, you may want to own "edgy" "indie" films like In Bruges so that you can *feel* like you are participating in the larger culture, but the truth is that you have to "enjoy" these things surreptitiously. You wouldn't dare name-drop these sorts of things publicly on the boards, because it would be tantamount to openly defying the Brethren.

Isn't that what he just did???

Daniel just "admitted", on a public message board, no less, that he *gasp* owned an R rated film.

Should he expect a call from the brethren in the morning?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Sure, you may want to own "edgy" "indie" films like In Bruges so that you can *feel* like you are participating in the larger culture, but the truth is that you have to "enjoy" these things surreptitiously. You wouldn't dare name-drop these sorts of things publicly on the boards, because it would be tantamount to openly defying the Brethren.

Isn't that what he just did???

Daniel just "admitted", on a public message board, no less, that he *gasp* owned an R rated film.

Should he expect a call from the brethren in the morning?

“Men occasionally stumble over the truth," Winston Churchill once said, "but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”

In this regard, if in virtually no other, Scratch is entirely human. I predict that this won't faze him a bit. The campaign will continue, unabated. He'll continue to pronounce damning judgment on things of which he knows nothing. He'll continue to simply make stuff up.

[_EAllusion]

My harpsichord has been repaired and is sounding fantastic.

OMFG! Liar! Liar. Liiiaaaaaarrrrrr!