jeudi, novembre 09, 2006

To Critique or not to Critique

The lifting of all obstacles to anonymous commenting on J'accuse has allowed the good old "anonymous" to return. This time I will enjoy his/her presence - whoever he or she may be. I did notice that others too who would have found creating a Blogger ID too tedious now manage to post comments at ease. Good Good. The more comments the better the discussion.

Two particular comments intrigued me this week. They both came in yesterday and both caused me to giggle uncontrollably. The reason the two comments were written is partially as a reaction to the unmitigated provocation that this blog tends to generate when criticising this or that website or article. Our TGIL posts have become stuff of legend and an appointment that is eagerly anticipated by many of our esteemed purveyors of all that is J'Accuse. We do not reserve the prickly pen of painful criticism solely for the Dame of the Gramatically Unconstructive - rather we have spread our blogging wings and flown over Hogan's, Di-ve's and other budding blunderers of this world.

So enjoy these two gems from the commenting world. I thought I should share them with you since they are posted on previous posts which have been relegated into the Bellagio Vault. I shall be breaking one of the laws of chivalry by speaking about the Knights before the Dames.

First the Knights
Offending Post: Up the Knights!
Comment by: Matthew Paris (author to Mdina Knights portal write-ups)

I will not retaliate to your unconstructive and inept criticism to my articles, I will simply limit myself to write that, your serious of write-up’s related to Mdina Knights FC, has substantiated my call that, indeed MKFC did manage to attract a considerable amount of Media coverage and a larger amount of followers – which do also include a number of lone Maltesers based abroad.

Dr. Jekyll – I value your comments:)
Matthew Paris – Author to Mdina Knights FC portal write-ups
I like this comment. Firstly because Mr Paris understood the jesting spirit with which the offending post was penned. Secondly because the very subject of the jest - overuse of bombastic, badly placed words to express basic ideas - is also present in the comment itself. And I have a strong suspicion that Mr Paris is an individual who has fully understood the humorous side of it all and is pulling his own leg there. Any doubt that I harboured quickly vanished with the last part of the comment... "Dr. Jekyll.... I value your comments" adorned with smiley.

Well done Matthew and well done once again MKFC. Just polish up the web site language. You need simple English... after all the game is about the pitch and not the prose. Otherwise I am sure your club will go a long way and - as I have already said - you have been adopted by J'accuse as its mascot team for which we have loads of sympathy and support.

And oh... if you have time... do change that horrendous badge.

Then the Dames
Offending Post: In Vin a Veritas (TGIL)
Comment by: Anonymous (but the comment is peppered with clues about the identity)
I can never get myself to understand how someone can critique something without even watching it. That is the problem, we ignorant human beings think that we can judge anything at face-value, without delving into the subject matter and trying to understand the why and how of certain happenings. Well i'm sorry that you are so unaware of your own ignorance, for he who judges a piece of work he has not seen, must be ignorant.
Good Lord. "I" and "myself" in the first five words of the sentence. Then we use the word "critique". See what has to say about usage of the word as a verb:

Critique has been used as a verb meaning “to review or discuss critically” since the 18th century, but lately this usage has gained much wider currency, in part because the verb criticize, once neutral between praise and censure, is now mainly used in a negative sense. But this use of critique is still regarded by many as pretentious jargon, although resistance appears to be weakening.
Well, well. Someone who speaks alot about "I myself" and uses "pretentious jargon". As for any remaining doubts to the authorship I also noted the invitation to "delve deeper into the subject matter". Which reminded me a lot of "Especially appealing to Francophiles, this year I have taken the opportunity to delve deeper into the mystical French language as well as its psyche": which is a phrase taken from the article by Lorna that was being criticised in this post, which post was being attacked by Anonymous.

That's three wiches in the last sentence, and speaking of wiches we must come to the message left by not-so-Anonymous. Basically I am being berated for criticising (I'd love to say critiquing) without seeing. Ignorance I must confess. Ignorance of the play in its Maltese form. Ignorance of the play with abridged Maltese names as translated by the Gramatically Challenged. But ignorant of the article penned by the Dame to promote the play I am not. And that, my dear, was the subject of my post. And that was what was so visciously dissected much to the amusement of the onlookers in this 21st century version of the Pan Circenses. I did not "critique" the play but its promotion. What I did say is that based on the presentation of the play in Lorna's article, I would rather be seen in an MLPN General Conference front seat waving a handkerchief than subject myself to the bastardisation by the Gramatically Inept of a French play.

Ignorantia grammaticae neminem excusat, Lorna. And that counts for you too Anonymous. :)

And finally
Thank you to Andre who implied in one of his comments that this blog comes up with a "classic quote" every now and then. See Anonymous... I got some fans too!

To conclude. Just keep commenting. The Good, The Bad and the Ugly. We like them all.

Aucun commentaire: