Bad words (Re: Some finer points of grammar)

[Thomas Vieth]

>From owner-pynchon-l at waste.org Sat May 10 06:35:57 1997
>Received: by waste.org id <162007-10653>; Sat, 10 May 1997 08:26:29 -0500
>Message-ID: <3373D8B8.6239 at pacbell.net>
>Date:	Fri, 09 May 1997 19:08:56 -0700
>From:	Unknown User <RAYGONNE at pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: RAYGONNE at pacbell.net
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-PBWG  (Win95; U)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To:	pynchon-l at waste.org, still lookin 4 the face i had b4 the world was made 
<traveler at afn.org>
>Subject: Re: Bad words (Re: Some finer points of grammar)
>References: <Pine.A32.3.95.970508154926.51101E-100000 at freenet2.afn.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: owner-pynchon-l at waste.org
>Precedence: bulk
>
>still lookin 4 the face i had b4 the world was made wrote:
>> 
>> _M&D_ spoilers, sorta...
>> 
>> On Thu, 8 May 1997, Jeremy Osner wrote:
>> >
>> > It's interesting that many curse words are bleeped out (for instance
>> > d---l), but fuck is not. Any thoughts?
>> 
>> This would be the distinction between profanity (religious oaths--"hell,"
>> "damn," "Christ," etc.) and obscenity (relating to bodily functions--"fuck,"
>> shit," arse/ass," etc.).  I have been told that northern European cultures
>> have tended to frown more on obscenity than profanity, while Mediterranean
>> cultures are the other way around.  This suggests a southern relaxation
>> about body functions but greater seriousness about religion, and a northern
>> uptightness about sex, excretion, etc., but more tolerance of "blasphemous"
>> language.
>> 
>> Can anyone else offer any insights?  By the logic of what I just posted,
>> M and D, being Brits, should be more uptight about "fuck" than "Devil"
>> or "damn."  Maybe "D----" and "d---'d" are just 18th-c. conventions in
>> English printing/writing...
>> 
>> Max
>> 
>>  M a x i m u s  D a v i d  C l a r k e | What a wonderful butler.
>>           http://www.afn.org/~traveler | He's so violent!
>>                  "Surrealist-At-Large" | --The Doctor, in _Dr. Who_:
>>                       traveler at afn.org | "City of Death"
>m & d do seem to be uptight about blasphemous language, and if i
>remember correctly, their dialogue is characterized by hyphen-censors.
>this conversation has been enlightening, since i wondered the same thing
>as i read, and though i really like the idea that cherrycoke
>('real-time' storyteller) and m&d (somewhat reserved brits) speak in
>censored blasphemies, i'm not quite sure the book is consistent in that
>respect. i am convinced that there is some method to pynchon's approach,
>but i haven't figured it out yet. most helpful idea so far was the one
>about cinematic sliding ie a storyteller in a movie begins a tale and we
>(the audience) hear first his voice, then see what he's describing (to
>his voiceover), then his voice drops away and we're there. if anyone can
>pull this off (outside of stephen wright, NOT the comic), it's pynchon.
>ray
>
At one point Dixon says: "I am no fucking Jesuit". Being no native speaker this 
still somehow struck me as anachronistic, since I always thought that this type 
of expression was fairly contemporary. But I don't know. BTW, "damme" occurs on 
almost every page.
Thomas


---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------