No, I'm not celebrating the geniuses of absurdist writers like Samuel Beckett and his lot. I'm talking about having nonsensical conversations just for the sake of having them: not to decrease brain cells (well, maybe just a bit) but just to have a bit of fun talking about the silliest stuff without worrying if you're saying the wrong thing, because in absurd conversations, everything you say is right (or wrong, it's a matter of perspective). It relaxes one's mind from everyday concerns that would otherwise fill up one's thought. Seriously. Instead of making a person a bit stupider because of the sheer idiocy of the topics, it would just help one to focus on a different thing, for a change. If one is lucky, a person can actually learn trivia that could be asked in game shows, if one decides to enter one someday (you never know).
I spent last night in the company of twenty-plus-old people, and by the end of the evening, our conversation was reduced to discussing the merits of cabbages. I did learn a bunch of other stuff though, an assortment of stuff that would make one think or wince, like the following:
(1) That to call a person an insect would be an insult, but if s/he is called a bug, it's simply cute
(2) That there is a good reason why cabbages are planted in furrows
(3) That elephants were not given wings simply because it would be disastrous if it decided to land on a person (whether the ears are supported by bones or cartilage is a different question, though)
(4) That TVs shouldn't be displayed in establishments unless they have cable TV, and that the cable should be connected from the outside. To display them with the rabbit antennas would be stupid; to display them just for the sake of showing them off is just pa-cool and will not accomplish anything. Better to have them replaced by steel windows instead
(5) That "doughnut" spelled as "donut" is just jologs. Besides, to spell it like that would be teleologically incorrect, as it would mean "do nut", such that the "o" should be replaced by a "u" to make it correct
(6) That the word "carpet" does not have anything to do with automobiles or household critters, but is actually derived from a foreign word
(7) That snails don't actually make the "shluck" sound while crawling (or whatever it is that you call the movement of snails)
(8) That "abundant" can be translated in a different way: "many-many" (complete with a rolling hand gesture)
(9) That promotion in a tree-measuring company might actually just be a conspiracy, because you only get to measure bigger trees, but it doesn't mean a better job
(10) That straight circles actually exist, as long as they lie on a flat surface
Some questions were left unanswered though, like:
(1) Why doughnuts are called doughnuts, and bagels bagels; alternatively, what is the doughnut-ness of a doughnut and the bagel-ness of a bagel?
(2) Whether black plants are actually proven to exist
(3) Why pretzels have that shape that make them hard to fit in the oven (I'm not sure about this one)
(4) Why doughnuts and bagels (at least some of them) have to have holes in the middle, which is just a waste of production effort
Doughnut conversation, anyone?:D
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
That was such a fun night! We had "many many" laughs! :D
totally agree.:D One of the best nights I've had for the longest time.:D
A very profound question entered my head just now...
Where did pumpernickel bread get its name? I mean, bread's not like shoes or coins, right?
Ok, "duh" moment over. But seriously though, where did the name "pumpernickel bread" come from?
I finally have a decent answer to the doughnut-bagel question, and I came up with that while walking alone (I recommend walking to people who want to think clearly. It helps out a huge deal). The answer, as you guys pointed out, lies in metaphysics, or more specifically, in the value of transcendence. Simply put, a bagel cannot be called a "huge/large/enormous/big/gargantuan (whatever-else-is synonymous) doughnut because it is transcendental to eat; that is, it is a completely different from a doughnut. In many aspects, it is similar to a doughnut, and yet, it is different, hence, it is given a different name. Putting it even more simply, saying that bagels are just big doughnuts is like saying a ten-wheeler is just a big convertible. You can't classify them together simply because they're different. Transcendence doesn't only mean a shift, but that it is completely different; not just a tweaking of mindset but a whole horizon makeover.
(And so I finally answer a question I started four years ago. How... quaint.)
whaddyaknow... it's metaphysics after all. Pero it's true, every being is different, that's why they have different names, to show that they are not the same thing (did it make sense? hope it did) :p
Yeah, dude! I so totally get what you are saying! That's one of the things I was trying to explain last night. A bagel wouldn't have been called a bagel if it were the same as a doughnut, right? Right.
Post a Comment