I make irrelevant comments because it's late.

Read somewhere between tonight and tomorrow morning:

The remaining cells die via apoptosis (programmed cell death).

Yeah, biology textbook. Point is this:

wouldn't Programmed Cell Death be the greatest name ever for a Techno Punk Rock Band?!

I know, right? Now you can return to what actually matters in your life.

I am just me

So. I start every post I write with "I . . . " followed by some action verb. Rob has indicated that this at times grates on his nerves, and asks me why I do it. Now I think this question answers itself, but I wanted to give a public defense of my habit because it says something about me and about how I blog. Here goes. 

Josh Gibbs' The Cedar Room influenced how I think about blogging more than I can really say (thus Rob's jab about copycat-etry). It was the first real blog I ever read, and I read it for nearly three years. It was cool, smart, well-written, and only rarely got above itself. Yet Josh always started his posts with the phrase "We are." At least, after he was married. Before that it was "I am." In a post I've long since lost track of, Josh talked about why he did this, and said that it reminded him of what he was supposed to be doing while typing away on the internets. 

I think this is very wise, and so I copied him. See, when I say "I ..." what I'm trying to do is make the reader realize that this is not some sort of encyclopedia, some vault of knowledge, some authority sitting in cyberspace. It's not even as trustworthy as Wikipedia isn't. It's just me, a very, very white freshman in college sitting in a two-bedroom apartment typing away just for the heck of it. My words are more often than not rash, foolish, and startlingly ill-informed. They're just that: my words.

Why is it "I" and not "We?" Well, like I said, when Josh used it it was because he got hitched, so I just avoided it cause that's not me. A friend of ours  already introduces us as "Rob and his partner Kaleb," so I get skittish around these sorts of things. And besides, if I make some absurd claim that Rob doesn't agree with, you can't expect him to go to the stake defending it. I've probably said or will say at some point that I believe that the death penalty should be used in America pretty much exactly like the Old Testament says it should be in Israel (yes, rebellious kids, witches, adulterers, and homosexuals all come under that). Rob doesn't agree with this, so I'd title the post "I call for blood" or something, because it's not "We call for blood." It's just little old me. But if this habit is indeed bugging everyone, I'll shut-up already and move on. What thinkest thee? 

Homonymity is not a choice: A response to Kaleb's response to my. . . whatever he called it

'Sup peoples?

Hear's what I think:

Some words are just dyeing to be misused. I think "their" has always wished that it could be demonstrative, and "there" can't shake the desire to be possessive. These words don't have a choice. After all, who would choose to have to endure all the stigma of being wrong all the time? And they have an excuse - if anybody asks, they were just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

I give these words a place to roam free, and be what they want to be. They need not be confined under the weight of "correct" English grammar. After all, what is correct grammar and word usage anyway? Just the arbitrary whims of thinking people who have the time to write dictionaries and style books. Forget what they say.

Whose with me?

The Rob Noland Center for Misplaced and Abused Words

Well, I found out something truly amazing a couple days ago. Kaleb hates homonyms! He's what we would call a dehomonyzer, a mahomynist, an anti-homonitic, take your pick. I would say he's a homophobe, but that means something very different (which is rather ironic, isn't it?). In short, he's very intolerant of homonyms.

I however, have much sympathy with homonyms. I have often had the feeling that I'm not where I belong. For example, sometimes I get the idea that I've wandered into the wrong apartment; strengthened by the terrified screams and painful anti-intruder mechanisms (baseball bats) they tend to use. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is. Same building, right? What's the difference? Sheesh. Get a grip people.

Anyway. . .

Inasmuch as I believe that their aren't enough homonyms in Kaleb's posts; I'm going to let homonyms in to mine. I want my posts to be a haven for abused words. I want them to feel that they are always welcome to come into my posts, and be just as wrong as they want to be. After all, they can't help what they are - that is how Webster made them. So, Whose with me?

The only hitch is, I can't have to many, or the post would get overcrowded. Therefore, I will try to have at least one, and not more than 10 in each post. (I might even try to smuggle some into Kaleb's posts. Who knows?)


N.B. I am not actually in favor of unlawful entry into other people's rented rooms. I pretty much stick to my own quarter's in this venerable establishment. And alas, I haven't actually been attacked with a baseball bat during my stay at the "Moscow Hotel".