28207, This argument is an abomination to humankind.|
Posted by Orbit_Established, Sun Aug-21-05 06:10 PM
>firstly, metaphors aren't supposed to be connected with their
>subject, as you ought to know
Actually, they are.
Discussing the differences between the imperial/metric system is merely a difference between two countries. Discussing any difference at all is not helpful for discussing differences in moral codes. Again, I could use the difference between Japan Yen and the Mexican Peso as an example of a difference. That difference would, however, be a terrible metaphor for the differences in moral code between the two places.
>ask donne what individuals have to do with islands
>ask burns what love has to do with plantlife
Those are real metaphors, though.
They discuss specific behavior on one object that is helpful for understanding aspects to another, more abstract, non-descript object(plant life vs. love).
So actually, you are wrong.
the film 'Get on the Bus' was a metaphor film, for example. It compared the bus ride to Washington DC, to the Million Man March in 1995 to the state of black manhood as a whole.
The 'Bus Ride' and 'Black Manhood' are completely different. Spike Lee did an exquisite job of using a relatively concrete object('Bus Ride') to help describe an abstract, non-descript object('Black Manhood in America').
That is an excellent metaphor. The objects have specific relationships, and the elements of the concrete example are SPECIFICALLY related to the abstract object.
I usually charge for lectures like this, by the way.
>you're taking it beyond a simple metaphor and wanting it to be
>a full blown analogy
>we can entertain this if you want
>the metric system has come into common usage in english
>speaking coutries relatively recently, so actually it fits
>well since Tarantino's film is about how evil functions in
>MODERN society, where values have changed a lot (and yes the
>metric system is the one used by the criminal underworld of PF
>- the drug dealer weighs the heroine in grams)
That doesn't make a grain of motherfucking sense.
Not a single, fucking grain.
For one, English speaking countries have been using the metric system for eons. Every scientist in the United States, every single one, has been using the metric system for the past century, at least. In fact, I am a scientist, and have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever measured anything of any kind in anything other than the metric system, and neither have any of my previous bosses who have been doing the shit for half a century.
And the reason why the criminal underworld uses the metric system is because the science world uses the metric system, because they use the same tools to measure their substance as the scientific and medical world uses to measure there substances.
A syringe shoots coaine, and shoots Morphine into a patient writhing in pain at a hospital.
A scale measures cocaine in grams, and I use a scale to measure bacterial media, in grams.
There is nothing about this phenomenon, at all, that has anything to do with the criminal underworld, or morals.
So you are wrong, and your metaphor sucks and dies right than and there.
Secondly, no, requiring a metaphor to actually be a metaphor is not requiring it to be a "full blown analogy."
Again, a metaphor typically describes a concrete phenomenon'object, and dicusses elements of that phenomenon/object that are similar to a relatively abstract, non-descript object/phenomenon.
The fact is that the only thing that Imperial/metric has in common with US morals/Dutch morals, is that they are different. That is similar to saying that the mean temperature in the US/Mean temperature of Holland are different, and attempting to relate this to moral differences. They would all be terrible analogies, unless one discussed SPECIFICS OF THE CONCRETE object that related to the abstract.
Your argument is an enormous piece of shit, by the way.
>do you realize what you're saying?
>have you ever seen the statue called Justice outside the Old
>Bailey (you most likely have)
>have you noticed that in one hand it holds a sword and the
>other hand it holds a set of scales?
>THE FUCKING SCALES OF JUSTICE
>the most well known metaphor for justice/law/morality in the
>entire english language, probably in the world, probably in
The "scale" has thousands of applications. There are thousands of metaphors for morality.
Anytime we say that we need to "balance" something, we are using the scale as something of a metaphor.
We need to "balance" imports and exports.
We need to "balance" the individual rights of citizens with the collective rights of a society.
The problem is the scales of justice, and the "balance" has nothing to do with the differences between the metric and imperial system, or even worse.
The "scales of justice" is a discussing of morals, not the fact that you need multiply the number of miles on your car mileage by 1.609 to get the number of kilometers.
Its amazing, every time your argument is refuted, you hop onto another even worse, argument.
>where is your argument NOW?
Pissing all over your argument.
>this particular metaphor had nothing to do with Crouch, though
>several other critics/reviewers picked up on it in articles
Hell, you are all idiots than.
>heck, it might be the only part of Jules and Vince's dialogue
>in the entire film (with eachother) that's not OVERTLY about
>morality or theology, so thinking of it as a metaphor isn't
Like I said -- Its either a terrlbe metaphor, or the product of an active imagination on the part of you overanalysts.
I'd say its probably a mixture of both.
Tarantino might have been trying to say something, but the analogy sucked, AND you all misinterpreted his attempt and over-arch your attempts at rationalizing it.