Although I wasn’t unfamiliar with the failings of post-structuralism, this particular book lacked some of the omissions I didn’t expect to not find. I had neglected to overlook the index, but this was a lack of oversight which failed to concern me – that is to say, if I hadn’t neglected to overlook the index, my lack of neglect wouldn’t have concerned me less.
‘This doesn’t fail to be a non-trivial problem,’ I muttered to myself. ‘There couldn’t be the absence of something I’m failing to miss, could there?’
It wasn’t something other than nonsense to imagine that I’d succeeded in failing to untangle the many far from non-linguistic problems that this text certainly didn’t lack. I just didn’t seem to be able identify the missing elements – or rather, the absence of them. Perhaps my failure to find said omissions was itself not insignificant.
‘Maybe I’m being too negative,’ I didn’t not whisper to no one other than myself.
Hm. I *think* this is what that says:
ReplyDeleteAlthough I was familiar with the failings of post-structuralism, this particular book included the items I expected to find. I had looked at the index, though it really wasn't important.
"This is a problem," I muttered to myself. "Could something be missing and I don't realize that it's missing?"
I had certainly managed to untangle the many linguistic problems that this text had. I just couldn't identify the missing elements - or rather, identify the holes where they should have been. Perhaps my failure to find those holes was significant in itself.
'Maybe I'm being too negative,' I whispered to myself.
That made a fun logic puzzle over coffee, thanks. :-)
*snap* Ow! My brain!
ReplyDeleteI just kind of gave up trying to understand halfway through.
ReplyDelete++negatives, laugh;
You are one of the least benightedly unintelligent life forms it has been my profound lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.
ReplyDeleteBut was it almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea?
ReplyDeleteThere ain't no reason to use double negatives, not never!
ReplyDeleteI never realized how common this was until now. Yikes.
ReplyDeletesooooo confusing!
ReplyDeletethis type of writing encourages thinking for the first 2 minutes, and then makes you wish you never have to think again
ReplyDeleteDuplex negatio affirmat; triplex negatio confundit; multiplex negatio ferblondiat.
ReplyDeletei give up trying to think through it. my brain hurts!
ReplyDeleteKyon from /The Boredom of Haruhi Suzumiya/ shows us the way:
ReplyDelete"When you put it that way, I can't say that I don't get the feeling that it does or doesn't, yet I wouldn't be confident enough not to refrain from voicing agreement. How many negatives did I just string together? I don't feel like counting, so if someone's free, tally them up for me."
I certainly didn't not misunderstand the prose of this nonsensical yet no less not not brilliant piece of writing. So please don't refuse this non-insult. My brain doesn't not hurt...
ReplyDeleteNot worst non-disregards,
Anne
This never fails to amuse.
ReplyDelete