The anti-amazing and the cutting-edge cliche

[Paul Beardsley]

A concept that has been rattling about in my mind for a while is that of the anti-amazing. Here's an example of what I mean.

There was an episode of the TV series Babylon 5 called "A View from the Gallery". J. Michael Straczynski wrote the script in one day. Whether he intended it or not, it came across as a bit of a boast - as if he'd said, "Can you believe it, I wrote that in one day!"

Trouble is, it really LOOKS as if it was written in one day - on a day when the writer was probably doing other, more important things. So, far from being amazed, I was anti-amazed by the discovery.

A similar concept to the anti-amazing is the cutting-edge cliche. The best example is the annual Turner prize. Year after year we get "artists" trying to push the envelope further and further, and each time we get a load of tiresome "things" that seem to be designed for the sole purpose of making members of the public say, "Well that's not MY idea of art! I can't believe someone paid money for that!" These "artists" seem to be victims of the falacy that goes something like this: "A lot of classical works of art caused outrage or derision in their day. Therefore, if my work causes outrage or derision, it will be a classic in the future." We see the same sort of stuff in science - "They laughed at Darwin/Galileo/Einstein but Darwin/Galileo/Einstein turned out to be right. They laugh at me, therefore I must be right."

Any thoughts or examples welcomed.

[SolusLupus]

My responce: Cutting-Edge Cliche is a very very nice way to put it. Anti-amazing almost sounds insidious. Probably is from all my exposure to the term of antimatter.

[Paul Beardsley]

My responce: Cutting-Edge Cliche is a very very nice way to put it.
I thank you sir!

Anti-amazing almost sounds insidious. Probably is from all my exposure to the term of antimatter.
So what happens when the anti-amazing comes into contact with the amazing?

[Moose]

So what happens when the anti-amazing comes into contact with the amazing?

Mutual annihilation generating (relatively) large amounts of apathy.

The nature and properties of apathy are unknown because (wait for it) nobody could be bothered to investigate.

(I'll be here all week, try the veal.)

[Roving Philosopher]

I seem to recall someone on the old BA forum had a signature which said (and I'm paraphrasing here)

"Sure, they laughed at Darwin/Galileo/Einstein. They also laughed at Bozo the Clown"

The anti-amazing thing seems to be popular in movies, particularly bad sci-fi/horror. We're supposed to be awed by twists and turns that everyone saw coming a mile away.

[SolusLupus]

If you don't get this, don't blame me, blame yourself.

Mutual annihilation generating (relatively) large amounts of apathy.


(I'll be here all week, try the veal.)

Meet is murder!

*Note: That wasn't a typo.

[genebujold]

I would just encourage people to ignore derision around them, unless it's solidly based in history or fact, and to get on with what they know to be true.

The chips will fall where they may.

[Melusine]

There was an episode of the TV series Babylon 5 called "A View from the Gallery". J. Michael Straczynski wrote the script in one day. Whether he intended it or not, it came across as a bit of a boast - as if he'd said, "Can you believe it, I wrote that in one day!"

Trouble is, it really LOOKS as if it was written in one day - on a day when the writer was probably doing other, more important things. So, far from being amazed, I was anti-amazed by the discovery.

So, the discovery caused you to be against or opposed to amazement? I can't think of an example of something that was so unamazing that it turned me off from amazement in general. I'm not against amazement, so I don't think I can relate to the concept of "anti-amazement". I doubt Stracynski is hostile to amazement either, he just didn't astound you. One person's, "Awesome!" is another person's, "Oh, so what?"

So, to answer your question: "So what happens when the anti-amazing comes into contact with the amazing?"

Well, if "anti-amazement" were a doctrine like anti-intellectualism, then the "anti-amazementists" would try to subvert wonder, awe and astonishment from our culture. In fact, "anti-amazement" could be, hypothetically speaking, synonymous with anti-intellectualism, in a way, but fortunately there is no "anti-amazement" movement that I know of. There's just a lot of underwhelment, especially on TV. What fills us with wonder or astonishment is subjective, just as what intellectually stimulates us is subjective; in between would be what Moose said-apathy or indifference. You may have a higher threshold for being amazed than others, but I don't think you're "anti-amazed." :)

[SolusLupus]

I would just encourage people to ignore derision around them, unless it's solidly based in history or fact, and to get on with what they know to be true.

The chips will fall where they may.

What is this in reference to?

[Paul Beardsley]

So, the discovery caused you to be against or opposed to amazement? I can't think of an example of something that was so unamazing that it turned me off from amazement in general. I'm not against amazement, so I don't think I can relate to the concept of "anti-amazement". I doubt Stracynski is hostile to amazement either, he just didn't astound you. One person's, "Awesome!" is another person's, "Oh, so what?"
You appear to have misunderstood my use of the prefix "anti-". Yes, it can mean hostile towards something, but it also means the opposite or reverse of the word that follows it.

For instance, if you're reading a story, and there's a huge build-up to a climax, but when the climax arrives it turns out to be lame, you'd call it an anticlimax. This does NOT mean that you or the author are opposed to climaxes, it merely means that the feeling you got when the climax arrived was the opposite to the feeling you hoped to get.

[genebujold]

Original:

Quote:
Originally Posted by genebujold
I would just encourage people to ignore derision around them, unless it's solidly based in history or fact, and to get on with what they know to be true.

The chips will fall where they may.

What is this in reference to?

To everything. There are universal axioms which apply in all circumstances, Lonewulf. No need to cripple them by trying to tie them to any specific.

You know, like this axiom: Breath.

Forget that one, and, well, you just cast your last vote.

[Paul Beardsley]

To everything. There are universal axioms which apply in all circumstances, Lonewulf. No need to cripple them by trying to tie them to any specific.

You know, like this axiom: Breath.

Forget that one, and, well, you just cast your last vote.
Are you sure you didn't mean Breathe?

[Melusine]

You appear to have misunderstood my use of the prefix "anti-". Yes, it can mean hostile towards something, but it also means the opposite or reverse of the word that follows it.

For instance, if you're reading a story, and there's a huge build-up to a climax, but when the climax arrives it turns out to be lame, you'd call it an anticlimax. This does NOT mean that you or the author are opposed to climaxes, it merely means that the feeling you got when the climax arrived was the opposite to the feeling you hoped to get.
I didn't misunderstand you--I was sort of poking at your made up word "anti-amazement." Maybe I should have put a few winking smilies in there; it just struck me as funny in the word-nerd sort of way I am. Anti-, even in the literary sense of anticlimax, is opposed to something, not necessarily the opposite of something. Anti-, especially with a hyphen, would indicate opposition to whatever. We don't say we are anti-elated or anti-awed, or what have you, right?

Anticlimax has no hyphen, and it's evolved to also mean that feeling of disappointment you get when things don't turn out be as great as you expected, and hence they're anticlimatic. In the literary sense, anticlimax is not a disappointment with the climax, it's a transition from a high point or something of significance to something less significant. Maybe some books just have no climax for you whatsoever. (I hope nobody is opposed to climaxes, too.)

Hmm, sounds pedantic, sorry. It's just with so many words out there like anti-science, anti-semitic, anti-inflammatory, anti-art, etc., I hate to see unamazed and the wonderful prefix un- unused. ;)

I'm not sure I understand what Genebujold is saying regarding the OP either. Paul, do you get the feeling your thread is strangely digressing from your intent? What do you think happens when the "anti-amazing comes in contact with the amazing"? :)

[zebo-the-fat]

I seem to recall someone on the old BA forum had a signature which said (and I'm paraphrasing here)

"Sure, they laughed at Darwin/Galileo/Einstein. They also laughed at Bozo the Clown"

I think it was originaly the late, great Carl Sagan

[Gillianren]

Anticlimax has no hyphen, and it's evolved to also mean that feeling of disappointment you get when things don't turn out be as great as you expected, and hence they're anticlimatic. In the literary sense, anticlimax is not a disappointment with the climax, it's a transition from a high point or something of significance to something less significant. Maybe some books just have no climax for you whatsoever. (I hope nobody is opposed to climaxes, too.)

Hmm, sounds pedantic, sorry. It's just with so many words out there like anti-science, anti-semitic, anti-inflammatory, anti-art, etc., I hate to see unamazed and the wonderful prefix un- unused. ;)

But of course "anti-amazing" would have a hyphen--it needs one for clarity of pronunciation. "Un-" ends in a consonant, so you don't need a hyphen for "unamazing" to make sense. However, what would you call the noun form of the adjective "unamazing"? (Though, now that I think about it, I'm not sure what you'd call the noun form of "anti-amazing," either. Clearly, this whole thing needs more thought. Or, possibly, less.)

[Melusine]

But of course "anti-amazing" would have a hyphen--it needs one for clarity of pronunciation. "Un-" ends in a consonant, so you don't need a hyphen for "unamazing" to make sense. However, what would you call the noun form of the adjective "unamazing"? (Though, now that I think about it, I'm not sure what you'd call the noun form of "anti-amazing," either. Clearly, this whole thing needs more thought. Or, possibly, less.)
Probably less. ;) Anti-semitism has a hyphen. Anti-amazing isn't a word. Unamazed is. Un- means 'not'...not amazed. There's no unamazement. There could be anti-amazement, but I don't think this is a good thing. :eek:

[Fram]

I think it was originaly the late, great Carl Sagan

I have read it in "Broca's brain", but I don't know if that's the first time he (or anyone) used it.

[genebujold]

Are you sure you didn't mean Breathe?

LOL - I'll grant you an e! Yes, I meant "breathe."

Thanks for the sharp eye.

[The Mangler]

Here's something I think is "anti-amazing": You always see ads on tv or in the radio saying how great their new product is because it's made from aircraft aluminum. I'm an aircraft mechanic, and my response to this is always ".......ok......." More than one kind of aluminum is used on an aiplane. There are different alloys used for different applications. ...Corrsion resistance, heat resistance, softness, hardness, ect... They all have a numbering system to tell you what the alloying elements (other than aluminum) are. Basically, saying "aircraft aluminum" doesn't mean much unless you also say which alloy it is.

[Paul Beardsley]

Hmm, sounds pedantic, sorry. It's just with so many words out there like anti-science, anti-semitic, anti-inflammatory, anti-art, etc., I hate to see unamazed and the wonderful prefix un- unused. ;)
I wrote a long reply to this, Melusine, and then the server went down. Oh well...

Un- and anti- do not mean the same thing. Un- suggests that something was merely absent. If a bunch of people did a difficult test, you might say, "I was un-amazed to hear that Susan and Graham (who are known to study hard) did really well whereas Boris and Andrea (who are known for being lazy) did very badly." Whereas anti-amazement occurs when you've been built up in the expectation of the amazing, or the person delivering the news believes you will be amazed.

[Paul Beardsley]

Here's something I think is "anti-amazing": You always see ads on tv or in the radio saying how great their new product is because it's made from aircraft aluminum. I'm an aircraft mechanic, and my response to this is always ".......ok......." More than one kind of aluminum is used on an aiplane. There are different alloys used for different applications. ...Corrsion resistance, heat resistance, softness, hardness, ect... They all have a numbering system to tell you what the alloying elements (other than aluminum) are. Basically, saying "aircraft aluminum" doesn't mean much unless you also say which alloy it is.
When they say "made from aircraft aluminum", presumably they mean one of the alloys that is actually used on aircraft, even though they don't state which one?

Or is the statement misleading - that the line should be something like "it's made from aluminum, which, by the way, is also used in aircraft"?

[zebo-the-fat]

When they say "made from aircraft aluminum", presumably they mean one of the alloys that is actually used on aircraft, even though they don't state which one?

Or is the statement misleading - that the line should be something like "it's made from aluminum, which, by the way, is also used in aircraft"?

Sounds like, "Contains water which is used by Astronauts!" :surprised

[The Mangler]

When they say "made from aircraft aluminum", presumably they mean one of the alloys that is actually used on aircraft, even though they don't state which one?

Or is the statement misleading - that the line should be something like "it's made from aluminum, which, by the way, is also used in aircraft"?

They mean that it is one one the alloys used on an aircraft, but without saying wich one it is. Some aluminum is very soft (you can bend it with your hands), and some is very hard. Thier statement is not really misleading, it's just not very specific.

[SolusLupus]

Years of Shadowrun gaming speaking:

Mmm... aluminum bone lacing.

[publiusr]

Pundits who just discovered "Democracy in America."

Oh! can they be tedious!


Thats okay. When everyone else was reading Tocqueville, I was reading Clausewitz.

[LurchGS]

Un- and anti- do not mean the same thing. Un- suggests that something was merely absent. If a bunch of people did a difficult test, you might say, "I was un-amazed to hear that Susan and Graham (who are known to study hard) did really well whereas Boris and Andrea (who are known for being lazy) did very badly." Whereas anti-amazement occurs when you've been built up in the expectation of the amazing, or the person delivering the news believes you will be amazed.


yeah, Rolex is amazing... Ronco is anti-amazing.

[Laminal Cockroach]

Years of Shadowrun gaming speaking:

Mmm... aluminum bone lacing.

Whats Bone LAcing ?

[SolusLupus]

In Shadowrun, Bone Lacing is basically material that's implanted into the body to strengthen bones. There's a few different materials... Plastic, Aluminum, Titanium, Kevlar, and Ceramic. They're very handy at strengthening bones, making them harder to break, and also strengthens unarmed blows. Very handy, overall, for a fighter.