Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Bullet points

Frost/Nixon: Better than I thought it would be. (A note made mandatory by the movie's title and me being thirteen years old: you could write Frost/Nixon slash based on this movie. Yes, you could. I might even have a few ideas about that.)

Assuming that current legal symmetries render past historical asymmetries irrelevant: Wrong. Say what you want, but know that it means more than what you mean (which should be obvious to a writer!).

Outing fans: Wrong. Primum non nocere, people. It's not a difficult concept.

Order of the Stick: Really good.

Pi Day, 2009: Probably going to be really interesting!

Random note of Greater Depression daily trivia: Pro: Bought today a really comfy used office chair for about 20% of retail value. Con: It used to be my office chair, until we closed down the office and sold off the meager physical assets of my previous start-up.

Even more random the-tv-is-on-as-background question: (Some) actors have the ability to look intelligent and awesome. Why don't they use it during interviews? I realize part of it comes from the lack of scripting, photography, direction, etc, but I think they could do better.



( 4 comments — Leave a comment )
Mar. 3rd, 2009 05:04 am (UTC)
Outing fans: As fans? As homosexuals? The generally negative connotations of the word outing means I'm inclined to agree with you on general principles, but I'm curious as to what you mean.

Current legal symmetries, &c.: Agreed, but only because of the nature of the word irrelevant. Does it become less relevant with time? Remember the lessons of history, certainly, but does there come a point when it is merely a somewhat distasteful curiosity of our less-enlightened predecessors?
Mar. 3rd, 2009 05:24 am (UTC)
As fans.

I think it becomes less relevant with time (if we are doing things right), but not as quickly or as thoroughly as we might wish. Formal equality often precedes real equality (and I try to keep a certain level of skepticism about my actual enlightnenhood *g*).
Mar. 3rd, 2009 06:12 am (UTC)
Assuming that current legal symmetries render past historical asymmetries irrelevant: Wrong.

I would love you for this even if I didn't know to which specific case you refer.

*beams at you*
Mar. 3rd, 2009 06:16 am (UTC)
( 4 comments — Leave a comment )


cass, can you not

Latest Month

July 2019


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow