Khari > Recent Status Updates

Uh...no.

I really don't know where this man is getting these ideas.
The Koreans didn't just "have contact" with other languages that had writing, they USED those scripts. Korean can be written and indeed was written with ideograpus borrowed from Chinese.

Hangul came about because the particular king wanted to spread literacy beyond just the few who had time to memorize thousands of characters.

"this serves to underline, then, as does so much of our popular culture, the paradoxical attitude of Americans towards the classics and tradition-a combined respect and disdain for the revered artifacts of our culture."

I think this was really true in the 90s, when this was written, and holds true for the people who grew up in the 80s and 90s, but I think the respect has devolved since then.

He might be right about the texts for the blind, I haven't seen those.

But he's wrong every where else. If he's wrong here with something that is easily checkable, where else is he wrong with things that have no ability to be proven either way?

"the most important [syllabary] being the kana syllabary that the Japanese use for telegrams, bank statements, and texts for blind readers."

Uh...

That's not how kana is used. I've never seen a bank statement written in kana. Telegrams are long gone....when was this book written???? 1997.

They were gone then, right?

Anyway, kana is ubiquitous in Japan, every sentence uses kana, it performs grammatical functions.

Gah. Finally finished the Lacan section, biggest waste of time in the entire book so far. I thought the next one would surely be better, it's at least coherent so far...but already I'm rolling my eyes. So far this book has been a major dud.

Fine, you might say 'he's talking about other people of the past, uncivilized people'

Why should they be different? From our point of view Job was uncivilized, he was a herdsmen!

We don't know when Job was written, let alone when Job lived, all we know is that it was a really long time ago, and yet he had a clear and deep grasp of numinousness, mysteriousness, holiness, and awefulness.

So, where does Mr. Otto get the idea that the savages of the past only had vague impressions of these ideas, grasping in the dark, when an actual denizen of the past clearly displays comprehension?

I don't understand this man, he continually references modern day thinkers and their conception of...things (like numinousness, or daemonicness, or soulness), and saying how they have a better grasp of it than did the savages of the past who had just awakened to religious feeling, but then he says that they (the moderns) haven't understood these concepts as well as Job.

Right. Doesn't that prove the argument wrong?

How on earth did this many get taken seriously enough to get published? He is talking about a comic with multiple shots of an elephant approaching the viewer and it's body gets cut up and this allows a giant imaginary phallus/vagina to hover over thr last panel.

Well. He refers to this series of images, but never actually shows them, because the imaginary part is pretty revealing. He imagines this genitalia.

"Corporeal framing, that is, panel boundaries cutting into the body-space of the page and figure boundaries cutting into the space within the panel, re-enacts both the primal umbilical cut and the psychic castration or sacrifice of being."

Seriously??? Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous? Panel boundaries are psychic castration. Dude be crazy.

Another 10 minutes of my life spent understanding nothing I read.

"God's rational attributes can be distinguished from like attributes applied to the created spirit by being not relative, as those are, but absolute...Our understanding can only encompass the relative. That which is in contrast absolute...is within the reach of our conceiving, but it is beyond the grasp of our comprehension."

Postmodernist scholarship not only has a penchant for being linguistically obtuse and nigh on impossible to parse, but the scholars themselves seem to have way too strong of a fascination with sexuality.

What on earth does a phallus have to do with comics???????

Nothing!

So why does this author just state that it does? As though it is self evidently true???

Dude be crazy.

Are there differences between those who live in rural environments and those who live in cities? Absolutely.

Do those difference equate to rural people being primitive and city people being 'refined'? Absolutely not.

It sounds like it was written by an arrogant prick who never stepped outside of pleasant middle-upper class urbanity.