Use Fewer Words
Please practice this New Year’s resolution: Use fewer words. I will too.
The Backward Glance is the blog of Lincoln and Abby Mullen. Lincoln Mullen is a reference librarian at Bob Jones University's Mack Library and a student of history. Abby Mullen is a master's student in English at Bob Jones University. She teaches freshman English at BJU. [Read more »]
Recommended Reading
- Winston Churchill: Secret conversations reveal views on Stalin and Gandhi
While researching his new book, Andrew Roberts discovered extraordinary secret documents recording every Cabinet conversation of our wartime prime minister. From the Telegraph. - Visualization as an Introduction to Text Mining?
Visualization of texts. The second diagram is particularly fascinating. From Edwired by Mills Kelly. - Quit Doling Out That Bad-Economy Line
Why the economy is not that bad after all--certainly not as "the worst since the Great Depression." From the Washington Post. - Palaeography Tutorial
A tutorial on paleography. From the National Archives. - Beginners' Latin
A tutorial for reading Latin from 1086 to 1733. From the National Archives.
Recent Comments
- Jessica on "Gas Prices and Dodge’s Store"
- Jonathan Newell on "Gas Prices and Dodge’s Store"
- Andrew on "Gas Prices and Dodge’s Store"
- Melanie Garland on "Gas Prices and Dodge’s Store"
- Lincoln Mullen on "Apple Picking"
- Melanie Garland on "Apple Picking"
- Ian on "Hair-Raising Adventures"
- LAM on "Biltmore Estate"
Posted 26 Dec. 2005 at 1:32 pm | Permalink
There’s a question that’s been on my mind lately: What in perdition does Lincoln Mullen think he’s doing? I mean, we have a right, an indisputable, inalienable, indefeasible, divine right to find more constructive contexts in which to work toward resolving conflicts. Although my approach may appear a bit pedantic, by setting some generative point of view against a structural-taxonomical point of view or vice versa, I intend to argue that I want nothing more — or less — than to subject Lincoln’s sermons to the rigorous scrutiny they warrant. To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise. The power-hungry Jacobinism I’ve been writing about is not primarily the fault of jaundiced autocrats, nor of the violent meatheads who use lethal violence as a source of humor. It is the fault of Lincoln Mullen.
If you think you can escape from Lincoln’s drugged-out tactics, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that if you ever ask him to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. Lincoln is unable to use the English language effectively or correctly, by which I mean that at this point in the letter, I had planned to tell you that Lincoln’s hastily mounted campaigns are merely childish attempts at ridicule. However, one of my colleagues pointed out that ignorant and highly emotional persons are frequently swayed by his bombast and fustian. Hence, I discarded the discourse I had previously prepared and substituted the following discussion, in which I argue that in order to convince us that ethical responsibility is merely a trammel of earthbound mortals and should not be required of a demigod like him, Lincoln often turns to the old propagandist trick of comparing results brought about by entirely dissimilar causes. For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that he doesn’t care about freedom, as he can neither eat it nor put it in the bank. It’s just a word to him. I must emphasize that several things Lincoln has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of his that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la.
It’s a pity that the voices of stultiloquent dingbats like Lincoln can still be heard, worse still that they’re listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. We can divide his invectives into three categories: prolix, irritating, and oleaginous. Lincoln’s opinions are related to the elements and bases of conformism both organizationally and ideologically. Natural law is therefore the fulcrum upon which rests the case that if Lincoln is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. There are two main flaws with his views: 1) his activities bespeak a spiritual crassness, a materialistic and short-sighted stupidity that will funnel significant amounts of money to what I call intrusive braggadocios faster than you can say “photoreconnaissance”, and 2) what we have been imparting to him — or what he has been eliciting from us — is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge. Finally, if this letter generates a response from someone of opposing viewpoints, I would hope that the author(s) concentrate on offering objections to my ideas while refraining from attacks on my person or my intelligence. I’ve gotten enough of that already from Lincoln Mullen.
*Special thanks to “Scott Pankin’s Complaint Generator” for making this long tirade both possible and timely.
Posted 26 Dec. 2005 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
If anyone else wishes to object, feel free to use the same method as Kellen the Prolix.
Posted 26 Dec. 2005 at 10:07 pm | Permalink
Wow. I think you just got owned by Kellen. I was going to object…but that comment was wayyy to long for my taste. Thats probably the reason why I didn’t read all of the comment.
Posted 28 Dec. 2005 at 9:27 am | Permalink
Kellen, I knew you were about the coolest guy ever! Way to use resources!
Posted 28 Dec. 2005 at 9:49 am | Permalink
Wow Lincoln. :p
Posted 4 Jan. 2006 at 9:16 pm | Permalink
Lincoln, maybe this is one time when editing Kellen would have been entirely understood (maybe even hoped for). Hope you had a Merry Christmas and set some more resolutions than just using less words. By the way, I like the new design :)