Re: The morality debate (again) / Kate & "Brazil"

[stevev@chemstor.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender)]

In article <8908260008.AA24580@EDDIE.MIT.EDU>, 
"Andy Gough, x4-2906, pager 513, CH2-59" <AGOUGH%FAB6@sc.intel.com>
makes the most wonderful and seemingly unintentional misspelling:

>A heroine addict is still commiting a crime when he purchases and shoots
>up heroine--even though he has a real, physical, need for the drug. And,
>if you confront the junkie with the moral, legal, and health issues
>associated with heroine abuse just as he's craving more heroine, the junkie
>won't listen to a word you say--for he only wants his fix.  You are a
>self-proclaimed Kate-junkie.  And we're supposed to believe that your
>morality is as strong, but more refined, than Tim or Lazlo's?  You need to
>detox first.

All I can really say to that is that yes, many Love-Hounds are
most definitely "heroine addicts"--IED certainly admitted to
craving more of his heroine, although not in those words.
In this context, the concept of "heroine abuse" is amusing to
think about.

I certainly hope this isn't taken as a sarcastic spelling
flame--under these circumstances saying "heroine" instead of
"heroin" is hilariously appropriate, and even funnier considering
that the misspelling appears to be unintentional, or at least
unconscious.  It gave me a good laugh as well as suggesting an
interesting perspective on the ongoing argument.

This joins neatly with the argument about whether intended or
perceived meaning is more important--the above is a nearly ideal
example of how both intended and perceived meanings are valuable.
If I had stuck with the intended meaning of the quoted paragraph,
I wouldn't have gotten a good chuckle from humorously perverse
thoughts about Kate Bush fans as heroine addicts craving more
heroine, or all the possibilities for heroine abuse by Kate fans.
But the perceived meaning suggested by the consistent misspelling
isn't all there is to that paragraph, either--it's very important
to know that the intended meaning of the paragraph is to make an
analogy with drug addiction.

As another example, it was through reading this newsgroup that I
first learned of the intended theme of _The Ninth Wave_.  Until
then, I had gotten vague notions from parts of the sequence that
it was about someone nearly drowning, but thinking about the
sequence being about a woman lost out in the ocean for a night
and struggling to survive greatly increased my appreciation of
the work, since I had a more coherent framework to think about it
in.  Without that framework I had enjoyed the sequence, but with
it I could appreciate the sequence in an entirely new way.

Occasionally I listen to a song and discover later that my idea
of what a particular word in the lyrics was is not the same as
what the artist intended.  Depending on my mood, I may even
prefer the lyrics as I originally heard them--sometimes it makes
more sense that way, even though I know what the intended lyrics
really are.  I find that I like ambiguous music more than
unambiguous music--vague meanings and multiple interpretations
are ultimately more interesting than what the artist may have
originally intended, or what I thought when I first heard the
song.  The intended meaning of a work is interesting to me, but
often not satisfying; if I prefer a perceived meaning, I still
want to know what the intended meaning was to satisfy my
curiosity about the artistic process.
--
Steve VanDevender 	stevev@chemstor.uoregon.edu
"Bipedalism--an unrecognized disease affecting over 99% of the population.
Symptoms include lack of traffic sense, slow rate of travel, and the
classic, easily recognized behavior known as walking."