Save 3abn Website, site registered to Gailon Joy Options

[SoulEspresso]

I tend to agree with Watchbird. I think it was written tongue-in-check in an effort to stimulate responses. The person who wrote it is probably sitting in a chair laughing while contemplating what people are thinking about it.

Me three. I hope this isn't counterproductive.

[watchbird]

I tend to agree with Watchbird. I think it was written tongue-in-check in an effort to stimulate responses. The person who wrote it is probably sitting in a chair laughing while contemplating what people are thinking about it.

"Tongue-in-cheek" is a modern expression used in place of the more formal.... and serious..... literary term, "irony" or ironic. Unfortunately, both the terms tongue-in-cheek and ironic are commonly used in a a wide range of meanings, from coincidence to facetious, all of which are quite different from the formal and serious use of irony as a literary genre.

My intent was to use it in the "literary genre" sense, when I wrote... "It is difficult to tell whether this letter was written tongue-in-cheek or seriously". But I can see, after Observer's reaction, that this was confusing, since it seemed to indicate that I was saying "facetiously or seriously"... which I did not intend to say. What I meant to convey was the contrast between literary irony and literal prose.

For irony... in a literary use... is for very serious purposes. And even when it masquerades as comedy, the author is hiding his tears... not being merely a buffoon. That is to say, even when he attempts to incite laughter, not for the purpose of entertaining, but for the purpose of relaxing his audience enough so they will come to see the issues in a different light... and even come to share his tears. But the writer of the letter did not act as though his purpose was to incite laughter.

A primary example of this in literature.... which is, I think, appropriate to this thread in content as well as an example of literary form... is......

THE FOOL'S PRAYER

by: Edward Rowland Sill (1841-1887)

THE royal feast was done; the King
Sought some new sport to banish care,
And to his jester cried: "Sir Fool,
Kneel now, and make for us a prayer!"

The jester doffed his cap and bells,
And stood the mocking court before;
They could not see the bitter smile
Behind the painted grin he wore.

He bowed his head, and bent his knee
Upon the Monarch's silken stool;
His pleading voice arose: "O Lord,
Be merciful to me, a fool!

"No pity, Lord, could change the heart
From red with wrong to white as wool;
The rod must heal the sin: but Lord,
Be merciful to me, a fool!

"'T is not by guilt the onward sweep
Of truth and right, O Lord, we stay;
'T is by our follies that so long
We hold the earth from heaven away.

"These clumsy feet, still in the mire,
Go crushing blossoms without end;
These hard, well-meaning hands we thrust
Among the heart-strings of a friend.

"The ill-timed truth we might have kept--
Who knows how sharp it pierced and stung?
The word we had not sense to say--
Who knows how grandly it had rung!

"Our faults no tenderness should ask.
The chastening stripes must cleanse them all;
But for our blunders -- oh, in shame
Before the eyes of heaven we fall.

"Earth bears no balsam for mistakes;
Men crown the knave, and scourge the tool
That did his will; but Thou, O Lord,
Be merciful to me, a fool!"

The room was hushed; in silence rose
The King, and sought his gardens cool,
And walked apart, and murmured low,
"Be merciful to me, a fool!"

Somehow, I sense that it is this "hush" that the writer of the letter may have been trying to evoke. And if I am correct, then he is currently NOT "laughing".... but waiting with "bated breath" "while watching and "contemplating what people are thinking about it".

[Noahswife]

I tend to agree with Watchbird. I think it was written tongue-in-check in an effort to stimulate responses. The person who wrote it is probably sitting in a chair laughing while contemplating what people are thinking about it.

100% absolutely agree with this assessment of the letter. In fact, it would not surprise me to learn that one of our BSDA family has the gift to have written it. If so, thanks for the laughter. If you are merely a lurking guest, come join us. If neither, this is just another example of the potential of the internet to reach people where they are. And at very little financial cost compared to the 10 Commandments weekend it would seem. (Does anyone know how many are expected there?)

nw

This post has been edited by Noahswife: May 5 2007, 05:56 PM

[PeacefulBe]

I must agree that Alfred Smith appears to have been making a thinly veiled but pertinent point by the absurdity of his letter. I would hope that some who give voice to similar opinions in their allegiance to the absurd will pause and take a reflective walk in a cool garden to seek mercy.

This post has been edited by PeacefullyBewildered: May 5 2007, 12:40 PM

[caribbean sda]

I could have done without reading this literary masterpiece...maybe it served some purpose unbeknown to me...

[watchbird]

I could have done without reading this literary masterpiece...maybe it served some purpose unbeknown to me...

Look at it this way, CSDA.... is there anything in that letter that has not been already said before by someone defending 3abn on this forum? Yet when all of these things are pulled together in one place they hit us with a lot more weight than when said bit by bit on one subject at a time and held behind the shield of attacking those of us who want to "call sin by its right name".

So maybe the purpose was to let people take a look at it all gathered together in one place. It is very easy to avert our eyes from the unpleasantness of sin. Sometimes it takes being forced to confront it directly in such a way that we have to recognize it for the wrong that it is.

I think Peacefully said it well when she said:

"I must agree that Alfred Smith appears to have been making a thinly veiled but pertinent point by the absurdity of his letter. I would hope that some who give voice to similar opinions in their allegiance to the absurd will pause and take a reflective walk in a cool garden to seek mercy."

And I think that if anyone is laughing, it must be one of those times, when "we laugh so they won't see us cry."

[howdy]

When Smith's letter is so obviously ironic Mr Joy's response does nothing to enhance Joy's status in my books. It appears that Joy took Smith seriously which is soooo funny!!

[mozart]

was Alfred Smith the guy on the cover of MAD Magazine?

I must agree that Alfred Smith appears to have been making a thinly veiled but pertinent point by the absurdity of his letter. I would hope that some who give voice to similar opinions in their allegiance to the absurd will pause and take a reflective walk in a cool garden to seek mercy.

[Clay]

was Alfred Smith the guy on the cover of MAD Magazine?

no, that was Alfred E. Newman......





and I am not suggesting anything... but.... the similarity is striking...

[Skyhook]

was Alfred Smith the guy on the cover of MAD Magazine?

There was an Alfred Emmanuel Smith who was the Democratic Presidential candidate in the election of 1928. He was, if I'm not mistaken, the first and only Roman Catholic to run for US President before JFK. He lost to Herbert Hoover.

[mozart]

awwwww you shaddup now.

no, that was Alfred E. Newman......


and I am not suggesting anything... but.... the similarity is striking...

[sonshineonme]

no, that was Alfred E. Newman......


and I am not suggesting anything... but.... the similarity is striking...

funny you would see george w.
my whole life i have always seen ted copel in the mad guy. can't shake it, still see that!

[Johann]

no, that was Alfred E. Newman......


and I am not suggesting anything... but.... the similarity is striking...

Thanks Clay. This gave a great laugh I needed for the day.

[Eirene]

Look at it this way, CSDA.... is there anything in that letter that has not been already said before by someone defending 3abn on this forum? Yet when all of these things are pulled together in one place they hit us with a lot more weight than when said bit by bit on one subject at a time and held behind the shield of attacking those of us who want to "call sin by its right name".

So maybe the purpose was to let people take a look at it all gathered together in one place. It is very easy to avert our eyes from the unpleasantness of sin. Sometimes it takes being forced to confront it directly in such a way that we have to recognize it for the wrong that it is.

You bring up a very good point WB. That is exactly why I have the opinion that Joy or Pickle or one of their "helpers" wrote that ridiculous letter. Someone wanted to put all of their false accusations in a dirty little bundle and make it look the way it looked. The fact that you would lend some credibility to it in your statements doesn't say much for your judgement or discernment. It only shows that you are so biased against 3abn and DS that you can no longer make any sound judgements or have any objective views on the 3abn topic.

This post has been edited by Eirene: May 7 2007, 01:08 PM

[LaurenceD]

You bring up a very good point WB. That is exactly why I have the opinion that Joy or Pickle or one of their "helpers" wrote that ridiculous letter.

Opinion? Am I hearing an echo? I keep hearing that buzz word from you folks.

Someone wanted to put all of their false accusations in a dirty little bundle and make it look the way it looked.

Isn't there a better way to get exercise than jumping to conclusions?

The fact that you would lend some credibility to it in your statements doesn't say much for your judgement or discernment. It only shows that you are so biased against 3abn and DS that you can no longer make any sound judgements or have any objective views on the 3abn topic.

Or, just the opposite may be true...it may show how sharp her discernment really is.