According to Mr. Oxford, a blog would refer to a web site on which an individual or group of users produces an ongoing narrative. “Narrative’”, not very much on the other hand, would imply a spoken, or written in this matter, account of connected events; like a story for instance.
By the way, did you happen to know that the word “blog” derived from the word weblog? ‘Web’ in the sense of World Wide Web while ‘log’ in the sense of a regular record of incidents. I didn’t know that. But looking at it now, you could even break it into ‘we’-‘blog’. Maybe that’s how we got the word ‘blog’.
Gosh, I’m ranting.
Well, that’s what most blogs are, aren’t they? Full of rants concerning what we did today, why we did it today and how we did it today. Of course there is also the what-did-we-do-consequently and such.
According to the definition, I reckon that there is nothing wrong with ranting the whole blog away. But even so, I would rather define a blog in a more precise manner and that would be by inserting “where a large group of people can relate to” somewhere in Mr. Oxford’s elucidation towards … enlightenment(?)
Presumably, that pretty much gives the idea; the structure and vocabulary of the insertion simply requires the need to be “pompous-fied”, in a not so negative way.
In any case, I was reading the work (that obviously doesn’t call for much effort) of a celebrity blogger sometime this week and I felt so disturbed. She is a total bimbo, except I don’t find her very attractive. She is only a bimbo in the sense that she’s an empty-headed young woman. The things she talks about in her blog, gah! Worthless piece of nonsensical complaints they sure are. In fact while viewing some of the comments made, I wonder, how on earth can people even classify her English as good; she gives English a bad rep [or rap(?)] for Christ sake! The English that she uses, simply despicable! Mind you, I’ve heard some sources stating that she got kicked out of journalism for her bad command in English.
Truth is, I don’t blame her readers for being oh-so-loyal. In fact, her pieces are actually good for easy reading. Perhaps we do need some "bimbo-ness" in our daily lives and seeing as she is prosperous and affluent in that aspect, I suppose it does radiate in an outward motion for our betterment. After all, we do require the mementoes to refrain from indulging in our own stupidity.
And now, my dear friends, is the cue where Albert Einstein's citation comes in:
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the former."
You know what? Maybe she isn't that shallow. Come to think about it, maybe her English is good but she just portrays herself to be a mentally challenged person while exploiting her stupidity so that she gets the attention. “Act cute” [in a lala way] as she would put it. I guess she would add the “lor” too. Speaking of which, (I don’t see how it relates but) she’s so self-absorbed. If she could just scale down her vanity to fit the small stage on which she plays her live out, would that not be great?
Hang on a second, if her English is good then she wouldn’t be out of the journalism in the first place, don’t you think? Furthermore, if she weren’t dumb, she wouldn’t portray herself as a bimbo now would she?
Well, there she goes, bitching about some other bitches that have been bitching about her, unaware and ignorant that she’s a bitch too. (Please excuse the profanities.)
Oh, crap! I’m bitching too aren’t I?
PS. Mr. Oxford defines “bitch” (noun) to be a woman whom one dislikes or considers to be malicious and unpleasant. Mr. Oxford also defines “bitch” (verb) to be an act of malicious or spitefully critical comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment