Thread: Awfully stupid article

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9925

After reading that I felt myself rather confused. It was a mixture of rage and humour.

Lol, why read such rubbish?

This paragraph IS INCREDIBLE. By far the best part of the entire composition. I laughed and laughed.
The New York Times published a picture of Kissinger seated across from Russian President Vladimir V. Putin at a dinner table in Mr. Putin's "country residence." Do you remember when a Russian president's country residence was called a "dacha"? Is there some arcane significance to the Times' substitution of the commonplace term country house for the slightly sinister dacha?
"Slightly sinister dacha!?!?!?" That makes NO sense. What's next? "Putin placed some bread in his terribly turquoise toaster?" "He purchased a savagly smart refrigerator?" "He sat at his mostly maniacal desk?"

And while pursuing such quiddities, what does Mr. Putin's middle initial stand for? Could it possibly stand for Vladimir? Is it possible that Mr. Putin's full name is Vladimir Vladimir Putin?
It's possible. But it's wrong. It's Vladimirovich...and it's not a middle name...

Originally Posted by Бармалей

"Slightly sinister dacha!?!?!?" That makes NO sense. What's next? "Putin placed some bread in his terribly turquoise toaster?" "He purchased a savagly smart refrigerator?" "He sat at his mostly maniacal desk?"

He's not implying that the dacha is sinister, he is implying that the word "dacha" has sinister connotations to Western ears, and that the phrase "country house" has been intentionally substituted in order to lessen that effect, thereby making Putin appear less threatening than would otherwise be the case.

Still stupid, just not the way you evidently read it.

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by Бармалей

"Slightly sinister dacha!?!?!?" That makes NO sense. What's next? "Putin placed some bread in his terribly turquoise toaster?" "He purchased a savagly smart refrigerator?" "He sat at his mostly maniacal desk?"

He's not implying that the dacha is sinister, he is implying that the word "dacha" has sinister connotations to Western ears, and that the phrase "country house" has been intentionally substituted in order to lessen that effect, thereby making Putin appear less threatening than would otherwise be the case.

Still stupid, just not the way you evidently read it.

But there is NOTHING sinister about the word to begin with. It doesn't have some dark, devious root. It doesn't have some evil historical connotation to it. It doesn't even have some harsh cacophonous SOUND to it. It's a plain old word, unspectacular in every way. I know what you're saying -- the idea that there is some nefarious NYT-Putin alliance creeping about in the shadows -- but it's such an illogical point to begin with that you really can't argue it on merit after a certain point...

This "piece of writing" should be submitted to some textbook editor as an example of what happens when some author tries to prove that he's humorous, witty, well-read, and capable of making cogent argument -- when he's NOT capable of ANY of those things...

I liked the comment about the USSR terrorising the world. Has he forgotten which country he lives in.

Originally Posted by Бармалей

But there is NOTHING sinister about the word to begin with. It doesn't have some dark, devious root. It doesn't have some evil historical connotation to it.

I didn't say it does, he did, and he wasn't looking at it from the point of view of a Russian, he was looking at it from the point of view of an American who evidently hasn't yet gotten over his Cold-War paranoia yet, just as millions of others across the world, including many Russians, haven't.

Either way, I can't understand why you're getting so upset over what is a light-hearted but frankly completely uninteresting piece of op-ed drivel, or why it so offends you.

It's really not worthy of the effort, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by scotcher

Either way, I can't understand why you're getting so upset over what is a light-hearted but frankly completely uninteresting piece of op-ed drivel, or why it so offends you.

It's really not worthy of the effort, in my opinion.

It was worth the effort in my opinion. It made me laugh. A lot. And not with the author, but at him.

Originally Posted by TATY

I liked the comment about the USSR terrorising the world. Has he forgotten which country he lives in.

LOL, good point.

Originally Posted by scotcher

He's not implying that the dacha is sinister, he is implying that the word "dacha" has sinister connotations to Western ears, and that the phrase "country house" has been intentionally substituted in order to lessen that effect, thereby making Putin appear less threatening than would otherwise be the case.

Really? Great! (I never knew).

Hmm, probably I must warn my relatives. (They have a dacha in Istra region of Moscow oblast, and some western business partners... what can happen if they *sometimes invite them to dacha*? I'm afraid, westerners can be in deep shock. )