Ye Olde English

I have completed my last ever English exam in school today. This is just a rant on the various little things I find rather amusing in Functional English as a subject... :D

Section B itself is a waste, in my opinion. All the forms of various types of mass communication are all so outdated. I mean why the hell is there a format for everything is beyond me. The odds that these things actually have an application in real life are very less. Even then, the odds that we actually follow these format rules while we are employing the use of such things are even lesser.

You know the one thing that makes all these section B stuff obsolete?
Telephones.
Praise Bell.

Sheesh. How stone age can you get? Let's take the message as our first example.

Random dude calls up your house and asks for someone who is always not present at the scene. You take the message for him. Till this, it's fine with me. Then it just goes crazy.

You take out a paper and write MESSAGE on the top, and URGENT/IMPORTANT right below it. And date to the left, and time to the right. And basically follow the pattern of a letter but use phrases instead.

Why?

Unless that person who is not present at the scene is off to some remote location, there is always a telephone by which you can reach him. Even if he doesn't have a mobile phone, surely wherever he is, there is BOUND to be a local telephone! Unless you are a crazy assclown, no one would prefer writing a message to a simple phone call.

Next, to the Poster. I always wondered how the word 'POSTER' just hangs by itself mid air just above the box in which the actual poster is drafted. Magic no?

Ads. The best of the lot. Does a tiny 10x8 micrometer space really prove to be that effective in advertising?
If the person who is advertising can buy a car or a plot of land or a house, why can't that cheapass advertise bigger?

I can never forget the ad miss gave us for lost and found. It was about Scabby, the lost dog.

1) Why do you call it "LOST AND FOUND"??? HOW CAN SOMETHING BE BOTH????

2) What's the point of giving the name of an animal that can't talk back? I agree that it might respond to the name Scabby, but nobody is stupid enough to shout SCABBY at every dog they see.

3) It has a hole in one ear. This was what was given. EVERY DOG ON THIS PLANET HAS TWO FREAKING EARS. IF IT DOESN'T IT IS PROBABLY MUTATED!!!!

That's all I can write about Section B... It's been a real blast writing all those debates, always fighting for a lost cause... I'm going to miss something which I always used as a chance to vent out :(

Moving on to Sec. D :D

I can't nitpick on the first lesson because it is actually very meaningful and good.

Room 10 by 8 is a super mega serial type lesson. Since I like to support the losing side always, I shall tell why the daughter in law is better than Mrs. Malik. She has enough respect and knows enough values to cover her hairdo with her saree (which according to Subhashini miss is a tradition in the North) while Mrs. Malik knows how to BALLROOM DANCE and especially with other's husbands.

Hum of Insects is a lesson meant only for Nature people. I am sick of it. Insects, irrespective of where I see them only anger me. The only reason I don't kill them instantly is because I am too scared to. And I personally can remember my each and every one of toys much more intensely than any garden I have been to in my life. I am no fan of Nature, and all the experiences I've had thanks to my garden is getting bitten by insects. Meanwhile, I proudly proclaim that I can name all the GIJoe and He-Man figures I had purely out of my awesome memory.
And no human can eat animal biscuits. (they aren't specified as animal shaped, just animal so mind you)
What irritates me is that if someone takes the side of the general public and writes an essay, it even makes it into an English textbook prescribed by an Educational board, but if on the same topic, someone writes against the topic, he is usually flamed*. Hypocrisy I tell you. I should be given the same respect if I say that Nature is 90% made up of shit (literally. animals shit everywhere. think about it.) that is given to Y dot Y. Poor guy, he's only a scalar, directionless idiot. No wonder he writes meaningless stuff.

I hate the Actress lesson so much that I can't even be bothered to criticize it.

Judgement of Paris is a hilarious lesson. The lesson starts out as narrated by none other than Rock! :D
In the summer of the memorable year- BUT THE DATE DOESN'T MATTER! XD
Check out the following:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gDF5cS-aV9U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=R_3zGBN0PIg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7jQSNTt1mM4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_TmhGK683cw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VcOHm1lH1Ww

Going through the lesson, I have observed that the usual words that convey a conversation (like told, said to, etc.) are rather few in comparison to the various words they've used (such as stammer, query, affirm, etc.). And this lesson brought out one super comment from Subhashini miss who said that beauty and brains are mutually exclusive.
Also was the source of inspiration for many jokes such as Shridhar's :
Him: What is sin 0?
Me: 0
Him: What is sin 30?
Me: 1/2
Him: What is sin 60?
Me: root 3/2
Him: WHAT IS SINE DIE????
Me: !!!!

And the text book questions are rather stupid. One of them asks us to narrate (as Suzanne) how it felt to settle for Quinquart to honour her word. The word 'settle' clearly implies an affair between Suzanne and Robichon which was clearly left out of the text book, which, had it been included would've caused quite a stir :D

A little research tells me that it is a part of a collection of stories in a book called "A chair on the Boulevard" by Leonard Merrick and not anonymously written.

And the best line : "And they all went to the Appeville-sous-Bois."

On Education is also a good lesson but I find it rather annoying that such a great man's words is not at all respected seeing as how we have to NV everything he says.

Asoka is another lesson that is CBSE's way of telling that you can never escape the dreaded subject called History. I personally felt that Asoka was not justified by his actions. He can follow Buddhism however he pleases, but imposing them on his subjects is really uncalled for and that just shows how he's misusing his power as a king. I will avoid talking more on this subject as anything involved with religion and me just causes unwanted controversy.

Grief is horrible. A guy's name is Iona Potapov, and yet, his son's name(s) Barin/Kuzma Monitch barely have any connection to his own. Not even the last name matches. I smell a Hornswoggle here. The gay young gentlemen are ultimate comedy.
And the way the last few lines are written is just plain outright disturbing. If it ever had to be made as a movie, Dan Radcliffe would be the perfect star. (along with his pet pony) :D


Sigfried Sassoon is the only poet to not have his own little pink box :( sucks to be him.

Ars Poetica is so full of ironies. If a poem can be anything it can, why the hell is Arichibald 'Fit Finlay' Macleish bothering to describe ground rules for a poem? And if we can interpret it as we like, why the hell should miss even bother giving us the meaning? And why does Canada have it's national leaf to be a symbol of grief? Boo to you Bret Hart! :P

Here's a pic of Finlay. See how he resembles the pic on top of the poem.

A K Ramanujan is a certified assclown. Not only does he have so many mothers, that he takes for granted his mother as among other things, but also he has enough wives to number them as 1 2 3 etc. (Read Love Poems to a Wife 1)

To be honest Keats never wrote "Ode to Autumn", he only wrote "To Autumn". And "Ode to Psyche" FTW!

I stand corrected. Helen Spalding is as unimportant as Sassoon. Pity, I rather liked the poem Curtain a lot.

Sally in Our Alley is ULTIMATE. The poem as such is hilarious, but Adi's version is better:

En aalu peru Sally,
Avalukku kattuven da Thaali,
On vaaikulla Poli,
PT sir peru Kali!

Again, a little bit of research (from GL) tells us that the lyrics are actually a bit changed for us (Cole: MODIFIED POEM!)
Check this out: http://www.contemplator.com/america/sally.html

"O then we'll wed, and then we'll bed,"

XD @ censorship.

And Henry Carey is badass. NAMBY PAMBY XD XD XD XD!! And I'll give you ten bucks if you can pronounce "CHRONONHOTOTHOLOGOS".

Alexander is my role model. I am the king of the world, damn it!

Monkey's Paw is SUCH A horror film ripoff. Someone actually told me they saw something to the same effect on Vijay TV. And I still find it funny how a married couple always call each other "Mother" and "Father". Again, research tells me that it is to inculcate the habit of calling them that in their children. Little children like that family in Christmas Carol, I can agree, but Herbert?!

That's about it. A well worth rant that covers the English language as we know it! :D


*meaning of flame for people not well-versed with Netspeak:
Verb

Infinitive
to flame


Third person singular
flames


Simple past
flamed


Past participle
flamed


Present participle
flaming

to flame (third-person singular simple present flames, present participle flaming, simple past and past participle flamed)

1. To produce flames.
2. (Internet) To post a destructively critical or abusive message, especially to provoke dissent or controversy