Tuesday, July 29, 2014

The other day, I was talking with someone about a TV show, and I said, I pretty much agree with critics who say that this show isn't very good. I a lots of episodes, but for every hilarious one there were five or six really unfunny episodes.

The other person responded with, "Blasphemer! [That actor] is God. The 'really awful' examples you cite are the core of the show and part of what made it a classic."

I know he was joking when he slapped me down, but he didn't respond to what I'd asserted and he laid down the law in return.

I replied, "I repeat: Most episodes of [the show] are not very good. Period. They aren't funny, they aren't well-written, and they are repetitive. Worse: [the actor's other series] is appallingly bad and nearly unwatchable, and repeats most of the gags and situations from the earlier show."

He replied, "You'd sound/read less persnickety if you'd drop a few 'in my opinion's here and there."

Really? He certainly didn't drop any such caveats in his reply.

In fact, what I suspect he's really saying is, "Your opinion made me mad. You are confusing fact and opinion by forcefully stating your opinion. I want to point out your ignorance."

What he's really doing is making assumptions about me. I think.

What he's really doing is imputing stupidity to me, as well as stubborn jackassery.

Frankly, it seems to me that opinion -- "this show sucks" -- and facts -- "this show ran for X seasons" are pretty easily distinguished.

Advising me to distinguish is a way of knocking me back, putting me in my place, and making sure that I do the extra things no one else has to.

That makes me so mad... It's diffficult to say just how angry I get at that.

No comments:

Post a Comment