Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 123
- 2
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Recently read Robert Shankland's 1954 biography of Stephen T. Mather, written apparently quite straight in what I can only describe as a jaunty Wodehousian style. This has inspired several reflections:
-1954 was of course 30-odd years into Wodehouse's career as a bestselling author (modulo the whole German radio broadcasts episode), meaning that Shankland, in writing a piece of serious if perhaps hagiographic biography, presumably knew he sounded a bit like Wodehouse and chose to write like that anyway.
-One naturally considers Wodehouse's style as a parody of the dominant straight middle-highbrow style of the time. Indeed, Wodehouse occasionally steps outside this to parody the genuinely avant-garde (the occasional modern poet character) or popular crime fiction (various episodes of jewel theft and so on.).
-At the same time, virtually everything Wodehouse ever wrote and said was in more or less the same distinctive voice--is it really a parody if you're just like that naturally, so to speak?
-This also inspires the speculation that Wodehouse's style read as relatively colorless New Yorker prose to the audiences of its day. Imagine sitting down to Psmith in the City or Right Ho, Jeeves and having it read like Atul Gawande's longform medical pieces or something. It's enough to give a guy vertigo.
-At the same time, one can see cheeky flashes of Wodehouse from time to time in A. J. Liebling, who was after all a New Yorker fixture, and perhaps even John McPhee. Was Raymond Chandler a pioneering modernist with his works of hard-boiled fiction? Maybe--but he also went to Dulwich within two years, I think, of Wodehouse.
There's probably a coherent essay lurking in all this but I can't put my finger on it.
Separately, I just started Samuel Chamberlain's My Confession: Recollections of a Rogue and while I don't have any definite textual evidence yet I am extremely confident that George Macdonald Fraser must have read it and lifted a good deal of the style and possibly some more or less intact episodes for the Flashman books. Flash does run into the Glanton gang at one point, Fraser was never one to shy away from primary sources, and the voice will be strikingly familiar to Flashman readers.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link