Monday, 23 July 2007

Dear Person or Persons With Whom I Share Plumbing,

I appreciate you sharing the reek of cheap ganja with anyone who enters my apartment.  Showering to the smell of stale bong water invigorates my soul.  Watching your morning fog on its miasmatic creep from the bathroom into the hall, then from the hall into my office, is the highlight of my day.  You have a kind heart. 

However, I find the material I produce in the wake of your morning ablution decidedly subpar.  This morning I transcribed a passage from Herbert Spencer's Psychology thus: "Every form of Intelligence being, in essence, an adjustmust of inner to outer relations; it results that as, in the advance of this adjustmust, the outer relations increase number, in complexity, in heterogeneity, by degrees that cannot be marked."  Granted, in terms of Lamarckian adaptation, the neologism "adjustmust" has some traction: individuals who "adjustmaybe" are less likely to survive than the "adjustmusters" who crane their necks for the next highest leaf.

But I digress.  (I do that a lot lately.)  I know what you're thinking: "Dude.  Just 'cause you see my smokes in your place don't mean you score a contact high.  Seriously."  Perhaps.  You do know about those scientific studies of scent and cognitive function, right?  The ones saying strong scents like peppermint work as mnemonics, and that you remember what you were thinking when you first smelt those smells?  Because let me tell you:

The crap my brain excavates every time you pump my place full of your noxious weed ain't exactly helping me finish my dissertation.  Quite the opposite.  It would be awesome if you could do your business in some room not connected to any of mine.  If you must—€”if it's bathroom or bust—”maybe not toke so early in the morning or keep it up for quite so long.  You have work to do, and I'm sure the shirts you smoke don't help so much. 

Make an adjustmust.

All will be cool.

Jul 23, 2007 8:28:19 PM | Academia, Dissertation, Edith Wharton, Evolution, Herbert Spencer

5 Comments

Adam Roberts

Verily, from today, this shall be my mantra: I must I must adjust my must. Words to live by.

Posted by: Adam Roberts | Tuesday, 24 July 2007 at 04:13 AM

Ahistoricality

I suspect nobody has commented because nobody wants to admit to any experience with these matters -- pot or plumbing, either one.

I would suggest either capping the drains -- cheap rubber covers should do it -- or making use of the bathroom fan (if your building is new enough to have those). Also calling the police is an option, but that might seem too drastic for some. Those of us who actually support legalization in the abstract need to deal with the secondhand smoke issue, I see.

Posted by: Ahistoricality | Tuesday, 24 July 2007 at 04:28 AM

Tim Lacy

Between that headless statue and your neighbors, your apartment building seems to have some character - or at least serve as home to a few characters! Long live characters. - TL

Posted by: Tim Lacy | Tuesday, 24 July 2007 at 12:23 PM

The Constructivist

And the use of analogies in mayoral campaigns.... That's what we were talking about, right?

Posted by: The Constructivist | Thursday, 26 July 2007 at 05:36 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Suitable Insanity; or, You Silly Science, You, Reinforcing Social Prejudice with Your Silliness The greatest hurdle in writing about works informed by turn-of-the-last-century science is communicating how unscientific it was. Unlike medievalists, who have the luxury of discussing barnacle geese and self-castrating beavers, I address works with the patina of reputable science—the toys and methods are patently modern, the problem lies in the conclusions drawn with their aid. Individually, each of these conclusions is merely incorrect; combined, they form the keystone for many a house of scientific horror, each built to the idiosyncratic specifications of its inmate-owner. Compounding my difficulty is that from the street, these monstrosities are indistinguishable from the stolid brownstones flanking them on either side. Only when you open the front door and step into a mud-walled bathroom in which a stove sits beneath a sign reading "FOR SHITTING APRICOTS" do you sense something is amiss. In short, convincing you that a conventional-sounding statement about social evolution is no more rational than a foyer dedicated to disposing peaches ain't the easiest stunt to pull. Here's my malformed attempt: Early in ["The Descent of Man"], [Edith] Wharton mentions [Professor Linyard's] authorship of “Ethical Reactions of the Infusoria” and “The Unconscious Cerebration of Amoeba” (314). These microscopic animals are not, however, his area of expertise: “On the structure and habits of a certain class of coleoptera [beetles],” Wharton writes, “he was the most distinguished living authority” (318). His interest in infusoria indicates the speculative—almost unscientific, but certainly unprofessional—cant of his thought. That he extends his investigation into the ethics of infusorial reaction points to a metaphysical tendency extant prior to writing [his popular mockery of metaphysically informed "science"] The Vital Thing. Infusoria are so named because they appear in infusions of decaying organic matter. Throughout the latter half of the nineteenth century, debates as to the classification of infusoria persisted. “Though the term Infusoria has usually been applied to all the Protozoa provided with cilia or flagella,” declares A.S. Packard in 1875, “it is not restricted to the highest [Ciliata] division of the Protozoa” (87). In the same issue of The American Naturalist in which Packard’s essay appears, noted evolutionist T.H. Huxley places them within the category of “Endoplastica,” which “while not forsaking the general type of the single cell, attain a considerable complexity of organization” (66). Infusoria are thus single-celled animals with uncharacteristic complexity; unless, that is, they are not animals at all. David S. Kellicott, delivering the keynote address at the annual meeting of the American Society of Microscopists, notes that it is without question that “these [infusoria] teeming in the hay infusion are alive,” then asks, “but why relegate them to the animal kingdom rather than to the vegetable?” (14). He then reminds his fellow microscopists that no lesser light than Ernst Haeckel proposed a third kingdom, Protista, in which to include animals with chlorophyll-bearing bodies. Straddling the fence between animal and vegetable, infusoria and related protozoa occupied a central place in early debates about the evolution of mind. The eminent neo-Lamarckian E.D. Cope argues that It is evident…that...
PREVIOUS POST
De-Link Medievalists ... If You Dare! The other day, Richard Nokes issued an ultimatum: be medieval or be de-linked. He can de-link Acephalous if he so desires, but before doing so, he should know: De-link if you adjustmust, Dr. Nokes. Just remember, I'll kill all your dragons, monkeys, and homosexual monks if you do. You've been warned. [Image courtesy of the Little Womedievalist, whose knowledge of manuscripts is far more refined than mine. You do remember she illuminated a text and bound it in goatskin, don't you? I certainly do. The curing process does wonders for the sinuses. For those who demand proof: here are three pictures, the last of which is the best.]

Scott Eric Kaufman

The Typepad Team

Search

Become a Fan

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments