J. Rubard noms des plumes 7/5/2023

Discussion:

(слишком старое сообщение для ответа)

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-05 18:53:52 UTC

Published book pseudonyms for Jeffrey Rubard (Oregon/US), 1990s-2020s

Fiction:

Russell Banks

T. Jefferson Parker

China Mieville

Dave Eggers

Jacques Roubaud

Paul Auster (less *Country of Last Things*, "by another hand")

Jeffrey Eugenides

John Wray

Jeffrey Lent

Jeff Noon

Andy Weir

Cixin Liu

Tom Rob Smith

Pascal Mercier

Paolo Coelho

Jamie Ford

Martin Solares

David Leavitt

Adam Rapp

John A. Heldt

Adam Levin

Russell Rowland

Edward Rutherfurd (shared, "city books" and *China* by Rubard)

Abdelrahman Munif (backdated to Intifada times, "Munif" not a person known to Arab world)

Laszlo Krasznahorkai

Simon Sebag Montefiore

Richard Russo (less *Mohawk*, "by another hand")

Richard Flanagan

Joshua Cohen

Nick Hornby

Jonathan Littell

Mark Z. Danielewski

Arturo Perez-Reverte

Brendan Mathews

Yann Martel

Roddy Doyle (less first three novels)

Douglas Stuart

W.G. Sebald (backdated)

Stieg Larsson

Anthony Doerr

Tom Drury

Keith Waldrop

M.T. Anderson ("Octavian Nothing")

Garth Greenwell

Wallace Cochran

Antonio Scurati (English texts original)

Domenico Starnone

Mark Helprin

Cormac McCarthy (“general Western life” comp. to Larry McMurtry)

Michel Houellebecq

Eugene Vodolazkin

Rohinton Minstry

History:

Gordon S. Wood

Alan Taylor

John Ferling (shared, 70s-80s books "by another hand")

David Hackett Fischer

Jon Meacham

Ted Widmer

Scott Reynolds Nelson

David W. Blight

David Priestland

Leslie Holmes

Ian Bell

Michael Dobbs (not the Dobbs of *House of Cards* and related series, separate individual)

Robert W. Merry

Richard White

James Sullivan

RJ Smith

Stephen Greenblatt (not the literary criticism)

Matthew Stewart

RJ Smith

Michael Azerrad

Nelson Lichtenstein

Timothy Egan

Tracy Daugherty

Greg Grandin

Bryan Burrough (*Public Enemies*, *Days of Rage* etc.)

Peter Hall

Louis Menand (imitations of William Shawn, etc.)

Simon Sebag Montefiore

Arthur Kempton

Mark Fisher

Robert Fisk

James J. McPherson (backdated, books not available in 1980s)

Taylor Branch

Sociology:

Charlie Bertsch ("Bad Subjects")

Craig Calhoun

William Rasch

Randall Collins (earlier books by another individual)

Göran Therborn (group)

John Roberts (not John Roberts, SCOTUS; fact known to Mr. Roberts)

Don Ross

Derrick Jensen

Gerd Baumann

Enzo Traverso

John Bellamy Foster

Richard A. Lanham (shared with other individual)

Joseph Carroll

Gerd Baumann

Jens Rubart

Hans-Georg Moeller

Michael Bentley

William H. Sewell Jr.

Jeffrey Alexander (less *Theoretical Logic in Sociology*)

John Roemer

Mark Fisher

Jan-Werner Müller

Oliver Zunz

Ulrich Beck

Michael Burawoy

Taylor Branch

Robert Brenner

Philosophy:

Philip Pettit (John Locke Lectures)

Tyler Burge (“Individualism and the Mental” backdated)

Frank Jackson?

Tim van Gelder

Peter Carruthers

Jeff Malpas

Manuel Delanda

Kojin Karatani (group)

R.J. Lipton

Patrick J. Hurley

Peter Godfrey-Smith

Huw Price

Evan Thompson

Kevin Lynch

Domenico Losurdo

Alexander Stern

Ian Hacking

Alain Badiou

Ted Sider (John Locke Lectures)

Axel Honneth

Detlev Claussen

Gilles Dowek

Jean-Luc Nancy

Jean-Pierre Dupuy

Joseph LeDoux

Terrence Deacon?

Eric Baum

Murray Clarke

Joshua Cohen

Paul Guyer

Tyler Burge

Matthew Stewart

Philip Kitcher

Jonathan Lear

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-06 15:43:30 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard
Published book pseudonyms for Jeffrey Rubard (Oregon/US), 1990s-2020s
Russell Banks
T. Jefferson Parker
China Mieville
Dave Eggers
Jacques Roubaud
Paul Auster (less *Country of Last Things*, "by another hand")
Jeffrey Eugenides
John Wray
Jeffrey Lent
Jeff Noon
Andy Weir
Cixin Liu
Tom Rob Smith
Pascal Mercier
Paolo Coelho
Jamie Ford
Martin Solares
David Leavitt
Adam Rapp
John A. Heldt
Adam Levin
Russell Rowland
Edward Rutherfurd (shared, "city books" and *China* by Rubard)
Abdelrahman Munif (backdated to Intifada times, "Munif" not a person known to Arab world)
Laszlo Krasznahorkai
Simon Sebag Montefiore
Richard Russo (less *Mohawk*, "by another hand")
Richard Flanagan
Joshua Cohen
Nick Hornby
Jonathan Littell
Mark Z. Danielewski
Arturo Perez-Reverte
Brendan Mathews
Yann Martel
Roddy Doyle (less first three novels)
Douglas Stuart
W.G. Sebald (backdated)
Stieg Larsson
Anthony Doerr
Tom Drury
Keith Waldrop
M.T. Anderson ("Octavian Nothing")
Garth Greenwell
Wallace Cochran
Antonio Scurati (English texts original)
Domenico Starnone
Mark Helprin
Cormac McCarthy (“general Western life” comp. to Larry McMurtry)
Michel Houellebecq
Eugene Vodolazkin
Rohinton Minstry
Gordon S. Wood
Alan Taylor
John Ferling (shared, 70s-80s books "by another hand")
David Hackett Fischer
Jon Meacham
Ted Widmer
Scott Reynolds Nelson
David W. Blight
David Priestland
Leslie Holmes
Ian Bell
Michael Dobbs (not the Dobbs of *House of Cards* and related series, separate individual)
Robert W. Merry
Richard White
James Sullivan
RJ Smith
Stephen Greenblatt (not the literary criticism)
Matthew Stewart
RJ Smith
Michael Azerrad
Nelson Lichtenstein
Timothy Egan
Tracy Daugherty
Greg Grandin
Bryan Burrough (*Public Enemies*, *Days of Rage* etc.)
Peter Hall
Louis Menand (imitations of William Shawn, etc.)
Simon Sebag Montefiore
Arthur Kempton
Mark Fisher
Robert Fisk
James J. McPherson (backdated, books not available in 1980s)
Taylor Branch
Charlie Bertsch ("Bad Subjects")
Craig Calhoun
William Rasch
Randall Collins (earlier books by another individual)
Göran Therborn (group)
John Roberts (not John Roberts, SCOTUS; fact known to Mr. Roberts)
Don Ross
Derrick Jensen
Gerd Baumann
Enzo Traverso
John Bellamy Foster
Richard A. Lanham (shared with other individual)
Joseph Carroll
Gerd Baumann
Jens Rubart
Hans-Georg Moeller
Michael Bentley
William H. Sewell Jr.
Jeffrey Alexander (less *Theoretical Logic in Sociology*)
John Roemer
Mark Fisher
Jan-Werner Müller
Oliver Zunz
Ulrich Beck
Michael Burawoy
Taylor Branch
Robert Brenner
Philip Pettit (John Locke Lectures)
Tyler Burge (“Individualism and the Mental” backdated)
Frank Jackson?
Tim van Gelder
Peter Carruthers
Jeff Malpas
Manuel Delanda
Kojin Karatani (group)
R.J. Lipton
Patrick J. Hurley
Peter Godfrey-Smith
Huw Price
Evan Thompson
Kevin Lynch
Domenico Losurdo
Alexander Stern
Ian Hacking
Alain Badiou
Ted Sider (John Locke Lectures)
Axel Honneth
Detlev Claussen
Gilles Dowek
Jean-Luc Nancy
Jean-Pierre Dupuy
Joseph LeDoux
Terrence Deacon?
Eric Baum
Murray Clarke
Joshua Cohen
Paul Guyer
Tyler Burge
Matthew Stewart
Philip Kitcher
Jonathan Lear

"Alain Badiou? And not, say, Quentin Meillassoux? You are too good."
You research these things the way you research them, you know, and not through "hearsay"?

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-07 15:28:46 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

"Alain Badiou? And not, say, Quentin Meillassoux? You are too good."
You research these things the way you research them, you know, and not through "hearsay"?

"Jean-Pierre Dupuy isn't too bad either..."

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-07 20:57:18 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

"Alain Badiou? And not, say, Quentin Meillassoux? You are too good."
You research these things the way you research them, you know, and not through "hearsay"?

"Jean-Pierre Dupuy isn't too bad either..."

"Why don't you cross-post your remarks on Jean-Luc Nancy here, then?"
Cross-posting is very bad manners, even if only 'in memory of' a functionally useful Usenet.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-09 15:30:51 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

"Alain Badiou? And not, say, Quentin Meillassoux? You are too good."
You research these things the way you research them, you know, and not through "hearsay"?

"Jean-Pierre Dupuy isn't too bad either..."

"Why don't you cross-post your remarks on Jean-Luc Nancy here, then?"
Cross-posting is very bad manners, even if only 'in memory of' a functionally useful Usenet.

"Those other people seem to know what they're doing, though."
They're doing what they're doing. As per usual for them, their "first move" is extremely gauche, and then...

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-13 15:22:30 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

"Alain Badiou? And not, say, Quentin Meillassoux? You are too good."
You research these things the way you research them, you know, and not through "hearsay"?

"Jean-Pierre Dupuy isn't too bad either..."

"Why don't you cross-post your remarks on Jean-Luc Nancy here, then?"
Cross-posting is very bad manners, even if only 'in memory of' a functionally useful Usenet.

"Those other people seem to know what they're doing, though."
They're doing what they're doing. As per usual for them, their "first move" is extremely gauche, and then...

"Is 'Jeffrey Rubard' itself a pen name?"
No, it was on my birth certificate.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 18:47:38 UTC

Permalink

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 22:13:43 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

"No, really, the way we talk about things *can* and *should* talk. It's actually really smart to think that..."
"You can change the way keyboards operated in 2004, so to speak?"
"No comment." #badpostmodernismalert

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 22:22:55 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 22:46:19 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 22:48:02 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-19 22:48:45 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-20 15:17:44 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-07-21 21:31:19 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-08-14 20:16:45 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-10-04 19:24:51 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-10-05 18:40:36 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-10-29 16:10:35 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-10-31 15:25:07 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-10-31 20:04:47 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-02 21:38:03 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-04 15:40:21 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-05 16:48:45 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-12 16:49:06 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-13 16:10:10 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

"Maybe he never lived in Paris at all?"
You're getting ahead of yourself. #melenchonybabyindeed

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-17 16:22:24 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

"Maybe he never lived in Paris at all?"
You're getting ahead of yourself. #melenchonybabyindeed

"'Paris in the Present Tense', maybe?"
Oh, you are far too 'arch', dude.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-17 21:26:23 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

"Maybe he never lived in Paris at all?"
You're getting ahead of yourself. #melenchonybabyindeed

"'Paris in the Present Tense', maybe?"
Oh, you are far too 'arch', dude.

(I did say that I wrote those books, though. It might be 'wrongheaded' but it's not 'trick argumentation'.)

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-18 16:14:03 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

"Maybe he never lived in Paris at all?"
You're getting ahead of yourself. #melenchonybabyindeed

"'Paris in the Present Tense', maybe?"
Oh, you are far too 'arch', dude.

(I did say that I wrote those books, though. It might be 'wrongheaded' but it's not 'trick argumentation'.)

"Like, that's a lot of published texts. I don't think so?"
You make a lot (but not an infinite number) of cars as an auto worker, right?

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-18 22:18:24 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jeffrey Rubard

Update: "Do you suppose any of the 'facts related to composition' changed recently?"
"It's not that simple."
"Oh, it would be."

For the Audience: Um, "there's no time-machine here" is basically how *all kinds* of history as a discipline work...

Wider World: "So you would just guess?"
Yes, you would *just* guess.
"I think that word 'just' is doing too much work here."
It usually does.

"Are you just guessing?"
No. They're substantially pictures of my face - I would 'entertain' theories the author photographs were literally of other people,
but they are never presented.

"But still, it's only reasonable to think..."
That you just *wish* the world was different, and think things should have been 'made to your liking'?

"No, I'm pretty sure that..."
That sounds like fantasizing, and to 'too much point'.

"Am I supposed to ask Paul Auster how he feels about all of this for you, little man?"
No.

"What about Siri Hustvedt?"
That'd be a 'no', too.

"She's a woman."
Sure.

"Is she... your wife?"
No.

"Did you really write those books, though?"
I sure did.

"How can you tell, though?"
That's actually a good question.

Using the 'normal methods' of literary history?

"You're making it up."
I'm not making it up.

"I think we should go ask Alain Badiou about this, actually."
Maybe. I guess you could think that.

Where are you gonna find him, though?
"In Paris, silly."
I guess you could think that.

"What if he doesn't live there anymore, though?"
Yeah, I guess it could be like that too. #noduh

"Maybe he never lived in Paris at all?"
You're getting ahead of yourself. #melenchonybabyindeed

"'Paris in the Present Tense', maybe?"
Oh, you are far too 'arch', dude.

(I did say that I wrote those books, though. It might be 'wrongheaded' but it's not 'trick argumentation'.)

"Like, that's a lot of published texts. I don't think so?"
You make a lot (but not an infinite number) of cars as an auto worker, right?

"What's the point?"
It's an analogy.
"I don't like analogies."
Hmm... oh, well.

Jeffrey Rubard

2023-11-19 19:14:11 UTC