Allons parler les couilles !!!

[English assassin]

Some classic stuff here from our man in the black beret with the cafe noir:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle1329421.ece

A distinguished professor of literature at Paris University has become a bestselling author with a work explaining how he comments authoritatively on books that he failed to finish, has forgotten or has never read.

Pierre Bayard, 52, who specialises in the link between literature and psychoanalysis, stunned specialists with the admission that he is anything but an assiduous reader.

He says that he often makes references in lectures, meetings, reviews and conversations to works that he has not read — without being found out.

However, Bayard — who has never finished Ulysses by James Joyce and forgotten what Steppenwolf,Hermann Hesse’s classic novel, is about — claims that this in no way devalues his opinion.

“It’s possible to have a passionate conversation about a book that one has not read, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who has not read it.

“The discourse on books that have not been read places us at the heart of a creative process which leads us to their origin,” he says in his work, Comment Parler des Livres que l’on n’a pas Lus (How to Talk about Books that You Haven’t Read).

Although Professor Bayard’s work was destined for the world of Parisian academia, it sold out almost immediately, was reprinted and is now rising to the top of the bestseller lists.

The publisher, Minuit, now wants to get it on supermarket and airport bookshelves. “I think the success shows that it has touched on a sensitive point,” Professor Bayard said, adding that his aim was to help people to avoid feeling guilty about their failure to read. He says, for instance, that he wants to free French intellectuals from the taboo that prevents them from confessing that they have only leafed through the works of Marcel Proust — “although that is the case for most of them”. He says that a valid literary opinion can be formed by dipping into a work, hearing others talk about it or skimming through a review of it

This, for me, sums up the abivalent relationship we have with the French. Consider:

A proposition so plainly wrong that a child should be able to see through it. Have they no shame?

Yet advanced with a shameless elan that you can't help but wish you, too, had.

And, hold on, dammit, if he hasn't lured ME into talking about a book that I haven't read.

On the whole I am guessing its a joke? It must be a joke, surely? Please?

(Mind you I bet no one at the Times has finished Ulysses either)

[Banquo's Ghost]

(Mind you I bet no one at the Times has finished Ulysses either)

All I can say is that Ulysses finished me.

I think it's a very interesting viewpoint (you may be right that only the French could get away with saying it and not be accused of philistinism) but unfortunately for Prof. Bayard, that means I may have to read and finish his book.

[English assassin]

I think it's a very interesting viewpoint but unfortunately for Prof. Bayard, that means I may have to read and finish his book.

That's the genius of it. If you buy his book and read it, he's wrong* , if you don't bother, he's right.

*My sad fact based pragmatic anglo-saxon heart demands that I add "as regards that one book at least", curse their French flair

[Adrian II]

Let's not pretend that we are confused about this. A Frenchman pretends he has written a book, other Frenchmen pretend they have read it and Anglo-Saxons pretend to be shocked about it.

This is called dialogue.

[English assassin]

By the way, you shall have written “allons parlez les couilles” or “allons parler des couilles” your title is ambiguous

Don't you try to impose your reactionary patriarchal so called "grammar" on me, just because you are a native french speaker and you think that makes you better at speaking french. Help, help, I'm being oppressed.

Everyone knows that semanticist objectivism suggests that reality is capable of truth, given that the premise of postsemiotic capitalist theory is invalid. It could be said that if Sartreist existentialism holds, we have to choose between postsemiotic capitalist theory and capitalist deappropriation.

The subject is contextualised into a semanticist objectivism that includes truth as a reality. In a sense, neocapitalist rationalism holds that the raison d’etre of the participant is social comment

(More, much more, from the Postmodernism Generator http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo )

[Petrus]

Don't you try to impose your reactionary patriarchal so called "grammar" on me, just because you are a native french speaker and you think that makes you better at speaking french. Help, help, I'm being oppressed.

Everyone knows that semanticist objectivism suggests that reality is capable of truth, given that the premise of postsemiotic capitalist theory is invalid. It could be said that if Sartreist existentialism holds, we have to choose between postsemiotic capitalist theory and capitalist deappropriation.

The subject is contextualised into a semanticist objectivism that includes truth as a reality. In a sense, neocapitalist rationalism holds that the raison d’etre of the participant is social comment

(More, much more, from the Postmodernism Generator http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo )

I'm sorry but isn't the subject of les couilles necessary linked to one form or the other of patriarchy?
How can i understand your title :
if it is 'parlez les couilles' it will be a perfidious invitation for frenchmen to perform syntax errors on your thread.
if it is 'parler des couilles' it can be an invitation to discuss about the logical flaws represented by this book.

Anyway you have to clarify your position about les couilles and the meaning you wish to give them.

[GoreBag]

Help, help, I'm being oppressed.

"Repressed", geez. And I'm from Canada.

[william the bastard]

Don't you try to impose your reactionary patriarchal so called "grammar" on me, just because you are a native french speaker and you think that makes you better at speaking french. Help, help, I'm being oppressed.

Everyone knows that semanticist objectivism suggests that reality is capable of truth, given that the premise of postsemiotic capitalist theory is invalid. It could be said that if Sartreist existentialism holds, we have to choose between postsemiotic capitalist theory and capitalist deappropriation.

The subject is contextualised into a semanticist objectivism that includes truth as a reality. In a sense, neocapitalist rationalism holds that the raison d’etre of the participant is social comment

(More, much more, from the Postmodernism Generator http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo )

Well..... It's a sad day for humour Death of the English one

[KukriKhan]

I vote Prof. Bayard to be chief Moderator of the Backroom, due to his unique qualifications and insight.

He'll fit right in.

[Kanamori]

I love the French.

Yeah, I'd agree that it's probably a joke, but I don't think anyone will ever get him to admit that.

[Petrus]

This is not a joke.

The author is used to develop paradox and to treat them very seriously.

His point seem to try to show it is possible to have very valid and interesting conversations about books whatever the knowledge you have from those books.

And he apparently manages to prove this point even if it is absurd.

Ever heard about cartesianism?

By the way, you shall have written “allons parlez les couilles” or “allons parler des couilles” your title is ambiguous.

[Fragony]

By the way, you shall have written

'should have'

hehehe

[Vladimir]

“It’s possible to have a passionate conversation about a book that one has not read, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who has not read it.

Well he’s right. I don’t have any problem with the quoted section. Hell, I’ve done the same thing with M2 even though I haven’t played the game yet . The key word is passionate ; passion is emotion based not reason based . I’d say that the less you know about a subject the more passionate you can be about it. Grasping the idea and listening to other’s thoughts on a book are all you need to have a conversation about it.

It seems to me he’s being perfectly candid about his lack of reading and is trying to focus more on getting people to talk about it. You know, just fun conversation. Besides, opinion based books make a lot of money and if you’ve read The Republic, you know what opinions are worth.

[Petrus]

'should have'

hehehe

'syntax error' is the only english expression i use both in my professional and non-professional life.

[Fragony]

'syntax error' is the only english term i use both in my professional and non-professional life.

Time to improve both of them then

[Petrus]

Time to improve both of them then

The .org is a great help for this.

Too bad it takes countless time to understand this barbarian language and even more to write it.

At least i hope it is funny to read.

[Scurvy]

Time to improve both of them then

[King Henry V]

'syntax error' is the only english expression i use both in my professional and non-professional life.

Does this mean you're the man who does the writing for the Texas Instruments calculartos?


Anyway, this sounds great: a book that will allow me to get through my French oral exam without having to read any of the books. Fantastic!

[Samurai Waki]

Sometimes I wish we would've gone with French as our main language *sigh* well I guess it was a good decision in the long run, we weren't overrun by Germans.