Friday
Oct302009
Solid State by Kevin Jackson (thrucrit)
October 30, 2009 at 10:31PM
Solid: stable, not fluid, substantial, not hollow
We stand shoulder to
shoulder, in solid-
arity with our friends in
(insert country name – verify
pronunciation): their fight
is our fight
and their losses
our losses.
Blah. Blah.
Blah.
Next!
kj29oct09
tagged Thrucrit
Thrucrit
Reader Comments (17)
imagine being in what we classify as a 'failed state'. that would give us the right to do anything we liked to you. not that we don't have that already, mind you! i suppose this refers to hilary's remarks in af-pak? we stand shoulder to shoulder with you as long as you do what you're told.
i don't think this is going well. (the politics, that is.) nobel peace prize? didn't they give that to kissinger for bombing cambodia flat in secret?
yes, that's where it sprang from pete... though hils has no monopoly on the "shoulder to shoulder" speech...
the whole thing sucks and sucks twenty times worse (if i can twist my metaphor) for being sold to us as "the right thing to do" by people who must know it's exactly the wrong thing to do but daren't let on
thanks for stopping by and sharing
k
I like this without the implication of it relating to the topical. I think it works as a general image (and quite humorous) of political stobbornness. Might want to consider losing the prepositional phrase after with, including its parenthetical phrase, and end the sentence at solidarity, then pick up at "their fight..."
larry
I concur with Larry's suggested edits and also that this works as a general comment on western foreign policy.
Was the slight indent at "is our fight" intended?
B.
~
I love how it doesn't waste any more time or energy than the well-worn topic warrants;
Its bitterness robs the subject of its unearned digity.
blah blah blah, next
perfect!
If you will permit me a redux play? The irony you set up with the aside, can stand on its own.
Solid State
We stand shoulder to shoulder,
in solid-
arity with
our friends in
[country name – verify pronunciation]:
their fight
is our fight
their losses
our losses.
PS. "blah blah" and "next" is implicit, really, in any speech of such a nature. They key is your aside, plus the inclusion of such common rhetoric (at least from a Canuckstanipoplian perspective.)
It's an either/or between the aside and the blah, blah, next: each being implied by the other.
In the detes, I fathom no need to line break "shoulder to shoulder" ; there is no surprise forthcoming (shoulder to???) , thus I begrudge having to wait to read what I expected to hear.
Yes, Brian, I do agree about the either/or , and I totally favour the aside; it is quite clever without announcing that it is just that.
I question the idea of the speaker verifying pronunciation --- would they be so conscientious?
Speech notes, depending on the handler, would include.
P'raps. Is the aside the speech writer's note? Hadn't thought of it as so, but that would answer my question I s'pose.
Now I'm on to thinking about some repetition. Please do ignore me, dear poet, it's just that when I am gobsmacked by a central idea combined with its first impression, I quite enjoy getting a bit carried away.
We stand shoulder to shoulder,
in solid-
arity with
our friends in
[country name – verify pronunciation]:
their fight
is our fight
their losses
our losses.
We stand
shoulder to shoulder;
our friends
their fight
our losses
Brian, it might just be a Canuckian presumption on my part, but not even NOBODY writes his own material any more; they are all "handled".
More work for us writers!
Bloody presumptuous Canucks. . . ;-P
So, how do I get me one of these here speech writin' gigs?
Wow, the threads here read like some modern dialogue play. Delicious, though largely enigmatic. Soduku in words :)
Thanks y'all for reads and responses.
I can't decide how/if to change this. Yes I know the last lines are ridiculously obvious but I kind of think that's the point. They're the (outsize) pin needed to prick the rhetorical balloon....
At least that's how I see it today. Will ponder on this.
Thanks again, k