If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
1. The Clapham omnibus has many passengers. The most venerable is the reasonable man, who was born during the reign of Victoria but remains in vigorous health.
Don't forget Fardell v Potts, in which the then Master of the Rolls held (Bungay LJ and Blow LJ concurring): "It has been urged for the appellant, and my own researches incline me to agree, that in all that mass of authorities which bears upon this branch of the law there is no single mention of a reasonable woman. [...] I find that at Common Law a reasonable woman does not exist."
[A P Herbert Misleading Cases]
I keep hitting the Escape key, but I'm still here!
Don't forget Fardell v Potts, in which the then Master of the Rolls held (Bungay LJ and Blow LJ concurring): "It has been urged for the appellant, and my own researches incline me to agree, that in all that mass of authorities which bears upon this branch of the law there is no single mention of a reasonable woman. [...] I find that at Common Law a reasonable woman does not exist."
[A P Herbert Misleading Cases]
"...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
...the then Master of the Rolls held (Bungay LJ and Blow LJ concurring): "It has been urged for the appellant, and my own researches incline me to agree, that in all that mass of authorities which bears upon this branch of the law there is no single mention of a reasonable woman. [...] I find that at Common Law a reasonable woman does not exist."...
Roy Dotrice and Leonard Sachs have just popped into my head. Curious...
'Hear, Hear!' ... (Don't worry, I'm already greatly blessed with a particularly fine pair of ears, thank you ... )
'Bravo!' ... (Oh dear, yet another worrying sign regarding the efficacy of the Government's tight immigration controls ...)
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Apart from any other considerations (of which there must be many), it's about as much of a sentence as "every little helps".
But it's the title of a television programme, so suely doesn't have to be a sentence (is 'Our mutual friend' a sentence?). I think that it's derived from the title of an Australian film, 'Strictly ballroom', which was about a teenager whose parents were ballroom dancing teachers & judges in competitions. He wanted to dance but, being young and rebellious, didn't want to abide by the strict rules of competitive ballroom dancing (at the end of the film he won the day, the competition, the girl & everybody's hearts).
But it's the title of a television programme, so suely doesn't have to be a sentence (is 'Our mutual friend' a sentence?). I think that it's derived from the title of an Australian film, 'Strictly ballroom', which was about a teenager whose parents were ballroom dancing teachers & judges in competitions. He wanted to dance but, being young and rebellious, didn't want to abide by the strict rules of competitive ballroom dancing (at the end of the film he won the day, the competition, the girl & everybody's hearts).
No, it doesn't have to be a sentence per se, but at least Our Mutual Friend is a meaningful clause whereas neither "every little helps" nor Strictly Come Dancing is. You are partially correct about its derivation, being a conflation of that movie title and the television series of many year ago Come Dancing; I think that it's this very conflation that gave rise to the shortcomings of SCD's title.
OK, I admit that I wouldn't subject myself to two consecutive seconds of the programme if you paid me (unless the sum offered was sufficiently large!), but my gripe here is specifically - or even "strictly", if you prefer - with the title itself and not with its everything-must-be-competitive-or-it's-no-good manifestation, or its assumption that people without previous dance experience can somehow elevate themselves, with help over a very short time, to some kind of professional standards and certainly not the wearisome headache-inducing mass hysteria that accompanies it (or rather that it accompanies) - and not even with certain of its competitors!
my gripe here is specifically ... with the title itself
And my point was that the titles of TV programmes, books, paintings, films, pieces of music, or anything else don't need to be grammatical or sentences or meaningful clauses. The only meaning they have is to give a flavour or hint or description of the work (& sometimes not even that).
at least Our Mutual Friend is a meaningful clause whereas neither "every little helps" nor Strictly Come Dancing is.
'Our Mutual Friend' is not a clause: it is a noun-phrase. And a jolly good novel.
'Every little helps' is a well-formed sentence, subject plus predicate. And a ghastly strap-line / jingle from some depressing advertisements.
I do not see your objection to the title 'Strictly Come Dancing' ; a sly nod to the film and the earlier telly series. There are objections one could have to the programme...
And a ghastly strap-line / jingle from some depressing advertisements.
"Gala La La" from the TV ad for a lottery being arguably the most pukeworthy example thus far in my endurance.
While it has always been my view that these ads are there for capitalist ideology at its most barefaced to work its nefarious means of inducing states of passive moronic infantile receptivity in those intended to be persuaded by them, this one really leads me to wonder if these requirements were actually set down in the brief to the maker of the ad.
I have no feelings about 'Strictly Come Dancing' either as the title of a television programme or simply a programme I don't have to watch and am under no obligation to do so.
I do find the world's habit of referring to it as 'Strictly' (esp. at the BBC) just to show how familiar and approving they are of such a rattling (eh?) good BBC product which shows the licence fee is really worth the small cost …
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
I do find the world's habit of referring to it as 'Strictly' (esp. at the BBC) just to show how familiar and approving they are of such a rattling (eh?) good BBC product which shows the licence fee is really worth the small cost …
I do not see your objection to the title 'Strictly Come Dancing' ; a sly nod to the film and the earlier telly series. There are objections one could have to the programme...
I just don't think tht it works and is accordingly an ostensibly clever idea that nevertheless trips itself up (which is not what people should do on such a programme). There are indeed objections that one could have to the programme - and I do have them!
I do, too - and I imagine that it was indeed intentional, just as I harbour a slight doubt that a certain "Proms presenter" is wholly familiar with the phenomenon...
Comment