ellauri030.html on line 908: An analysis of content from business-to-business advertising magazines in the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany found a high (23 percent) overall usage of humor. The highest percentage was found in the British sample at 26 percent. Of the types of humor found by McCullough and Taylor, three categories corresponded with Freud's grouping of tendentious (aggression and sexual) and non-tendentious (nonsense) wit. 20 percent of the humor were accounted for as “aggression” and “sexual.” “Nonsense” was listed at 18 percent.
ellauri030.html on line 914: Tendentious humor involves a "victim", someone at whose expense we laugh. Non-tendentious humor does not require a victim. This innocuous humor typically depends on wordplay, and Freud believed it has only modest power to evoke amusement. Tendentious humor, then, is the only kind that can evoke big laughs. It's the only kind to be found in religious works.
ellauri030.html on line 916: However, Freud believed a mixture of both tendentious and non-tendentious humor is required to keep the tendentious humor from becoming too offensive or demeaning to its victim. The innocent jokework of the innocuous humor would mask the otherwise hostile joke and therefore "bribe" our senses, allowing us to laugh at what would otherwise be socially unacceptable. Therefore, we often think we are laughing at innocuous jokes, but what really makes them funny is their socially unacceptable nature hidden below the surface.
ellauri243.html on line 736: Job Thornberry comes into the story with the Anti-Corn-Law League, representing the remarkable change in English politics from the time before Napoleonic wars when the 10% richest guys were local landowners to after the wars when the merchants and industrialists had become the nobs (am. head honchos). This change of mens of production necessitated the passage of Reform Bills that favored Millian laissez-faire by the Conservative Derby-Disraeli ministries. Job Thornberry may be Richard Cobden; for he certainly has much of Cobden´s subject in him. The energetic and capable minister Lord Roehampton is taken to be Lord Palmerston, and Count Ferrol is perhaps Bismarck. Neuchatel, the great banker, is the historical Rothschild; Cardinal Henry Edward Manning figures as the tendentious papist Nigel Penruddock.
xxx/ellauri169.html on line 473: Esim venäläisvastainen, Israel-myönteinen näkövinkkeli olisi ollut nyt enemmän kuin paikallaan. Mutta ei, its heavy-handed, tendentious, and regressive! Pahassa ryssämiehessä on muka jotain lieventäviä asianhaaroja. Hah, paskan marjat, paha mikä paha! Ryssä on ryssä vaikka sen voissa paistaisi. Mutta se onkin ulkkareiden oscar-ehdokas. Eine osaa, eivät edes yritä. Missä räväyttävät käänteet, missä car chaset, missä reippaat länkkärit, missä antiryssäily? Eihän tästä tule yhtään mitään, yhtä vätystelevää kuin Aki Kaurismäki. Vitun autistit!
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 123: At moments Rilke's awareness of his self-interest amid modern anxieties appears uncannily precocious: "The pressures even in the preschooler's life were often suffocating. He longed for change." How does Freedman know that? I presume he got it from one of the mature Rilke's self-dramatizing letters, letters that Freedman paraphrases tendentiously throughout the book. That approach has the effect of turning Rilke's harsh and vain self-explorations into evidence of the "traumas" that Rilke spent a life riddled with "failure" denying. Indeed, Freedman writes enigmatically about "Rilke's pattern of living through failure as part of a process that turns denial into poetic art." I'm not sure what that means, but it sounds like success to me.
xxx/ellauri250.html on line 431: Sometimes you can tell from the first shot. In “Compartment No. 6,” the camera follows a young woman at a party as she leaves a bathroom and enters a living room full of gathered friends. That walking, back-of-the-head shot is one of the soggiest conventions of the steadicam era, a facile way of conveying characters’ own fields of vision while anchoring the action on them. The familiarity of this trope suggests both limited imagination and an unwillingness to commit to a clear-cut point of view. When used cannily, it can convey ambiguous neutrality and looming mystery, but, more often, it suggests the merely functional recording of action, which is exactly what’s delivered in “Compartment No. 6,” opening in theatres on Wednesday. The movie sinks, fast and deep, under the weight of dramatic shortcuts, overemphatic details, undercooked possibilities, unconsidered implications. It’s heavy-handed, tendentious, and regressive—and it should come as no surprise that it’s on the fifteen-film shortlist for the Best International Feature Oscar.
7