Thothmuffin
Don't get any crumbs on the scale of judgement.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Another Installment of "Words I've Never Heard"
My archival studies reading today brings you, dear readers, another installment of "Words I've Never Heard!" Today's word of the day is: thigmotropic.
In context:
"the archivist-historian relationship is a thigmotropic one. Archivists do historical work of sorts and historians do archival work of sorts."
Brothman, "Orders of Value: Probing [!] the Theoretical Terms of Archival Practice", Archivaria 33 (Summer 1991), p.86
From Internet gleanings (The American Heritage Dictionaries), it appears that "thigmotropism" refers to "The turning or bending response of an organism upon direct contact with a solid surface or object. Also called stereotropism." I grok this as what happens when a tree encounters a fence post and proceeds to grow around it, or, if you like, the mythical phenomenon of the kitten in a jar. Very well.
So wtf is Brothman talking about? Is the archivist the organism, and the historian the object? Or the other way around? Or can there be a such thing as mutual thigmotropism, whereby two organisms act as objects for each other? In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
More importantly, wouldn't it have been clearer and more accurate to say "The shape of the archival profession affects the shape of the historical profession, and vice versa"? Or just delete the first sentence all together, and rely on the second sentence to make the point, though in an unhelpfully imprecise way?
On a side note: this is why skimming reading is so difficult for me. If authors would be considerate enough to confine themselves primarily to one- or two-syllable words, things would go much faster. I'm just glad I only have to read a reaction paper to Brothman's article, and not the whole thing, although who knows how many deliciously unnecessary new words he could teach me?
In context:
"the archivist-historian relationship is a thigmotropic one. Archivists do historical work of sorts and historians do archival work of sorts."
Brothman, "Orders of Value: Probing [!] the Theoretical Terms of Archival Practice", Archivaria 33 (Summer 1991), p.86
From Internet gleanings (The American Heritage Dictionaries), it appears that "thigmotropism" refers to "The turning or bending response of an organism upon direct contact with a solid surface or object. Also called stereotropism." I grok this as what happens when a tree encounters a fence post and proceeds to grow around it, or, if you like, the mythical phenomenon of the kitten in a jar. Very well.
So wtf is Brothman talking about? Is the archivist the organism, and the historian the object? Or the other way around? Or can there be a such thing as mutual thigmotropism, whereby two organisms act as objects for each other? In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
More importantly, wouldn't it have been clearer and more accurate to say "The shape of the archival profession affects the shape of the historical profession, and vice versa"? Or just delete the first sentence all together, and rely on the second sentence to make the point, though in an unhelpfully imprecise way?
On a side note: this is why skimming reading is so difficult for me. If authors would be considerate enough to confine themselves primarily to one- or two-syllable words, things would go much faster. I'm just glad I only have to read a reaction paper to Brothman's article, and not the whole thing, although who knows how many deliciously unnecessary new words he could teach me?
Sunday, April 01, 2007
The USPS: It's better not to know
I still submit my tax forms in paper by mail, for some strange reason. I will do everything else on the Internet, but when it comes to taxes, I just really need the satisfaction of filling out and copying and stapling all my forms and what have you.
But then I have to mail them. I think, deep down inside, I trust the USPS less than I trust the Internet to deliver things on time. So what do I do? I send my taxes priority mail with delivery confirmation, thinking this will prevent any nastiness.
Yesterday when I checked the status of my tax packet, I got a message that went something like this:
"Your item has been sent to an incorrect destination. We are doing everything we can to correct this error as soon as possible. Delivery Confirmation status is updated every evening."
I wish I'd copied the message exactly, because it was such a hilarious mix of surprise and apology. I was not greatly comforted by it, but I checked back today and everything seems to have worked out. It does make me sort of wonder what would have happened if I had sent it by regular 1st class...is the USPS less likely or more likely to get that wrong?
I do love the USPS, though. They're fast, they're dedicated, and now they have Star Wars themed EVERYTHING, including R2-D2 mailboxes. I just don't want to know how they work their strange and wonderful magic.
But then I have to mail them. I think, deep down inside, I trust the USPS less than I trust the Internet to deliver things on time. So what do I do? I send my taxes priority mail with delivery confirmation, thinking this will prevent any nastiness.
Yesterday when I checked the status of my tax packet, I got a message that went something like this:
"Your item has been sent to an incorrect destination. We are doing everything we can to correct this error as soon as possible. Delivery Confirmation status is updated every evening."
I wish I'd copied the message exactly, because it was such a hilarious mix of surprise and apology. I was not greatly comforted by it, but I checked back today and everything seems to have worked out. It does make me sort of wonder what would have happened if I had sent it by regular 1st class...is the USPS less likely or more likely to get that wrong?
I do love the USPS, though. They're fast, they're dedicated, and now they have Star Wars themed EVERYTHING, including R2-D2 mailboxes. I just don't want to know how they work their strange and wonderful magic.
