uTopianTurtleTop

In the car tonight, listening to Sinatra & Basie. Fairly rapid dialogue.

"Who is it singing, Daddoo?"

"It's Frank."

"Is Frank still singing?"

"It's still him."

"Is he still singing?"

"Yes, that's Frank."

"Is he still singing?"

"No, now it's Ed. Now it's Jimmy. Now it's Ron. Now it's Bill. Now it's George."

The kid's face lights up. "George the Monkey?"

(Laughing.) "Of course it's still Frank!"

"Why are you laughing?"

"Because you're a kook!"

"No I'm not! I'm not pooping!"

"I didn't say you're pooping, I said you're a kook."

"I don't like that word. That word belongs in the bathroom."

"OK, I won't use that word for you any more."

*

Objective v. subjective a false polarity. Understanding happens in between. The perceiving subject perceives qualities existing in the object. "Johnny Cash frequently sings with an eccentric relationship to standard Western intonation." An objective statement. But some judgments reside in the subject, based on frequently incommensurable personal criteria, experiences, and memories. "But Cash's timbre and phrasing are so powerful that I love his singing despite its frequently being out of tune." That's a subjective judgment.

This thought impressed me more before I wrote it down. Now I'm not even sure it makes sense.