I feel like I found a prokaryotic version of fnord, which is almost a different species. Only one word, repeated with no skills or subtlety, and then directly used as a punchline. I think modern-day fnords are supposed to have a larger vocabulary, so they can better merge with the text.
Eh, it’s the same thing even if we replace some instances of the word ‘religion’ with synonyms like ‘X fetishism’, ‘worshipping at X altar’, ‘fundamentalism’, ‘X-god’.
...so one of the basic writing skills, of adding meaning at a subtextual/connotative level? (Poe in particular was adamant that you should set the tone of the story in the first first sentence.)
I’m puzzled by that story. Any halfway decent author can do that with a halfway receptive audience without all the prior-hypnosis baggage, just by utilizing the negative feelings people develop towards words over the course of their lives. Periodic spacing of negative-connotation words throughout an otherwise neutral-connotative work would make most people uneasy or uncomfortable.
I think the fnords are meant to have more effect than merely making most people uneasy or uncomfortable; they’re supposed to function as a means of outright control. But I haven’t actually read the Illuminatus! trilogy so I don’t guarantee I’m right about that.
In Illuminatus!, children were trained to have anxiety reactions to fnords in elementary school, and then have no conscious awareness of why they felt anxious. I assume this is allegory—and also that most of the training doesn’t happen in school.
I’d say that in the book, fnords are about control, but in a general “the system is out of control you” sort of way rather than getting specific beliefs or actions.
Ads don’t have fnords, so people buy things in the hope of relieving anxiety. This is not literally true—many ads evoke anxiety.
Becoming able to see the fnords is a sign of impending enlightenment.
That’s just a fnord.
I feel like I found a prokaryotic version of fnord, which is almost a different species. Only one word, repeated with no skills or subtlety, and then directly used as a punchline. I think modern-day fnords are supposed to have a larger vocabulary, so they can better merge with the text.
Eh, it’s the same thing even if we replace some instances of the word ‘religion’ with synonyms like ‘X fetishism’, ‘worshipping at X altar’, ‘fundamentalism’, ‘X-god’.
Interestingly enough, this is what the original ur-fnord was.
For anyone unfamiliar with the term: Fnord.
...so one of the basic writing skills, of adding meaning at a subtextual/connotative level? (Poe in particular was adamant that you should set the tone of the story in the first first sentence.)
I’m puzzled by that story. Any halfway decent author can do that with a halfway receptive audience without all the prior-hypnosis baggage, just by utilizing the negative feelings people develop towards words over the course of their lives. Periodic spacing of negative-connotation words throughout an otherwise neutral-connotative work would make most people uneasy or uncomfortable.
I think the fnords are meant to have more effect than merely making most people uneasy or uncomfortable; they’re supposed to function as a means of outright control. But I haven’t actually read the Illuminatus! trilogy so I don’t guarantee I’m right about that.
In Illuminatus!, children were trained to have anxiety reactions to fnords in elementary school, and then have no conscious awareness of why they felt anxious. I assume this is allegory—and also that most of the training doesn’t happen in school.
I’d say that in the book, fnords are about control, but in a general “the system is out of control you” sort of way rather than getting specific beliefs or actions.
Ads don’t have fnords, so people buy things in the hope of relieving anxiety. This is not literally true—many ads evoke anxiety.
Becoming able to see the fnords is a sign of impending enlightenment.