Twitter — the idea, concept, and objective
One-liner: An expression that neither has any logical credibility nor any context, yet practitioners of this form of communication remain intellectuals in the eyes of everyone by relentlessly hurling disjointed statements that are completely uncalled for. People, since time immemorial, have been giving them the benefit of the doubt owing to their stature in the society or their confidence in delivering those statements in public places, be it the one who wrote quotations or your colleague who took a jibe at you in front of members of the opposite sex and became an instant hero (while you waited for an eternity to settle the score with this person and unnecessarily unleashed your reprisal at those who were not remotely associated with him, e.g., panipuri wala, vegetable vendor, paperboy and so on).
Coming back to quotations, let’s take a look at some of them for a better understanding of the thought process that goes into such work. I found this one while going through a series of tweets:
Now, this not only portrays a disturbing picture but it also sends a wrong message to everyone who once used a typewriter, as they would attribute the near extinction of the device to the fact that, as users, they probably did not bleed well. I am sure, no one ever asked Mr. Hemingway to clarify his views. I mean, what’s the point in writing a quotation if you have to write an explanation underneath. That would destroy its intellectual and aesthetic values. But what if someone asked him to do what he said? Take, for example, another quotation by this gentleman.
Ok, I am assuming that you were referring to yourself as that intelligent man, Mr. Hemingway, but you did not drink because you were surrounded by fools (you judged them). ‘Oh, there are dumb people around me. Let me get drunk.’ The fact that 7 out of 10 of your quotations have a mention of alcohol was because you were an alcoholic and you were trying to justify that by creating hypothetical scenarios. Alcohol doesn’t help you achieve greatness. At best, it gives you the courage to express this misbelief. And by the way, sir, getting drunk and calling everyone fool is not an act of greatness. Thousands perform this act in my town every day. Anyway, I will quickly go through a couple of quotations by another person:
This one did not make any sense because that’s not even a language. When you are the only person using a particular style of communication without complying with the existing norms then it cannot be considered an integral part of the language. It falls under dyslexia. Secondly, you were asking someone to be skeptical about everything that had hitherto been proved except something that only you believed in. The only valid point you made was that the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth but that was not because you were clever. You just wanted to write something defying prevailing notions.
The last one:
Wah-wah, wah-wah! Ok, you did not know the difference between name and characteristic. And thankfully, we did not give two hoots to your suggestion and called everything whatever we felt like otherwise human race would have been one confused species. And what if you did not have a name?
To put things in a nutshell, most of us, when pushed out of our comfort zone of abridged ambiguity, make a monkey out of ourselves and end up blabbering nonsense. And hence, a group of individuals decided to carry out an extensive research to identify the maximum limit of human intelligence and their findings showed it’s 140 characters.
A new online networking service was launched to display a collage of abstract artworks in the form of texts, and subsequently a logo of a bird was pasted on it for no apparent reason.
…to be continued
Originally published at factsandnonsense.com on August 17, 2015.