Usefulness (jara: Has anyone made a real conlang?)
|From:||Jan van Steenbergen <ijzeren_jan@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, April 24, 2003, 5:50|
--- R Burke skrzypszy:
> No, they're useful. The mind of a conlanger is probably a scary place for
> most. Would you rather we conlangers fix your car? :) If you mean useful in
> an auxlang viewpoint, then maybe not. But telling conlangers that their
> creations aren't useful is like telling an artist his paintings are useless.
Hmmmm, "usefulness"... Interesting topic, that reminds me of this a political
fashion we had here in the eighties. It said that everything had to be
profitable. People were encouraged to study mathematics, chemistry, econometry,
law, etc., because those studies would make you useful for the greater good,
our economy. Why study Hittitology, Romanian, Latin, archaeology, or
musicology, when we can life happily without them? What kind of purpose could
these things possibly serve if our beloved economy can't even take the
slightest profit from it?
Same thing with art, of course. Why on Earth would we spend millions to support
an orchestra, while a rock group that consists of only four people can be
self-supporting and pleases a bigger audience anyway?
No, "use" is quite a subjective idea. What's the use of art, after all? Nothing
at all, apart from the fact that it gives meaning to our miserable, empty
lives, but that is, of course, mere self-suggestion.
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones
For a better Internet experience