Various made-up synonyms for 'lying around on the couch for ages not doing anything'

Sloucheing.

Loungeulating.

Hoisting my sails in the pillowing wind.

Planting a field of couch potatoes.

Extreme sitting.

Going to the gym, in my mind.

Like it or slump it.

Being couchettish.

Settee-settling.

Going out in a laze of glory.

Chairbling.

Really literally actually secretive symbolic cipher

FACT: Dan Brown loves facts so much that he begins all his books with the word ‘fact’, followed by a series of assertions, that could, in fact, be facts. His favourite adverbs are ‘really’, ‘literally’, and ‘actually’, which he uses with liberal abandon in his books.

But anyway, the opening sentence to The Da Vinci Code really is a doozy. Check it out:

Renowned curator Jacques Sauniere staggered through the Grand Gallerie of the Louvre Museum, clutching at his chest.

That, I submit to the reader, is pure genius: something horrible happening to a very famous, though fictional, person. Fame is just like reality, only better. And of course, when something bad happens to a famous person, it’s a something that is even worse than the something that would happen to an ordinary person. Brown simultaneously appeals to the sensibilities of the readers of Who magazine and the purchasers of true crime novels, with a nod in the direction of Sister Wendy fans as well.

Dan Brown doesn’t so much take the truth for granted as he takes it to be a liar. His next favourite words, alongside ‘really’, ‘literally’ and ‘actually’ are ‘secret’, ‘symbol’, ‘code’, ‘cipher’; and his codes and ciphers, once revealed, nearly always lead to other codes and ciphers. A symbol is no good unless it symbolises another symbol, which is itself a code for another code, which is also a secret. The secrets themselves, once you get to them, are not very good, but the investigation that uncover the secrets is of some interest. The last secret in Brown's books are always the most disappointing.

Once you become familiar with Brown’s favourite terms, it becomes quite easy to devise a few standard Brown sentences for yourself: ‘The symbol for the code was literally embedded in the cipher, and the symbol…’ This is perhaps an exaggeration, but not much.

You can have a good game with the sentences in Brown’s novels, finding mistakes and grammatical errors and ambiguous descriptions and repeated terms and clichés and unrealistic descriptions, but you don’t have to. It provides literary critics with an entertaining exercise and an opportunity for them to demonstrate why they have been given the job they have. I can think of two examples off hand: in The Lost Symbol, Langdon and his friend Katherine Solomon narrowly escape from the CIA in a subway train that ‘whisked them to their destination’. In Da Vinci Code, Langdon and Sophie Neveu await for a box in a French bank which is both ‘mysterious’ and ‘whose contents were unknown’. But who cares? The plot is what is important.

I suppose I shouldn't admit to enjoying Dan Brown. I don't think I've ever read a favourable review of his books. Funnily enough, though, when I read Brown I find myself, again and again, encountering ideas and plot points that I've encountered in books by authors that are taken much more seriously. In The Lost Symbol Brown goes on about telepathy and the development of mental powers: look in the pages of a few Brian Aldiss books and you can find the same. Brown's plots, with their elaborate three-act structures, echo those of Michael Moorcock. He's nowhere as thoughtful or as well crafted as those two writers, but still, he's a lot of fun.

Predictions of perdition

I was listening to radio the other day, and some paper shuffler from some paper shuffling agency was taking a break from his paper shuffling in order to bang on about how great his state was. "Oh, this is fantastic," he said, "We've cut the predicted road toll right down from last year's predicted road toll!"

It's just such a tragedy when predicted people die as the result of a predicted road toll, after all. If only we had a reliable way of cutting back on the predictions in order to save all those predicted lives lost!

If you thought that this quaint concern about the predicted loss of lives was limited to just one person, you'd be quickly proved wrong. Look on the internet at all the horrible terrible disastrous definite disasters that global warming is predicted to maybe possibly in some potential future lead to. And the UK Met office has been making similar predictions.

Of course, if all these predictions were so devastatingly tragic as some people have been making them out to be, you might think the people making them were wilfully committing genocide. Instead of, you know, drawing attention to their pet cause or attempting to fill out column spaces in the local Dullsville Times.

Making paranoid prognostications about the future is a pretty pointless exercise, but in the future, it's predicted that this tragic prediction count will only increase.

Such a pity that all these predicted predictions won't come to pass because the entire human race will be wiped out at three pm tomorrow by a gigantic cyber toad from the other side of the galaxy who decides to eat our planet for his dinner, according to a prediction made by me, Tim Train, today. Predictable, isn't it?

Lame superheros

Inaudible Man
Donning his amazing cloak of inaudibility, Inaudible Man enters the lift amongst the evil supervillains, and lets fly with the most amazing series of farts that you have ever not heard in your life!

Non-existent Man
When mild-mannered Clinton Kurt puts on his Anti-ontogenical ring, he gains amazing powers of non-existence that allows him to enter into the very ranks of an army of psychopathic genocidal maniacs with demonic powers, and combat them with complete and utter nothingness.

Superfluous Man
He, also, can leap tall buildings in a single bound! He can outrace speeding trains - as well! In addition, he is faster than a flying bullet! And plus, he just saved the entire galaxy from being blown to smithereens by a zillion Ultraatomic bombs with his amazing powers, not to mention also, in addition, and as well! He is...

WILD CHEERING MOB PILES ONTO THE BLOG, SHOUTING: Look! Superman has just saved Paris Hilton's puppy from getting a paper cut! HOORAY FOR SUPERMAN!

HE IS SUPERFLUOUS MAN!

Woof! Woof!

Doggerell! Posted at Pacos!

Climate emails leakin', leakin',
Dodgy graphs have got a tweakin',
MSM is really freakin'
At this situation.
People everywhere start seekin'
An investigation.

Believer is at war with skeptic,
Monbiot is apoplectic
His fits verge on the epileptic -
What a scandal!
This global warming email epic's
Too hot to handle.

Believers start to fume and fret,
They say some things that they regret,
They twitch and twiddle, shiver, sweat -
How disobedient!
But we can turn to rhymin' yet
When Truth gets Inconvenient.

All-purpose Christmas carol

Deck the halls with boughs of holly,
And a Happy New Year!
'Tis the season to be jolly -
And a Happy New Year!

Glory to our new born King,
Joyful and triumphant,
Peace on earth and mercy mild -
And a Happy New Year!

Don we now our gay apparel -
On Christmas Day, on Christmas Day -
Troll the ancient yuletide carol -
On Christmas Day in the morning.
(And a Happy New Year!)

All is calm! All is quiet!
Westward leading, still proceeding,
Three French hens, two turtle doves -
And a Happy New Year!

I sang this to the Baron recently, and she commented that it was 'like being stuck in an elevator'. Strangely enough I took it as a compliment.

Absolutely right about everything, but otherwise open to disagreements

CANBERRA, MONDAY - After months of debate, Federal Parliament has finally cemented into place legislation that has been agitated for over the course of several years by some guy with a blog called Matt.

The EML (Everything Matt Likes) bill was passed by both sides of Parliament with only one dissenting vote from the Liberals and none from Labor and the Greens. Although some amendments were originally proposed by the National Party under the name of STSDAWMA (Stuff That Simon Doesn't Agree With Matt About) clause, they were eventually struck down by the Coalition whip.

Simon, as was revealed over the course of the months-long debate, was a guy who regularly commented on Matt's blog and got into arguments with Matt and other commenters over various points. However, after scrutiny by the media, his disagreements with the policy positions held by Matt and other commenters were found to be too unworkable, principally because Matt didn't agree with them.

Schemes for the Everything Matt Likes bill have been outlined over the course of several years on Matt's blog, http://iamabsolutelyandutterlyrightabouteverythingandyouallcanjustgohometobed.blogspot.com.

Although the EML bill is still to go before the Senate, it is expected that it will be passed before long and become part of Australian law before next election.

"Finally, we can rest easy, knowing that Australia is going down the right path - the path agitated for by years by some obscure commenter on the internet with a blog," said Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, in a press conference yesterday.

"I have had conversations with Matt, and I have found him a fair and reasonable person to work with," said Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott in reply to media questions, "especially when every single detail of every single policy passed in federal parliament is something that he agrees with."

HOW THE EML BILL COULD AFFECT YOU
The Everything Matt Likes bill, experts predict, will have important impacts upon Australian life. There are four major tranches to the Matt-based legislation:

- The JWATFROA (Just What Are Those Feminists Really On About) scheme;

- The LOGWBWRUSCWAP (Let's Outlaw Global Warming Before We're Really Up Shit Creek Without A Paddle) plan, basically enabling parliament to pass legislation outlawing global warming whenever they feel like it;

- The ANRFEIWSNIMBY (A Nuclear Reactor For Every Idiot Who Says Not In My Backyard) rule;

- And the LMAFLANSBMICIAS (Let's Make AFL A National Sport By Making It Compulsory In All Schools) plan.

Although quibbling over the details, almost all the experts interviewed for this article agree that, once the EML legislation is set into place, the world will become a utopian paradise. Australians concerned about how a utopian paradise may affect their way of life are urged to call up the hotline number, 1319 87, and speak to an expert in the Matt-inspired legislation.

However, one prominent expert disagreeing with Matt is Simon, who has decided, now that the Everything Matt Likes legislation has been set in place, to set up his own blog, http://mattisanabsolutelycompletelystupididiotandheisonlyrightaboutsomeofthethingsheisbloggingabout.blogspot.com.

Matt is reportedly pleased about these developments, and is now wondering "what to do next" with his blog.

Controversy corner

A recent post on the Overland blog asks the reader: 'Art and sexism: is it acceptable?' Good question. I'd like to pose a related one in this thread today at Controversy Corner: should sexism be banned because it leads to art?

On the one hand, we must admit that there are many non-artistic sexists in society today, innocently practicing their sexism without ever producing art, great or otherwise. However, the fact remains that there is a small minority of sexists who produce great art, which goes on to pollute our galleries, clog up our bookshops, and fills up our airwaves which could be better used for other things. Should we continue to tolerate a system of sexism that can be misused to produce great art?

There is of course a compromise solution: the innocent practices of sexists everywhere should be strictly regulated so that their sexism would have less danger of turning into great art. For instance, we could introduce a sexism license, administered by an appropriate government department. (At a pinch, we could probably get the entire National Party of Australia to become the relevant 'Department for Sexism', or 'Department for the Subjugation of Women', or whatever).

The counter argument must nevertheless be proposed: there are some artists who will continue to practice their art in spite of these discouragements, psychopathically creating new works to confuse and irritate the ordinary citizen. Can we ever do to much to stop these detestable villains, these invidious craftspeople? Perhaps sexism should simply be banned outright to stop them. But then, sexists everywhere would protest at these infringements of their liberties.

What is more important: the freedom to practice sexism, or the eradication of art from our society for once and for all?

That was Controversy Corner for another week!

Next week: we pose the question, 'Does racism lead to origami!' Tune in to Controversy Corner for another erudite discussion!

The Hey Hey Blackface segment: could this seemingly innocuous incident have lead to dangerous outbreaks of origami?

Position for the position of...

I was thinking about doing a blog post inspired by this blog post by Maria about hating job interviews. But then a week passed and I forgot. But then another week passed and I remembered - so here we are!

Job interviews. Man, I've been to them. I've been to interviews where the employer just spent the entire half hour rambling on about whatever took his fancy, and didn't bother asking anything vaguely job related. I've been to some interviews where the employer just gathered all the interviewees together in a huge board room and tried to interview everyone of us, all at once. Other interviews were just preliminary interviews to see if you would make the grade for further interviews down the track. Some employers, I found, liked to give you little general knowledge tests, while others just asked you along to an exam that lasted for two hours or so. I even did interviews at several temping agencies around Newcastle where they got you to perform pointless psychological tests on the computer before ushering you out the door and promising to call you the moment a job came up. (Strangely enough, they never did.)

It eventually got to the point where I could have seriously considered listing in my resume

- Significant experience in preparing for and attending job interviews; answering pointless questions; filling out meaningless general knowledge quizzes; participating in baffling psychological tests; and generally sitting in waiting rooms for medium to large amounts of time while the interviewer prepares to see me.

I suppose I could have seriously considered going back to uni or TAFE and getting some more practical experience and trade qualification, but hey, I'm never one to do something practical about a problem when I can whinge about it.

Anyway, in all that time, there was one sort of interview that I haven't attended. Here's how I imagine it would go.

SCENE: A cavernous boardroom. MARIA is sitting at a large polished oak desk slowly eating creamy, golden puftaloons. She contemplates each puftaloon before lowering them into her mouth, munching contentedly on them, and licking the cream off each finger. Eventually, she puts her head up, wipes her hands on a tissue, and calls out across the room...

MARIA: NEXT!

(There enters into the room a SHY YOUNG BUSINESSMAN, JONES, carrying a briefcase which has been polished up to look incredibly important. JONES has to walk all the way across the room to get to his seat at the table).

MARIA: Ah, good to see you, Mr.... (reads from a sheet of paper) Jones. Puftaloon? (Pushing the box towards him).

JONES: (Looking slightly confused.) Oh, uh, er, no, thanks.

MARIA: Now congratulations Jones. You're among our top ten applicants.

JONES: Ha ha, thanks.

MARIA: Now let me put it to you straight away, Jones. This is an important position you're
applying for. You're now interviewing for the job of the person who will be interviewing me for the job. Do you think you have what it takes to be my interviewer?

JONES: Oh yes, Ms...

MARIA: Maria, please.

JONES: ... Maria. I have extensive experience interviewing other people for a job.

MARIA: How much?

JONES: I interview on Mondays, Tuesday, Thursday, and Fridays.

MARIA: That's a lot of interviewing.

JONES: And sometimes on Sundays. Extensive interviewing, as my resume...

MARIA: Do you do anything besides interviewing?

JONES: What... (looks confused)

MARIA: Does your job entail anything other than interviewing?

JONES: Oh, administration, filing...

MARIA: Hmmm. (Frowns). How many people have you interviewed?

JONES: (Looks embarassed).

MARIA: Jones, it's going to be a tough job interviewing me. I want to be sure you have what it takes. Can you fire a couple of application criteria at me?

JONES: Oh... sure! Maria - are you a people person?

MARIA: Ha! Cliche. A good start! (Makes make on form).

JONES: Do you work well on your own?

MARIA: Well how on earth would I answer that? It's in complete contradiction to your previous description - brilliant! (Makes another mark on form).

JONES: (Nervously) Do you have good communication skills? Are you outgoing?

MARIA: Yeeeeeeerrrrs. Not bad, but I'm not really intimidated by these. (Makes more marks on form).

JONES: (Quaking with fright, very quickly). Are you able to use Word, macros, Excel, formulas, and do you have industry experience with Quark, HTML, and Illustrator?

MARIA: Goood.

JONES: (Finishing off, utterly ruined). But most of all, are you warm, efficient, bubble, down to earth, competitive, friendly, with a co-operative and go-get-em attitude? Are you born-to-win and born-to-grin or born-for-fun and born-to-rule?

MARIA: Excellent! (Ticks form). How could anyone possibly be expected to answer such fatuous criteria? Jones, one last question. Why do you want to be my interviewer?

JONES: Because, I... I... I... (flustered, fumbling around for an answer)... um, I look forward to the challenge?

MARIA: Hmmm. Interesting. Anything you want to ask me?

JONES: Oh, nothing much, just...

MARIA: (Cocks eye). Mmm?

JONES: When will I know if I've got the job of interviewing you?

MARIA: We'll call you, Mr Jones. Well, thanks for taking the trouble to come all this way. (Walks around the table and shakes Jones' hand.) Have another puftaloon. And help yourself to some coffee on the way out.

JONES makes his way to the door. MARIA waits 30 seconds before taking the puftaloon box back to her side, sitting down, and picking another puftaloon up, turning it this way and that so she can admire its golden glow in the light of the sun beaming in through the window, and then slowly lowering it into her mouth...

How to lose friends and unimpress people!

Never use a short word that makes sense when a long word that doesn't make sense is available. Instead of 'probably', say 'probabilistically'. Instead of 'problem', say 'problematically'. Instead of 'impress' say 'impressionistically'. Avoid 'making up' when 'reconcile' or 'reconciliation' is available. Never say sorry or 'apologise' when an 'apologia' is available. And don't stop at pretentious English words, take words out of context from the works of difficult-to-understand French philosophers: don't say 'differ' or 'difference', say 'differance'!

Example: "Well, we'll just have to agree that we have a differance over this problematic, and probabilistically we'll never reconciliate our differances. However, your argumentations are very impressionistic, and I offer an apologia up in advancement."

I recently used 'apologia' in an email, but unfortunately I didn't follow up the opportunity and use any of those other words. Bollockifications!

An appreciation

A character is the representation of a person in a narrative or dramatic work of art (such as a novel, play, or film). Derived from the ancient Greek word kharaktêr (χαρακτήρ) through its Latin transcription character, the earliest use in English, in this sense, dates from the Restoration... the sense of "a part played by an actor" developed. Character, particularly when enacted by an actor in the theatre or cinema, involves "the illusion of being a human person." Since the end of the 18th century, the phrase "in character" has been used to describe an effective impersonation by an actor. Since the 19th century, the art of creating characters, as practised by actors or writers, has been called characterisation. - Wiki

Well, there are some who say that we identify with characters by sympathising with the situations that they find themselves in. There are others who say that characters can represent people we want to be like, or people we don't want to be like. Many maintain that fictional characters resemble people in the real world.

But I don't know about all of that when you consider the character of Krang, (from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle Universe) a large pink pulsating brain with eyes and tentacles, sitting, manipulating a control board, in a hollow chamber in the chest of what appears to be a mindless human slave. I have never known any pinkly pulsating tentacled brains personally, and I don't think I know anybody who does; I do not particularly sympathise with the plight of pinkly pulsating tentacled brains; and I don't particularly want to be a pinkly pulsating tentacled brain. It seems to me that the theory of character can only take you so far, and doesn't quite manage to encompass creatures like Krang.

I've been thinking about Krang for a while. I don't know why. Possibly he has a natural charisma. Anyway, what actual function did Krang serve in the TMNT cartoon show? As far as I can remember, he didn't actually do anything. Krang just kind of harrangued Shredder to go after the turtles, and that was it. In Turtles Forever - by far the best Turtle movie - his principle function seems to be to stand around and looked scared every time Shredder does something evil. Sure, Krang is evil too, but he's evil in a placid and domesticated way, and you get the sense that he really doesn't care much about taking over the world. He just kind of blobbles around, pulsating pinkly, and occasionally squalling at Shredder to do something for him.

Oh Krang. It's been so long since you left our television screens. Why don't you ever call?

Is it wrong to be talking this way to a pinkly pulsating tentacled brain who is, by the way, evil?

Excremental success!

Top of the New York Times bestseller list!

Secrets of the Gordon Ramsay Swearing Code

"Fucking cunty bollock shit turd steaming pile of wee." These are just some of the famous swear words from the famous swearing mouth of professional sweary and part-time cook, Gordon Ramsay. Now you might want to just take them at face value, mightn't you?

Well according to a professed Professor* at an alleged university, there's more to the ever-eloquent Ramsay's words than just swearing.

"We just applied a simple formula to the swear words," says Professor Gribble McGrubble, "And found that Ramsay had encoded secret, non-swearing messages in his swear words."

McGrubbles goes on to explain: "The secretive secrets included within the amazingly offensive and puerile swear words uttered by Gordon Ramsay include such astounding revelations as, 'I am fond of grey cats', 'I'll just pop the kettle on so we can all have some tea', 'I would like to wear a hat today, but I am uncertain as to whether I should put on my red one or my green one', 'perhaps I should take my umbrella, it looks a little cloudy out', and 'Civilisation will end in 2059 due to the five-day Guatemalan war'."

But that's not all! You can apply the secrets of Gordon Ramsay's swearing to your own professional and love life, as analysis of passages of unredeemable filth by Gordon Ramsay turns up such unlikely messages as, 'Now is the time to indulge in new relationships', 'the stock market will fall five points in two days from now', and 'a rabid ox will devour your testicles this afternoon, so put your relationship and work plans on hold'.

And who could afford not to take heed of such advice as, 'wear the blue coat, it suits you', 'the package should arrive in the post tomorrow, at seven pm', and 'in the year of the serpent blue fire will rain down on the sunlit lands and a strong emperor will emerge after a famine of eight moons', such as can be found in the fantastically offensive string of four letter words proceeding from Gordon Ramsay's mouth? No-one, that's who!

Secrets of the Gordon Ramsay Swearing Code! Are you thinking of buying it? Are you fucking nuts?!?? Available in all bad bookstores!

*Professed Professors are the most professional Professors of them all.

Apply the timeless wisdom of Gordon Ramsay's disgusting swearing to your life for instant SUCCESS!