Ho-koš-po-koš pr-de ko-koš i-ma jed-na mod-ra rje-ka
Prije pola stoljeća svijet je još uvijek bio dobri stari svijet u kom se znalo kako šta funkcioniše i šta je čija zadaća. Uslijed nepostojanja globalne informatičke mreže čeljad je saznanja o svijetu dobijala putem škole,
Tako je Mak Dizdar morao napisati svoju čuvenu pjesmicu u kojoj je objasnio gdje se nalazi Modra rijeka. Pošto se u nas poezija ipak više piše nego
Pod jedan smo znali da se ona nalazi iza gore iza dola iza sedam iza osam i još huđe i još luđe preko mornih preko gorkih preko gloga
Danas je sve to, međutim, znatno jednostavnije, dovoljno je u gugl ukucati blue river i pogledati šta vikipedija na engleskom kaže o tome. A kaže da ima čak trinaest modrih rijeka na dunjaluku, od kojih svaka može bit ona Dizdarova, mada
Ali nemojte pretjerano puštati nadanjima na volju. Ni gugl ni vikipedija neće vam ponuditi odgovor na pitanje - a što to nama valja
Na kraju vas moram upozorit da nije sve u tehnološkom i informatičkom napretku. Bez obzira na to što sad putem nekoliko klikova mišem možete saznati gdje se nalazi Modra rijeka, vi ipak s vremena na vrijeme pročitajte i onu Dizdarovu pjesmicu ili barem poslušajte
Pošto će biti
- Pošto je knjiga? pitam.
- Jel puno četiri marke? veli on.
- Nije puno, rekoh pa ščepah knjigu i utekoh preko Bunura bježeći od one marke kusura ko od
Tek kad sam prešao most usporim korak i otvorim knjigu.
Udesilo se da mi je baš te večeri u goste
- De me bolan pusti da dahnem
Negdje pred samu zoru, u ono doba kad džinni svijaju onu veliku sjenku sa Mostara i po njemu raspoređuju dnevne sjenke, mene probudi pojava zvana naćeralo me pišat. Kad se hoćete tiho i nečujno kretati, nemojte hodati na prstima, to je samo
- Nisi valjda sve do sad čitao? upitah ga zabrinut i baš mi nešto žao što se nije odmorio.
- Aha, blagim glasom potvrdi moj ahbab i podiže glavu taman toliko da mu na licu vidim dva
Ovako vitak i elegantan, što je literarno dopušten način da za sebe kažem da sam mršav i suh, ja sam ujedno i poprilično debelokožno đubre, što znači da baš i neću lahko pustit suzu zbog tamo neke pjesme. Ali i tako
More from All
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?