Oh, shut up
Q: Could you write a stupider hed than this?
A: Could I write a stupider hed than this? I don't know. I'm a little out of practice. It's going to take a while.
Q: No, I mean could one write a stupider hed than this?
A: I guess. I mean, it'd take a lot of work, but you don't want to rule it out.
Q: Does it have enough exclamation points?
A: No, definitely not. If you're going to pretend it's a regular hed and not a hammer, you want enough exclamation points to fill the second line, as in this example from the old Barricada days:
Q: What if it didn't have any exclamation points at all?
A: It would be marginally but not significantly (p=.13) less stupid.
Q: Isn't that an improvement, though?
A: No, not really.
A: Could I write a stupider hed than this? I don't know. I'm a little out of practice. It's going to take a while.
Q: No, I mean could one write a stupider hed than this?
A: I guess. I mean, it'd take a lot of work, but you don't want to rule it out.
Q: Does it have enough exclamation points?
A: No, definitely not. If you're going to pretend it's a regular hed and not a hammer, you want enough exclamation points to fill the second line, as in this example from the old Barricada days:
CONGRESISTAS
INSOLENTES!!!!!!
Q: What if it didn't have any exclamation points at all?
A: It would be marginally but not significantly (p=.13) less stupid.
Q: Isn't that an improvement, though?
A: No, not really.
1 Comments:
What seems to make this really stupid is that (I gather) Hoke is consider the right choice. That makes it NOT audacious.
Post a Comment
<< Home