Template:Oubliette capsule: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A [[negotiation oubliette]] is the lawyer’s equivalent of what {{author|Douglas Adams}} once called<ref> | A [[negotiation oubliette]] is the lawyer’s equivalent of what {{author|Douglas Adams}} once called a “clabby” conversation:<ref>{{br|The Meaning of Liff: The Original Dictionary Of Things There Should Be Words For}}, by {{author|Douglas Adams}} and {{author|John Lloyd}}.</ref> one struck up by a [[rent-seeker|commissionaire]] to appear busy while avoiding difficult work, wasting time and provoking maximum forward confusion. | ||
Negotiation oubliettes have a cosmological quality to them; like any [[Schwarzschild radius of institutional ennui|black hole]] they are impossible to see ''directly'' — detectable only by their signature detritus: crushed aspirations of clarity and elegance swirling around an [[event horizon]] of nothingness, like so many gossamer dreams of greatness gurgling down a galaxy-sized plughole. We enter these space-tedium [[Singularity|singularities]] often, but always unwittingly, because only when we scrabble desperately for a way to back out do we realise what we have fallen into. Only then does the conceptual impossibility of such a withdrawal occur. | |||
Revision as of 15:04, 11 June 2021
A negotiation oubliette is the lawyer’s equivalent of what Douglas Adams once called a “clabby” conversation:[1] one struck up by a commissionaire to appear busy while avoiding difficult work, wasting time and provoking maximum forward confusion.
Negotiation oubliettes have a cosmological quality to them; like any black hole they are impossible to see directly — detectable only by their signature detritus: crushed aspirations of clarity and elegance swirling around an event horizon of nothingness, like so many gossamer dreams of greatness gurgling down a galaxy-sized plughole. We enter these space-tedium singularities often, but always unwittingly, because only when we scrabble desperately for a way to back out do we realise what we have fallen into. Only then does the conceptual impossibility of such a withdrawal occur.