Today I was writing a caption for a photo of a herd of oryx, and I started to write something like "these majestic creatures," and then I wondered if they could be called majestic. What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for majesty? One coworker said she thought a dog could be majestic, like an old, wise Golden Retriever, which is just false. Other coworkers looked at me as though I were a TV show they didn't recognize. But I was not to be dissuaded, and I now present to you the Lore & Ipsum Rubric for Identifying Majesty in Animals (LIRIMA).
Does it have horns? 2 pts.
Do it have horns that appear disproportionate to its body? 5 pts.
Is it in a herd? 5 pts.
Is it significantly larger than a prototypical member of their species? (boas, pythons)? 4 pts.
Does it look tired all the time? 2 pts.
Is it a solid color? 1 pt.
Does its name seem neither Latinate nor Anglo-Saxon? 1 pt.
Is it cliche-edly majestic? -6 pts.
Would someone in kindergarten know what sound it makes? -2 pts.
Your thoughts welcomed. This is clearly a timely and important topic, and I expect to see it on the Huffington Post and spread round the blogosphere shortly.
About Me
- Lore & Ipsum
- I'm interested in language, grammar, cooking, rhetoric, discourse, design, taxonomies, food, conversation & interaction analysis, girl things, cognitive science, finding a job, and large bodies of water.
3 comments:
Yes, but what about the giant squid? I suppose it's more lethal than majestic, in an "I'll rip your arms off" way. Can creatures that live in the water be majestic? I don't know if I'd consider a blue whale majestic. I feel like it's excessive size is sort of like over-bidding on your showcase at the price is right, even by a dollar. It's so majestic that it's so not majestic.
Dogs cannot be majestic, except perhaps if they are momentarily harkening back in some amazing gesture to their wolfen ancestry.
I think you've left out all of the great majestic winged creatures. Although, for example, the eagle is a cliche of a majestic creature, I think it still IS majestic--soaring in the sky, in grand, sweeping gestures, with it's aerie in high craggy places inaccessible to ordinary creatures of all kinds--very Nietszchean. It's sort of like how all the people who like Bob Marley don't take away from the fact that Bob Marley actually made good music.
Also, in response to Shannon, I think sea creatures cannot be majestic. There's no wind blowing in their faces, and I think the wind-in-the-face is important.
I think giant squids are too weird-looking to be properly majestic (though I'm sure plenty of royals were weird looking and still seemed majestic. Or maybe not? Faces on Roman coins are totally majestic, but a) they're not representative, and b) an Oreo carved on a coin would look majestic.) And odd as this may sound, I can't conceive of being the proper distance from a blue whale to find it majestic. Distance is important.
Amanda, you're right about the momentarily harkening dog, which would be super-majestic. The wind blowing in face thing could also a function of distance: a herd of something could be majestic regardless of wind. And sea creatures can be majestic! I present to you my next post.
Post a Comment