| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 13-Mar-01 11:42 PM
Dear Friends,
I am delighted to see our Web friend "Curious George"
being showered with all kinds of etymological/philological
compliments . . . all because, I gave him a nice
Nepali name of Shailesh Nath!!
[Aside to Gokul: One way to deal with anonymous
slingers on this Web site could be to give them
nice Nepali names such as Shailesh, Rajesh etc.
Such names BOTH humanize and Nepali-nize anonymous
slingers. Besides, since those names are not copy-righted,
real-life Shaileshes and Rajeshes cannot protest
either!!)
Anyway, congratulations, Shailesh Nath!!
What has happened on this Web site is what friendship, even virtual friendship, is all about! That is to say, getting a friend to understand what he is all about through his own given name. Needless to say, being "curious", you've got more than you bargained for.
If I am still making you laugh, then, the pleasure is
all mine.
Have a good day.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a book(s)
to write :-)
oohi
ashu
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 14-Mar-01 02:50 PM
Dear Ashu:
I compliment your readiness to name the anonymous(well, kind
of). It also reminded me the feud between Tulsi Ghimire and
Sambhu Pradhan approximately ten years ago.
Apparently, those two directors weren't so fond of each other.
So, when Tulsi Ghimire made 'Chino', he gave a name 'Sambhu' to
a sycophant of villain, who was dirty and really one of the most
despicable character in the movie. Then Sambhu Pradhan made
'Sapana',in which he gave a name 'Tulasi' to an equally detestable
character, a myrmidion of villain again. It was a famous incident
of those days.I am sure you also know this.
Since I have never been to Boston, I don't know who lives there.
But surely, I came to know that there are real life Shailesh Nath,
Rajesh in Boston. One of my friends(and also your friend) told me
you used to have heated discussion with Rajesh and others.
Probably, using euphemism, some sorts of intellectual antagonism
is still there.
Probably, it will be more mature to give a name that doesn't have
such coincidence to anonymous.For example, in one previous thread,
a discussant ,Nakul, was critical to me. Should I give him a name
like 'Ashutosh' just because I used to have some discussion before
with you? My point is , either we should establish a registration
system in this website (which is not a good idea,anyway), or we
shouldn't just suspect each discussant who is critical to us of
being this guy and that guy.It is a kind of cynicism.
If Narayan is asking some questions about your book , I think that
is great, because people still remember you, what you said, after
several years and are curious about that.I never found anybody who
was so curious in my personal matters, and I always wished I had
at least one person. You got to be proud, man, that you have been
remembered among your friends for so long.
Sorry for being meddlesome.I personally don't want to respond to
those anonymouses who are just hurling anathema, or blabbering
some senseless stuffs. However, I think it is a harmless practice
to answer curious questions. Since it is a free zone, we are free
to do whatever we want, however.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 14-Mar-01 02:50 PM
Dear Ashu:
I compliment your readiness to name the anonymous(well, kind
of). It also reminded me the feud between Tulsi Ghimire and
Sambhu Pradhan approximately ten years ago.
Apparently, those two directors weren't so fond of each other.
So, when Tulsi Ghimire made 'Chino', he gave a name 'Sambhu' to
a sycophant of villain, who was dirty and really one of the most
despicable character in the movie. Then Sambhu Pradhan made
'Sapana',in which he gave a name 'Tulasi' to an equally detestable
character, a myrmidion of villain again. It was a famous incident
of those days.I am sure you also know this.
Since I have never been to Boston, I don't know who lives there.
But surely, I came to know that there are real life Shailesh Nath,
Rajesh in Boston. One of my friends(and also your friend) told me
you used to have heated discussion with Rajesh and others.
Probably, using euphemism, some sort of intellectual antagonism
is still there.
Probably, it will be more mature to give a name that doesn't have
such coincidence to anonymous.For example, in one previous thread,
a discussant ,Nakul, was critical to me. Should I give him a name
like 'Ashutosh' just because I used to have some discussion before
with you? My point is , either we should establish a registration
system in this website (which is not a good idea,anyway), or we
shouldn't just suspect each discussant who is critical to us of
being this guy and that guy.It is a kind of cynicism.
If Narayan is asking some questions about your book , I think that
is great, because people still remember you, what you said, after
several years and are curious about that.I never found anybody who
was so curious in my personal matters, and I always wished I had
at least one person. You got to be proud, man, that you have been
remembered among your friends for so long.
Sorry for being meddlesome.I personally don't want to respond to
those anonymouses who are just hurling anathema, or blabbering
some senseless stuffs. However, I think it is a harmless practice
to answer curious questions. Since it is a free zone, we are free
to do whatever we want, however.
|
| prabhat |
Posted
on 14-Mar-01 06:24 PM
I agree with you Bishwo.
|
