Re: Putting the 'Anal' into Analogie

From: Stewart Stansfield <stu_stansfield_at_JUClwYonnq3tRRhDls_JFhvvAeQK0fZ1AgVXHlY0nkVPq2Cas9bj32UbdGc7Y>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:03:50 -0000


Jane:
> If we mean "analogy" , say" analogy"? And if we mean "source of
> inspiration", say that? Naa. It'll never catch on.

Probably because sources of inspiration can often be such because we view them as an applicable analogue (in some way, shape or form) to an aspect of Glorantha. In initially drawing upon them we thus make an analogy. And then if we wish to explain why we used such a source of inspiration we often do so with reference to analogy -- "I was inspired to use X because I think in some ways Y in Glorantha is very similar).

Not always, of course (and for some probably not at all). To take an example from a bit ago, I played around with Stormfinders because I thought it would be fun to have them. That the act of repressing Orlanth was in some way analogous to repressing witchcraft was a minor point, and only really investigated later.

(Why do you think there's been so much bloody confusion? Because the SOED lists about 5 definitions of 'analogy' that are pertinent, ranging from a quick simile to "the process of reasoning from parallel cases". Some of us have recognised this, without attempts at faux exclusivity. Of course, on ImmoderateHeroQuest, any definition is decided by Sejanus and/or mob violence, so what the fuck)

Cheerio,

Stu.            

Powered by hypermail