Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Nobody said it didn't exist.But that was strongly implied in the comments: And where on earth did you uncover the word "obliviate"?I don't know. Did I make it up? Maybe.In any case I can't find it in my Random House dictionary.It's clear that the existence of the word was doubted, so I thought it would be appreciated that I could remove that doubt. It seems I was wrong.I appreciate it, DF. Now I know I'll find it when I get to my Oxford later today. It seems I just pulled the word out of the air. I wonder if I ever even saw it before.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I'm sorry to sound grumpy, but pretending what was wasn't is even worse then not being able to admit to a mistake. Considering all the in-fighting, pretty soon all the old lectures will be blank. I remember hearing Rand's Fiction Writing course in New York. If one of the Brandens was on the tape, they'd been erased with long pauses and silences. It was laughablle because everyone knew it was the Brandens. Like the communists, Peikoff tries to rewrite history. Then he complains when no one takes him seriously.We aren't sure why the Branden material was deleted. There was some legal wrangling back then among interested parties resulting in settlements causing this or that. There may have been more involved than obliviating Nathaniel and Barbara Branden.--BrantWhat further evidence would you view as being required before being convinced that the intend was to erase the Brandens from the memory of the Objectivist community? Given the erasures from the fiction writing course as merely one of many examples - consider the Objectivism Research CD-ROM as another example, and the ostentatious efforts in so much of what has been written by those in the ARI camp to avoid citing either Nathaniel or Barbara.What else could explain the pattern? Bill PI'm sorry I generated some confusion about this matter as I've always been aware of the efforts of the ARI crowd to shovel the Brandens down the memory hole. I may have inadvertently come up with the perfect word to describe it.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Brant: "We aren't sure why the Branden material was deleted. There was some legal wrangling back then among interested parties resulting in settlements causing this or that. There may have been more involved than obliviating Nathaniel and Barbara Branden."No legal issues were involved, and there were no settlements. What was involved was the desire that Nathaniel and Barbara Branden cease to exist, and that they never had existed.Thanks for going on record about the legal issues, Barbara. I can't recall right now where I got that information from, obviously not first hand. There were copyright issues with Nathaniel's work in The Objectivist he wanted to use in The Psychology of Self Esteem, but that's not what we are talking about. There is a more basic issue here: Without you and Nathaniel there would have been no Objectivist movement, ARI and all the rest of it. Where would libertarianism be? Just as Ayn Rand gets proper and objective credit for what she accomplished, so should Nathaniel and Barbara Branden. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I guess I should have Googled "Obliviate." I much prefer the richness of what I find in a dictionary. Notice I capitalized the word. In my high school freshman English class we had a spelling test and I capitalized all the common nouns. The teacher considered them all spelling errors. He could not be argued with. He would have had a point if I had violated any instructions.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) Dragonfly,I know I looked it up before making my post. I could not find it in the Free Dictionary, so I Googled it. Then I got the same definition you got and saw it made sense. This is why I used the word "uncover" in the banter rather than "invent" or something like that.Actually, from Brant's responses, it looks like it was a mistake.Actually, it looks like it wasn't. But I can't for the life of me tell you how I came up with it. I spent absolutely no time thinking about it. I just typed it in. I still have to go the the Oxford to see if I used it correctly. Might be the definition needs some expansion.--Brant Edited January 11, 2009 by Brant Gaede Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Could it be Harry Potteritis?"I realize it's used in Harry Potter along with many other fictional words, but I feel like it might be a real term. My spell check on Microsoft Word is marking it as incorrect but dictionary.com shows that it has two meanings in Webster's New Millenium dictionary: one being a noun from Harry Potter and the other being a verb with definition "to forget." I'm not sure if this is enough evidence for me to safely use in my paper, though i'd like to because it fits perfectly. Thanks in advance!!""According to dictionary.com, it can be both a noun and a verb, depending on how it is used.Main Entry: obliviatePart of Speech: nDefinition: a memory charm or spell in the Harry Potter books that makes one forgetMain Entry: obliviatePart of Speech: vDefinition: to forget"http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Obliviate <<<<This is from the Urban Dictionary whatever the heck that is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Okay, now. The Oxford English Dictionary defines Obliviate, a rare and obsolete word, as "To forget, commit to oblivion." I'll expand that to include "To make obscuring obvious." Hence, blank spots in the lectures. This perfectly illustrates ARI-type attempts to separate the Brandens from Objectivism in as much as they can. It's a powerful word: "Obliviationists!"--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso Jones Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Okay, now. The Oxford English Dictionary defines Obliviate, a rare and obsolete word, as "To forget, commit to oblivion." I'll expand that to include "To make obscuring obvious." Hence, blank spots in the lectures. This perfectly illustrates ARI-type attempts to separate the Brandens from Objectivism in as much as they can. It's a powerful word: "Obliviationists!"--BrantOr, you could head closer to classic Objectivist phraseologyand refer to:Those who would deny A is A.Those who would deny the evidence of their senses.Those who would pretend...I think I'll stop now.Bill P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Brant,I am going to make use of this word obliviate in my long-overdue work on airbrushing the Brandens.Like a singer in Brazil once asked me after a very happy accident, "We need to repeat this. What is the science of coincidence called? Coinscience?" Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Like a singer in Brazil once asked me after a very happy accident, "We need to repeat this. What is the science of coincidence called? Coinscience?"It is called history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) I guess I should have Googled "Obliviate." I much prefer the richness of what I find in a dictionary. Notice I capitalized the word. In my high school freshman English class we had a spelling test and I capitalized all the common nouns. The teacher considered them all spelling errors. He could not be argued with. He would have had a point if I had violated any instructions.--BrantIf I could have done anything great, and I'm going to, I would have been a great teacher. I did teach commercial driving over the road for a year. I might go back out for six months to get that groove back to write a booklet on safe (commercial) driving. Unlike the teacher I referenced above, I know how to help a student--especially a young student--with his or her self-esteem--self-esteem a la Nathaniel Branden, not the crap commonly put out by public educators. I could only do it for a year, though. Not interesting enough or challengingly enough. I'd get bored even though I love kids. --Branttruck driver--while the world went to 9/11 hell Edited January 12, 2009 by Brant Gaede Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I guess I should have Googled "Obliviate." I much prefer the richness of what I find in a dictionary. Notice I capitalized the word. In my high school freshman English class we had a spelling test and I capitalized all the common nouns. The teacher considered them all spelling errors. He could not be argued with. He would have had a point if I had violated any instructions.He should have marked one wrong. You only made one error, and were consistent with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I guess I should have Googled "Obliviate." I much prefer the richness of what I find in a dictionary. Notice I capitalized the word. In my high school freshman English class we had a spelling test and I capitalized all the common nouns. The teacher considered them all spelling errors. He could not be argued with. He would have had a point if I had violated any instructions.He should have marked one wrong. You only made one error, and were consistent with it.He wanted the proper nouns capitalized to know if we knew the difference. This wasn't explained beforehand. Technically I made no error. It was a very discouraging way to start the school year. I should have changed classes, assuming that was possible. He had an ego problem. He couldn't admit a mistake. These kind of teachers are very hard on kids. I've never enjoyed any school or school year even in college. Too much crap, badly taught. There were other issues.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Brant:Boy can I identify with that story. I even remember the prick's name - Mr. Barker - Freshman English - I was 16 and did a paper on the premise that dolphins were more intelligent in their environment than the ape was in its environment.He gave me a D with the words, "I disagree with your conclusion."I went to his office with the paper and asked him if the grammar or spelling or structure were poor. He said no he just disagreed with me and that is why I got that grade.Oh well, I guess I should not have quoted Ayn Rand at Queens College in 1962, lol.At any rate, I said quite respectfully, since what I wanted to do was throw his broken body out of the second floor office on the Quadrangle, I have no respect for you Sir and I will not be at any more of your classes. I said you are teaching in a perfect section of the school as these buildings are from the original reform school and you have the intellectual capacity of a jailer and a thug.And I walked out. Needless to say it was the best F I ever fully earned.Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Boy can I identify with that story.... I was 16 and did a paper on the premise that dolphins were more intelligent in their environment than the ape was in its environment.I disagree.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I did not read this thread, the title just came up on the online list or I would never have noticed it. But I just have to say....That topic title really says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 Maybe I meant to make obscure as opposed to make obvious. Therefore "obliviate" means to make obvious in an attempt to make obscure. In any case I can't find it in my Random House dictionary. I'll try my Oxford after I go to sleep and wake up. Has a new word/concept been born? I won't pay child support, but will take the credit.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 Brant, just came across this wonderful new verb of your coinage and fair warnings, I will appropriate it whenever I can. Carol Shameless Amoralist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now