This seems to be a generally agreed principle the world over. So why on earth would anyone run a competition in which they ask the entrants to insult and abuse them in the cruellest possible way? Surely this is the work of a damaged personality, the result of ocean-bed levels of self-esteem or at the very least a very public display of masochism? Well, to quote from Frank Zappa's hilarious Valley Girl monologue, "Yeah right, HURT ME, HURT ME... I'm sure! NO WAY!"
No, the aim was simple curiosity. I wanted to see what people would say. I was interested to see which aspects of my personality (or this site) people would choose to base their insults on. I wanted to see how accurate the slanders would be, whether they would be unfocused and clueless or whether they would pierce my armour and provoke some pique. I wanted to see who would choose to enter and how mean or meek people would be.
My head is buzzing with insulting quips all day long. I'm not making any claims for quality, but I certainly have quantity. The free-association part of my brain works overtime and I can base a wisecrack on the most tenuous of links between this and that. The better I know someone and the dearer they are to me, the more vicious the unspoken thoughts will be because the more accurate will be my understanding of the source material.
I have absolutely no intention to offend, most of the time. It's just the intellectual concept of The Joke that appeals to me. When I was younger I used to open my mouth and let it all out, not realising that my abstract, funny idea was potentially (and frequently actually) quite hurtful. I thought that people would understand that the more devastating the comment was, the more effort I would have put into it, which was a reflection of how much I valued that person.
As a shy, somewhat introverted child and adolescent, I loved the brazen, innuendo-laden humour of the British Carry On films and I was especially keen on the arch, camp humour of Kenneth Williams. Frankly, he was my god. At one point he published a book that was a collection of put-downs and one-liners, called Acid Drops. I read and re-read it until it virtually fell apart. My favourite was the infamous exchange between Margot Asquith and Jean Harlow; when the latter kept mispronouncing the former's name as "Mar-gott," Asquith's response was "No dear, the 't' is silent, as in 'Harlow'." Justified? Probably not, but I think the world would be a poorer place if she'd kept quiet.
So, that was the kind of standard that I was hoping for in this competition. Never let it be said that I don't have high expectations of you, my dears. However, the responses were a very mixed bunch and for the most part very timid. Clearly you all love me too much. The pack was led by Mike, whose quoted song lyric hints that the superfically middle-of-the-road, middle-class, middle-management nature of my life might not be the full story. Interesting stuff and not without substance, but not actually that insulting. However, he does get a Special Mention for aptly anthropomorphising that free-associative mud-slinging part of the brain as the "Evil Bitch Troll From Hell."
Caroline and Vaughan both offered insults which they helpfully described as not being insulting at all. Hmm, no winners there either, then. Mike had another go, suggesting that the lack of anything to bitch about within Hydragenic could indicate a lack of anything interesting at all. Nice try, but as this was his third comment on the subject we have to assume that something here had fired his imagination. Caroline had another go, plagiarising Mike's "inoffensive" concept, but the only thing that was inoffensive about it was the total lack of insult contained therein.
By this time I was beginning to feel a little embarrassed. Was it only me that had all of this misanthropic bitchery floating around my head 24x7? Had I misjudged the general nature of the human? Were other people actually quite nice and I was some awful Janus-like creature, openly preaching peace and love whilst mentally stabbing and mugging everyone I met? Then Mark appeared with a whole collection of insults and things were looking up. Well, until I actually read them, that is.
"None of them are really bile-filled," he warned at the end of the comment, which was understating it by several degrees. At least two of them seemed positively complimentary, although the one about the wedding was a bit creepy (I thought I'd managed to keep that lambada thing quiet). The only one that seemed to have promise was the one that compared me to those self-satisfied idealists who "actually do let passengers off the train before boarding". Acute social observation there, Mr Londonmark; I am indeed precisely that kind of sanctimonious do-gooder.
Gert was up next, but for a woman who always speaks her mind I thought that "Who's this Hg bloke?" was rather unimaginative. Unless, that is, she was just momentarily confused by my recent change to "Hg" in everyone's comment boxes (no point having a coherently thought-out online identity if I don't use it, I began to think; also, too many other St****s these days, it was getting confusing). New reader Opie contributed an apposite Elvis Costello quote, though by this point I had made my views on plagiarism very clear. Returning a few minutes later, (s)he highlighted the issue that I had wondered about when setting the competition up - "years of social conditioning will out." It seems that even permission can't encourage transgression.
So, ignoring Sue's totally lame performance ("I'm going to see you in a week and I want you to be nice to me" - God, will I be giving her some shit for that one!), you've probably worked out - if you haven't fallen asleep by now - that both Mrs Hg and I are agreed on a clear winner. Yes, Gert couldn't let it lie and returned the next day with the following ruthless pronouncement: "Hg: used to be a must read." This has absolutely all of the qualities that I was hoping for. It's a blunt, pithy, witty, no-holds-barred affront to my notion that I'm doing something interesting and worthwhile with this website.
Neatly, it's an insult couched in the form of a compliment. It draws on my own previously articulated opinion that last year's content was better than this year's and has a wonderful implication that I really shouldn't bother any more. I laughed out loud when I read it, yet at the same time it makes me just a teeny little bit uncomfortable. Perfect! Not only did she sock it to me right between the eyes, she also ventured her opinion that this competition was a load of crap, a "pale imitation" of better stuff elsewhere and a cheap publicity stunt. Hallelujah! At last, someone had got into the spirit of the occasion!
In short, I am pleased to announce formally that the winner of the competition is the Mad Muse herself. Gert, when you next visit the site and realise that you've won (probably in two weeks time, seeing as I'm not such a compelling read these days...), please step forward and nominate your chosen Amazon merchandise either by comment or e-mail. A speech would be appropriate, though you cry at your peril. Additionally, Mark will be receiving a Runner-Up prize for the train-door quip, which will be awarded to him in Guinness the next time we meet (saying "in a pub" would be superfluous, I think, based on previous form).
Posted by Hg on Monday 15 September 2003 at 08:35.
Received 13 comments so far.
You mean to say you're not insulted by all those of us who didn't even bother with your poxy competition?
And as for the unoriginality of awarding Gert the prize for being rude.... she's ALWAYS rude. Didn't we do something like this once before? I seem to remember her getting downright nasty. It's what she does best.
I think the greatest prize you could give her would be to run the competition again, with the Mad Muse as the subject.
I'd like to dedicate my silver medal (and Guinness) to all those out there who thought that I would never amount to anything. Hah! How wrong you were.
Oh heck, social conditioning and all that...I went through this whole guilt thing that maybe you might take it personally and then I remembered you asked for it.
I didn't even notice the prize thing. but you can come over to my place and be horrid...!
thanks stuart, now i just can't wait to see you... what have i gotten myself into?
Comment by ModSue on Monday 15 September 2003 at 18:46.
Karen - not insulted at all, I just assumed that you had decided to save us all the wasted effort of having to read your entry.
Mark - yes, that'll show 'em. You can now look them in the eye and tell them that you were second-best.
Gert - usually a sure sign that it's a good one! C'mon, don't be coy, there must be some book that you want. (Having seen your infrequent posts about music, I'm withdrawing the CD offer; you're not to be encouraged.)
Sue - you have gotten yourself into three days of hell, where every other comment of yours will be met by "Sue, I don't think that's a very nice thing to say" :-)
See, if I'm right, Stuart, what you should have done was announced the results first, thereby ensuring that everyone who didn't win (even though they, um, wouldn't yet have entered - but, hey, that's a small point) would be mightily pissed off. Cue more insults and abuse than you could ever have hoped for.
Yeah, so, er, why didn't I win then, eh? WHY DIDN'T I BLIMMIN' WELL WIN?!! EH????!!! Answer me that, Stuart, you - you - you - you - PERSON, you!!!!
Sigh. I still can't do it can I?
T****r. :-)
Okay, Stuart, seeing that you insist on generosity, I would be very grateful for a CD of your choosing (NB This year I have bought White Stripes and Norah Jones). And I will promise to provide a fair and open-minded review.
Cheers :)
Thank you for the compliment :) One day I'll get around to categorising them all properly! And packaging the whole thing up as a download for people who want the code. Eventually, honestly :)
Maybe beneath each of the 1300+ words of this post, I presume, is your hope that we all missed the very obvious insult, that is, that even with your soul laid out for the scythe, Death couldn't be bothered to stop by.
Daniel - think again. I have it on good authority that She loves this website, so I doubt that She'd do anything so self-defeating.
I will have to confess that the Dutch part of me was insulted (on behalf of Hg) by Gert's effort, especially the comment on the competition. Then there was another part of me (to which I can't seem to attach a nationality, but possibly Irish of the annoying kind) thought she was dead on.
Comment by Caroline on Wednesday 17 September 2003 at 14:31.
"Daniel - think again. I have it on good authority that She loves this website, so I doubt that She'd do anything so self-defeating."
Of course. It warms me to see that your grasp of metaphor is as strong as your resolve against obsequiousness.
http://www.hydragenic.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hydragen/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1068
The previous post was Rambling Tale.
The next post is Psychic TV.
All original material on this site is © Hydragenic, 2002-2008. Extracts of other people's work are used for the purpose of criticism, review or news reporting, in line with the "fair dealing" (or "fair use") principle.