Sunday, 28 June 2009

What they're saying about Michael Jackson in the Dog and Duck

Is this the most pretentious article ever published in the Guardian?

"Nor was his whiteness just a question of skin tone. Think of his eyes and nose. Then think of the very word "eye", as it's printed on this page in lower-case letters. If ever there existed a word that was an ideogrammatic, visually ­onomatopoeic mise en abyme, then that word is "eye". What does it resemble if not a pair of heavy-lidded eyes, ­forming a minute isosceles triangle with the dainty skewwhiff nose of the "y", a nose uncannily like Jackson's own? Again, I say (and despite the fact that it gave rise to as much mockery as Cyrano's ­tumescent ­schnozzle), I thought it as pretty a nose as a putto's in a Tiepolo altarpiece."


Fred Trellis said...

They are clearly intoxicated with the exuberance of their own verbosity.

Not to mention as mad as a box of frogs.

Old Holborn said...

I've read worse by Polly Toynbee