It was all so simple at the beginning. There were those who were pro-authenticity, and those were anti-authenticity. Think of them as primary classifications.
Gradually, positions hardened, battle lines were drawn and two new secondary groups appeared: there were now those who were anti- pro-authenticists, and those who were anti-anti-authenticists.
As a result of comments under recent postings (elsewhere: I'll spare you the unflattering details dear reader) there is now an embryonic tertiary group emerging, present membership of 1, that might be described as anti- anti- anti-authenticists. (Might there be scope for a sociology PhD here?)
This is startin' to do me 'ed in, as certain characters are given to saying in one of our leading TV soaps, based in London's East End needless to say.
There should be a simple ground rule on shroudie web forums. You can be either pro-authenticity or anti-authenticity to your heart's content.
But you are not allowed to be anti-pro-authenticists or anti-anti-authenticists.
But you are allowed to be anti-anti-pro-authenticists, or anti-anti-anti-authenticists, if you know wot I mean like...
PS: Have just recalled that a certain Oz-based shroudie site systematically blocks my comments. Does the site's owner add a fourth ("quaternary") layer to the shroudology onion - an anti-anti-anti-anti-authenticist? Maybe he should've stuck to being a pro-authenticist.
No comments:
Post a Comment