4 ms·

> the subtle and escalating transgression of the humming child Is humming a "transgression"? Music is typically considered entertainment. Why can't the other c

> the subtle and escalating transgression of the humming child Is humming a "transgression"? Music is typically considered entertainment. Why can't the other child put on head phones, hum a different song, or look out the window? It's exactly this phenomenon that OP is addressing. A fairly common behavior (humming to oneself) is portrayed as a "transgression" and you go so far as to say it is unjust, just because somebody else happens to not like it. You've thrown the authors framing, that certain actions are inherently annoying and unacceptable (singing loudly in a small space) while others are generally acceptable (humming softly to oneself) out the window.

perfmode 8y ago
Context matters. In a library, humming is a violation of the conventions of the space. In a music practice room, it is perfectly fine. In a car, the convention is ambiguous and dependent on the passengers. This is precisely why it is necessary to come to agreement on what is okay to do in the space. Again: The humming child was initially singing. So, to view the humming in isolation is to dismiss the fact that this is an iterative negotiation.
- will4274 8y ago
  But they did come to an agreement. From the article: > Then the first might start to quietly hum, which we might decide is okay. You've thrown the agreement on what is okay out the window because somebody is offended.
  - perfmode 8y ago
    The humming child broke the agreement by increasing in volume after the agreement was made. Why did you omit the sentence that followed? > Then the first might start to quietly hum, which we might decide is okay. Then first might hum more loudly and triumphantly
    - will4274 8y ago
      Mm, I interpreted the second child as writhing already from the soft humming and increasing in writhing intensity as the humming volume increased.
PavlovsCat 8y ago
> Why can't the other child put on head phones, hum a different song, or look out the window? Why can't the humming kid not hum normally, instead of "more loudly and triumphantly"? > A fairly common behavior (humming to oneself) is portrayed as a "transgression" No, you portray deliberate annoying of someone else as humming to oneself. > You've thrown the authors framing, that certain actions are inherently annoying and unacceptable (singing loudly in a small space) while others are generally acceptable (humming softly to oneself) out the window. Because that's a "general" framing that is used to replace the actual context of the actual situation and the actual meaning of these actions.
ukoki 8y ago
I read it as both children acting in bad faith. The hummer acts in bad faith by following the letter, not the spirit of the law and humming "loudly and triumphantly" in as annoying a manner as possible. The hummee acts in bad faith by victim-playing — overstating the harm caused by the hummer and making a "dramatic display of suffering"
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

perfmode 8y ago

Context matters. In a library, humming is a violation of the conventions of the space. In a music practice room, it is perfectly fine. In a car, the convention is ambiguous and dependent on the passengers. This is precisely why it is necessary to come to agreement on what is okay to do in the space. Again: The humming child was initially singing. So, to view the humming in isolation is to dismiss the fact that this is an iterative negotiation.

will4274 8y ago
But they did come to an agreement. From the article: > Then the first might start to quietly hum, which we might decide is okay. You've thrown the agreement on what is okay out the window because somebody is offended.
- perfmode 8y ago
  The humming child broke the agreement by increasing in volume after the agreement was made. Why did you omit the sentence that followed? > Then the first might start to quietly hum, which we might decide is okay. Then first might hum more loudly and triumphantly
  - will4274 8y ago
    Mm, I interpreted the second child as writhing already from the soft humming and increasing in writhing intensity as the humming volume increased.

PavlovsCat 8y ago

> Why can't the other child put on head phones, hum a different song, or look out the window? Why can't the humming kid not hum normally, instead of "more loudly and triumphantly"? > A fairly common behavior (humming to oneself) is portrayed as a "transgression" No, you portray deliberate annoying of someone else as humming to oneself. > You've thrown the authors framing, that certain actions are inherently annoying and unacceptable (singing loudly in a small space) while others are generally acceptable (humming softly to oneself) out the window. Because that's a "general" framing that is used to replace the actual context of the actual situation and the actual meaning of these actions.

ukoki 8y ago

I read it as both children acting in bad faith. The hummer acts in bad faith by following the letter, not the spirit of the law and humming "loudly and triumphantly" in as annoying a manner as possible. The hummee acts in bad faith by victim-playing — overstating the harm caused by the hummer and making a "dramatic display of suffering"

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]