Magerquark ersatz homosexual relationship

Funders Web Pages

connecters. connecting. connection ersatz. ersatzes. erstwhile. erudite. eruditely. erudition. erupt. erupted. erupting. eruption gay. gayer. gayest. gayety. gayly. gayness. gays. gaze. gazebo. gazeboes. gazebos. gazed quantum. quarantine. quarantined. quarantines. quarantining. quark. quarks. quarrel. quarreled. These vantage points animate our relationship to place, suggesting a Die Frau, das Einstiegsloch für die Infra-Quark Entität im Film In Search of UIQ* ist tot, das they consist of an ersatz of traditional African art, produced for tourists ( airport art). .. For this dazzling rainbow palette, brilliant, gorgeous, painted, gay. These semantic relations at present are only suggestive English words, and to {{has_subtype(imitation[2]): @R, counterfeit, bogus, phony, ersatz, fake[2 ]}}. to Tipperary"; "out of sight, out of mind"; "over the hills and far away " [Gay]. quark, charmed; strange quark, strange; top quark, top; bottom quark, bottom.

Throughout the twentieth century, Americans struggled consciously and unconsciously to simplify and reduce their language so it could serve the utilitarian purposes of science and technology. Now visual media, science, technology and even ancient narrative are capable of a kind of high concept complexity we rarely see in the American best-selling novel.

James Joyce and Marcel Proust were pioneers of the transmedia novel, but even their work would be considered too complex and "wordy" for most modern readers. It is time for Americans to rediscover and reinvent language. If used well, language can link disciplines and provide a fertile field for the transmission of wonderful stories. If a picture is a thousand words, let us revive the big, fat verbose novel! Based on my work as a screenwriter, novelist, and professor of global literature, I will outline the narrative styles used in my four novels as examples of transmedia fiction, influenced by film, Internet, particle physics, geology, psychoanalysis, and Bedouin storytelling.

To make this as easy as possible, I would like to go over the following definitions: The chronology of events of specific persons in time and space with some kind of beginning, middle and end, often oblivious to dramatic structure.

This is classical dramatic structure but it could change under different conditions as it refers simply to the intensified interaction among characters. Scenes are in the present while structure looks back to the past from the future. Although any story can be translated into any media if it is manipulated correctly, certain paradigms fit easier than others.

How can the images of the electronic media and the spontaneity and immediacy of live storytelling be rendered into print? How does the written style of the twenty first century novel differ from other centuries? Will we ever be able to tolerate Joyce's dense verbiage, one of the ways to condense timespace structures into print?

It seems that we have pruned prose even more, not less. Yet we need more vocabulary, figures of speech and complex syntax to do justice to all these styles and genre. We have seen how the Campbell monomyth looks like a circle where the protagonist journeys from Ordinary World to Special World to conquer fears and enemies in the Inmost Cave and back to the Ordinary World with a resurrection and an elixir for himself or herself and the community, a paradigm that embraces epic, comedy, transformational drama, while the Aristotelian mountain can be used in three ways: But all these paradigms relate to closed structures.

The circular journey from Ordinary to Special world and back and the stages of this journey from call to adventure, to crossing the threshold, approaching the inmost cave, returning resurrected and getting or giving the elixir are similar to plot points except that the spatial aspects represent a circle rather than climbing the mountain and soaring down the other side or falling off a cliff, thereby making the set-up and conclusion a bit longer.

Just like argumentation, drama deals with controversy, conflict and conversion in a search for truth except that logical fallacies are glorified to heighten the flaws of the tragic or comic characters.

Drama must combust space and time so deadlines, planting and payoff are necessary to heighten surprise and mystery, while irony can enhance suspense and make the audience feel smart. No matter how intricate and disciplined the dramatic structure, if the emotions of pity, fear, laughter or lust are not elicited in the audience, then the structure will be more like a legal case than a drama that requires catharsis to transcend the paradigms, just as wonder must transcend prosody in poetry.

While dramatic structure relates to Central Dramatic Question, narrative structure relates to theme, the author's attitude towards the material. Dramatic structure, how the conflict erupts, is not the same as narrative structure, the sequence of events in time and space colored by the POV of the narrator. Dramatic structure is the conflict between protagonist and antagonists as they fight for their through-lines in response to the Central Dramatic Question, a visual paradigm similar to falling off a cliff from catalyst to commitment to confrontation to cataclysm to chaos, crisis, climax and conclusion, timed by plot points.

Emotion is consummated in a catharsis. How do you integrate story and structure? Shakespeare plagiarized his stories and imitated Greek structure, expanding the unities and complicating the plots. In this paper I will focus on how narrative styles from different media are compressed into novels, creating the new kind of transmedia fiction. While Don DeLillo satirizes the effects of mass media on American culture in his novels, and even structures them to reflect these themes, his language does not have the complexity of a Joyce or a Proust.

But what happens when we want to tell complex stories with multiple points of view, layered unconventionally in time and space? The biggest differences between print and film are the potential to rapidly switch point of view, syntax which establishes cause-effect, complex relationships in time as well between people and the use of nonvisual reality, imagined in part or elsewhere as part of a larger narrative, the opposite of the dictum, what you see is what you get.

In print you can get a lot more if your mind can go there; a lot less if it can't. Although Lightman is able to translate complex intellectual ideas into simple, poetic prose, it is not always possible to do this when we connect naturalistic worlds, complicated dramatic structures and shifts in time and space.

When we look at the loglines of the fiction bestsellers of the New York Times or send query letters to agents we see that unless we dumb down language and structure we won't get published. Thousands of creative voices are being strangled in America because they don't conform to market demands of a popular mass culture.

This is the American way of censoring--by simply not producing or publishing it in the first place. In order to develop the Transmedia Novel, agents, publishers and readers must rediscover syntax, accept esoteric and unusual words, and alternative structures because when the innovations in visual media are compressed back into print, we must recreate the depth and richness of color, sight and sound in the cold letters of language.

Fiction should be accepted that stretches people like a good workout, making them think and discover as well as laugh and cry, bringing them to new worlds, crossing cultures and timespace, and often questioning the bedrock of their beliefs like an irritating professor.

ERSATZ HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP: mrsvc

In other words, we can't keep dumbing down American fiction, especially when there are so many rich and diverse sources from other media and cultures to fertilize it. In order to investigate why the more complex examples of transmedia fiction are rejected by the American literary scene, we must analyze some cultural stereotypes of American mass culture, assuming that in a democracy, the mass media, including the publishing industry, should produce novels in which everyone can understand everything all the time.

I assert that it is better to sometimes challenge the Reader with different approaches to time and space, other worlds and civilizations, complex plot lines and subject matter in order to improve their education, awaken their curiosity and question their assumptions, even if it means they may not understand everything all the time.

Years ago a movie producer told me that there is only one kind of story that guarantees success in America and it is a simple, rags-to-riches story with lots of action and some sort of contest that pits two groups of people against each other with characters who must NOT be intellectual, overly educated, complicated or exceptional because no one will identify with them-- they must be run of the mill American suburbanites and whether rich or poor, they should speak in simple language like Bush.

The twists and turns in the plot can involve surprise and suspense following the main action but every word must be understanable by everyone, a flat line instead of Shakespeare's layered world. Even The Great Gatsby, a great novel, is a rags to nouveau riche story of Oedipal love, delusion, adultery and deception with twists and turns for the murder.

Although Gatsby dies, there is a happy ending for the Buchanans and the narrator and the American Dream because Fitzgerald hides his satire. All the words are easy to understand. This book has universal appeal, but many people in the world are sick of the American story. For the French and some British, it is too predictable and unsophisticated; for the Muslims it shows too much of the decadent lifestyle without any transformation out of corrupt values-- transformations are really to enable the character to be more successful with money and love, not with Allah.

The Asians see a loss of community although they are drawn visually to the films. The South Americans copy them but add their own twist like the priests who are always committing adultery. The Republican story is rags to riches-- the poor immigrant who becomes a successful entrepreneur, starting and growing small businesses like well-loved flowers while Shakespeare's tragedies dealt with the downfall of kings and queens. Chekhov wrote about riches to rags with the Russian revolution.

Word of the Week: Ersatz

Great writers are not always popular but it is time to forget about these stereotypes and be open to different kinds of structure. The same goes for character transformation which appears to change emphasis in different cultures. Some Americans want their characters to get better, not older and weaker as they do in real life. They have a puritan need to learn something from the story to make their own lives better-- how to give up an addiction, fight an external or internal enemy and win, get a better job, resolve their relationship problems.

But in real life the law of entropy usually has people getting older, fatter, weaker, losing their minds and their bank accounts, their dignity and their hopes. In The Cairo Trilogy by Naguib Mahfouz characters peak with their marriages and births or even martyrdoms but very few people have the pollyanna triumphs of American cinema.

Many Americans like realism but not depressing naturalism. They like to leave the cinema or put the book down with renewed energy and hope to conquer their own troubles. They also like to be entertained and while they expect these moral lessons embedded in their stories they don't want to work too hard to learn things, especially about other culture or historical periods.

They read or watch primarily for the twists and turns of the story, the amusing or heart-wrenching actions of the characters, the sex and violence that keeps things moving.

American drama is often characterized as a theme, a task, a team, a deadline, a competition, and a consequence--"You're fired! Since we are gathered together at the world's foremost University for Science and Technology, I thought it would be appropriate to compare drama to physics in terms of matter, energy, force, time and space. Matter refers to the characters in the story and Energy to the way that they attack, avoid, negotiate their challenges.

Force refers to the circumstances, internal and external, that push the characters in various directions towards and away from their objectives. Time and Space are crucial to both physics and drama--combustion can bring explosion in both, but today I would like to talk about unconventional uses of time and space, based on sciences like particle physics and geology. For example, the third novel of my trilogy, How to Survive as an Adjunct Professor by Wrestling is a tandem-competitive narrative between the depressed, sticky, but homeostatic Quantum Chromodynamic Force and the manic, ebullient Electroweak Force.

My novel, Huguenot Street, is narrated by the omniscient voice of the Gunks conglomerate rock, dipping into five layers of secrets and lies from the crust to the fiery rigid upper mantle, the tar-like lower mantle, the liquid center and the solid core.

More on this later. If closed classical dramatic structure can be symbolized by a mountain or a circle, I want to show how four distinct narrative styles lead to four dramatic structures symbolized by a wheel, a caravan across a desert, electrons whizzing around an atom as the Bore-dinary and the Extraordinary Worlds, or in my case the Quantum Chromodynamic Force and the Electroweak Force and the five layers of geology--crust, fiery upper mantle, tar-like lower mantle, liquid center and solid core, leading also to different linguistic styles, and therefore a need for more linguistic complexity.

The overall title is How to Survive as an Adjunct Professor by Wrestling, referring to how I personally was able to support myself on the pittance provided by the universities to adjunct professors, and to the throughline of my protagonist Jan Klein who wants to be a happily married, full-time professor, but each tome deals with important high-concept issues such as twentieth century narcissism and megalomania in the first tome, the battle between freedom and terrorism in the second, and the struggle to control death through health, suicide, religion and creation in the third.

The chief protagonist, Jan Klein, with her dramatic throughline of doing anything to survive as an adjunct professor, weaves the novels together and many of the characters reappear. This trilogy also shows how and why a twentieth century megalomaniac, a nymphomaniacal, narcissistic, overeducated, intellectual liberated woman becomes a Muslim in the midst of a barbaric jihad against Westerners.

While the Campbell monomyth embraces the three novels so that the first tome represents the Call to Adventure in the Ordinary World to break through the glass of narcissism, the second tome crosses the threshold into the Special World of terrorism, ancient civilization and Islam, and the third tome takes the road back to the Bore-dinary and Extraordinary worlds of QCD and EWF where a youth elixir is developed as people commit suicide, get sick and struggle with mortality in the QCD narrative and find resurrection in the EWF narrative.

However, each novel represents a distinct narrative style, tracing the history of human narrative from first person recursive memoir, to pass-the-ball linear caravan tales told by multiple narrators, to the omniscient voices of the forces of particle physics as they compete in tandem the way the electron circles the atom.

The first tome of the trilogy was sewn from a number of short stories about my life now encapsulated in the chapter breakdowns, but it wasn't until I had written the second tome, Unclashing Civilizations, that I decided to turn them into a novel about the narcissism and megalomania of the twentieth century. The character, Jan Klein, was one of my wrestling personas, and while some of her experiences are similar to mine, she is not me; she is an only child and then an orphan while I have four siblings and a father, and her personality is brasher, bolder, until the last tome when she starts to lose her mind.

One of the chief antagonists, Mary Matthias, resembles a Republican woman who lives near West Point and is in no way connected to my bosses, although some of her duties would have to be similar. But its narrative style is unconventional: I call this a conglomerate narrative, the way the earth folds on and in itself, erupting, oozing out and then settling down. How to Survive as an Adjunct Professor by Wrestling These novels are NOT about authorial abdication, nor an interactivity that leads to communal creation.

They are still novels in print by one author.

  • Conversa.asp
  • ERSATZ HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP
  • The Big Bang Theory - ersatz homosexual relationship

In a recursive narrative, the present is relatively static and the past is used to solve a problem in the present, even if that is to recapture lost time as in Proust, or to stop the plague in Ancient Greece in Oedipus Rex. While the climax of the play occurs when Oedipus plucks out his eyes, the present action up until then has been mainly conversation about dramatic events in the past.

Raj ended up working alongside Sheldon or "for" him, as Sheldon insists"exploring the string theory implications of gamma rays from dark matter annihilations ". Relationships[ edit ] For most of the series' run, Raj had not been involved in any lasting romantic relationship, mostly due to his inability to speak to women.

However, he was much more successful in casual sex than the more sexually aggressive Howard. He once dated Lalita Gupta, a childhood friend, in an arrangement made by his parents. With Raj able to speak to her only under the influence of alcohol, the date goes badly, and Lalita left the intoxicated and bothersome Raj to have dinner with Sheldon.

When Penny forces him to do so verbally, he utters a barely audible "sorry". To do so, he takes an experimental drug to correct his anxiety disorder. He is the only one, out of himself, Howard and Leonard, in whom Missy showed any interest, but the medication wears off when he tries to ask her out.

After drinking what he thinks is a beer, Raj is able to charm Glau. When a jealous Howard points out to Raj that his beer is non-alcoholic, Raj stops speaking in the middle of his conversation, and flees from Glau. She has never appeared in the show, but he states that she was deaf, so his inability to speak with women was not an issue.

This is described by Leonard's mother, Dr. Beverly Hofstadteras an " ersatz homosexual marriage".

Raj Koothrappali

Raj recounts a dream where he and Howard both had mansions with a secret tunnel that connected Howard's "front yard" to his "back yard". He uses a female avatar in World of Warcraft. In season four he claims to be a metrosexual[26] and in season 8 it is revealed that he and Howard were once in couples therapy.

In season 10's "The Emotion Detection Automaton", Howard tells Raj that if they are both unattached in the next thirty years, he would be open to the two of them having a relationship. In the season 4 finale, Penny and Raj become intoxicated and, despite agreeing to remain good friends, end up in bed together.

The next morning, both agree to pretend it never happened, but they are caught by Leonard, Sheldon, and Howard as they try to leave, [27] causing Penny to think about moving back to Nebraska. In the opening episode of season 5, Raj reveals to Penny that they did not have intercourse; instead he ejaculated prematurely and they fell asleep.

Penny promised not to tell the guys, although subsequently she sometimes calls him "Quick Draw". Raj gets along well with his parents' first selection, but discovers that the woman is a lesbian trying to conceal her sexual orientation from her family: Happy with his new companion, a female Yorkshire Terrier he names Cinnamon, Raj proceeds to see if the pup fits in his man-purse.

This leads Bernadette to dispute Raj's heterosexuality. This culminates in a dream sequence where he and Bernadette dance together in a Bollywood musical number. He reflects upon these fantasies by observing that he is "definitely not gay". After giving a speech about how one cannot define themself by being in a relationship, he is approached by a woman named Lucy Kate Micucci.

They both leave to get a cup of coffee, with Raj hypocritically declaring "Later, losers! Lucy gives Howard her phone number to give to Raj.

Later, Lucy goes to his apartment to apologize and tells him that she has problems around new people. Raj describes his own psychological problems, and they agree to have a formal date. In the following episode, "The Contractual Obligation Implementation", he takes Lucy out for a first date to a library where they text message each other instead of speaking, in light of her social anxiety and his selective mutism.

They continue to date and by "The Love Spell Potential" they kiss. However, in the season 6 finale "The Bon Voyage Reaction", Lucy feels too pressured by Raj to meet his friends, and a dinner between Lucy, Raj, and Amy does not go well.

Raj apologizes for his behavior and asks Lucy to come to Leonard's goodbye party before his departure for the North Sea on Professor Stephen Hawking's expedition. However, Lucy text messages him at the party saying she will not be there and does not want to see him again. The next day, Penny goes to comfort a heartbroken Raj, who thinks he is completely unlovable. Penny suggests that this lament is attributed to alcohol, but Raj says he that he has not had a drink since the night before: In season 7, Raj's newfound ability to speak to women allows him to put aside his previous difficulties with them, and though he does not date, he manages to charm several women throughout the series, including the divorced HR representative Mrs.

Davis, and a veterinarian named Yvette. Eventually, he begins dating Emily Sweeney Laura Spenceran attractive but rather sinister young dermatologist he met on the Internet. Their initial interaction does not go well, when she finds Raj's shyness and passivity off-putting, but she eventually agrees to go on a date with him: In "The Valentino Submergence", episode 15 of season 9, Raj breaks up with Emily right before Valentine's Day, because he has developed an interest in Claire, a bartender working on a sci-fi screenplay for a children's film who he met in the previous episode.

Upon learning that Claire has reunited with her former boyfriend, he begs Emily to take him back, but she refuses.

During season 12, Raj asks his now-divorced father to arrange another marriage for him: In "The Consummation Deviation", their attempts to be physical together bring about a brief relapse of Raj's mutism. Creation and casting[ edit ] Raj did not appear in the original, unaired series pilot, which only featured Leonard, Sheldon, and a different version of the Penny character, called Katie.

The test audiences reacted negatively to Katie, but they liked Sheldon and Leonard. In the new pilot, Raj and Howard were added.