- Joined
- Sep 22, 2018
- Messages
- 42,892
- Location
- Moonbase Caligula
- SL Rez
- 2008
- Joined SLU
- 2009
- SLU Posts
- 55565
There were three then PBS came along and made it four, sort of.I remember the old days, when there were only three networks, and the other channels carried reruns and old movies. .
We had the networks on VHF channels 2, 5, and 10 then PBS on UHF 42. The first cable stations I remember were WGN in Chicago and TBS in Atlanta. Then MTV started playing music videos and we thought that was so silly. We called it MTSullivan until we saw MJ’s Thriller.There were three then PBS came along and made it four, sort of.
I think you got the initials backwards. 2-13 were vhf, 14 - 82 uhf.We had the networks on UHF channels 2, 5, and 10 then PBS on VHF 42. The first cable stations I remember were WGN in Chicago and TBS in Atlanta. Then MTV started playing music videos and we thought that was so silly. We called it MTSullivan until we saw MJ’s Thriller.
So *my* fondness for the movie is due to an artificial nostalgia for a time I never even experienced (though I definitely know that part of Indiana), and not because it's an hilarious film that actually has some fun with the idea of nostalgia? Oh yeah sure right. Tell me more about how naive I am.Peoples' bizarre fondness of / fixation on A Christmas Story is artificial nostalgia for artificial nostalgia.
><Notice how I commented and replied to you, not the video.
If you were trying to pack that rambling paragraph into the previous sentence, may I suggest getting larger bags.
If you don't want to stand behind your own words, fine. But then don't go throwing a litany of negatives as a critical opinion just to lash out because you think it's gonna bother me. Your opinion at this point is pretty sapless.That rambling paragraph was already packed into the video, which you were supposed to watch. The sentence before it was just introductory. I kinda find it hard to believe you legitimately believed the sentence was a complete, self-contained argument that deserved to be analyzed independently from the video it introduced; so I'm going to assume you're just upset cuz I implied something negative about this incredibly dull, lifeless, unfunny, and overplayed movie that you happen to like.![]()
Context should have told you that it was just a summary of the video. You can persist at treating it like some separate, self-contained argument if you want, but I don't have to play along - especially since I know that you know better.If you don't want to stand behind your own words, fine.