Just what is a "druther", anyway? People are always talking about how things would be different if they had theirs, but what I want to know is—ok, you don't have yours, so who does? Or does no one have your druthers? Maybe your druthers are out there somewhere, like an ore, that you have to locate? But what, then, makes it your druther?
People say things like, "if I had my druthers, I wouldn't even be dressed before 10:30 every day.". But what if I had that person's druthers—would I then be in that person's state? (Or what if I only had some of that person's druthers? For that matter, what if that person only had some? Would h/s only be partially dressed by 10:30? But partial dress is a mode of "not being dressed". Maybe the effect of a druther on a life is like that of a photon on an electron, with multiplicity substituted for energy: there needs to be a certain amount, or there's no effect at all.) Would my possession of h/h druthers mean that I don't get dressed before the appointed hour, or what?
So, is this like wondering, if someone took my virginity when I was 19, did he give it to the next person he slept with? Who has my virginity now? If I sleep with the right person, can I get it back?
Posted by: A White Bear | February 14, 2006 at 06:56 PM
Those are excellent questions as well!
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 14, 2006 at 06:59 PM
If I had a boat I'd go out on the ocean, and if I had a pony I'd ride him on my boat.
Posted by: Jacob Haller | February 14, 2006 at 08:03 PM
I'm not sure if you're actually asking what a "druther" is, or if you're just riffin', but just in case it's the former, I believe it's a contraction of "I'd ruther" which is a corruption of "I'd rather."
Now, gimme back my damn druthers.
Posted by: Matthew Harvey | February 15, 2006 at 06:45 AM
If you did get your virginity back, what would you do with it? You'd just lose it again, b/c you're careless like that.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 09:29 PM
The thing about virginity is that it's an abstract quality—virginitas—and when we say that it's been "taken" or "lost", it's just a manner of speaking. We don't mean that anything has actually been taken, which someone else then has in his or her possession, merely that one is no longer correctly characterized by the adjective to which the property corresponds—one is no longer virginal.
Consider the case of olive oil: virgin olive oil is taken from the first pressing of the olives. It's not as if the olives actually had some physical attribute, not-having-been-pressed-before, and then after they lost that attribute, something else had to have taken or gained it. It's only a side effect of the way our language works that makes it appear that there's actually something gained or lost which can be exchanged the way, say, my lost watch can be.
I have no particular reason to believe that druthers are like this, though.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 09:36 PM
I get the feeling you are playing favorites here.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 09:46 PM
I refer you to our exchange of 15 minutes ago.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 09:48 PM
No wonder they call it a "Wolfson indiscretion error."
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 09:49 PM
Huh.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 09:52 PM
Two can play that game, but I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm insensitive.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 09:54 PM
Always helpful, you are.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 09:54 PM
It's because I'm so insecure, and I want people to like me.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 09:56 PM
Well, that strikes me as a sensible, if predictable, way of proceeding, if you really are insecure.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 09:57 PM
Yes, but it lacks independence.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 10:02 PM
I have to say, in response to feeling challenged w/r/t favorites, you've certainly shown your self-assertiveness here.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 10:07 PM
I can't resist being overdramatic, and my pride was threatened. What can I say?
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 10:08 PM
You could show some flexibility.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 15, 2006 at 10:11 PM
That would require confidence.
Posted by: bitchphd | February 15, 2006 at 10:13 PM
I thought the first pressing was extra-virgin?
...extra-virgin seems to necessarily be the first pressing, but the first pressing may also be virgin. Does virgin have to be the first pressing? My sources are not clear.
Posted by: Matt Weiner | February 16, 2006 at 02:14 PM
My sources are not clear, either, but this much is for sure: extra-virgin must come from the first pressing, virgin may come from the first pressing, neither may be chemically treated, and extra-virgin has a lower level of acidity, although the acceptable levels of acidity for both grades are in dispute.
Posted by: Becks | February 16, 2006 at 07:45 PM
Ben, what in Heaven's name have you done to Geoff Pullum?
Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | February 16, 2006 at 07:46 PM
He works for me now.
Posted by: ben wolfson | February 16, 2006 at 07:49 PM