Troppo guide to exotic flora and fauna

cycad

tree ferns

rude senile royal turd

obsequious Tory blogger

About Ken Parish

Ken Parish is a legal academic, with research areas in public law (constitutional and administrative law), civil procedure and teaching & learning theory and practice. He has been a legal academic for almost 20 years. Before that he ran a legal practice in Darwin for 15 years and was a Member of the NT Legislative Assembly for almost 4 years in the early 1990s.
This entry was posted in Media, Uncategorised. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Troppo guide to exotic flora and fauna

  1. Gummo Trotsky says:

    AFAIK tim’s wasting his time – that Knight of the Garter vacancy has already gone.

  2. ken says:

    scratches head

    Let’s see, is this
    (a) One of those – what did Ken call it – those boy bloggy Niall things?
    (b) No, it’s about the cyclads. Cyclads are wounded, wounded I tell ya. Silenced by the tree ferns! Plant rights for cyclads. All plants are not equal!
    (c) Someone confessing to a secret crush on Joomie Drooory (does Jen know?).
    (d) Something about a grumpy old man with no sense of humour
    (e) Something about Tim Blair?

  3. saint says:

    Pugnacious me, Troppo thinks I’m ken

  4. saint says:

    And Ken thinks (f) missing link

  5. Jacques Chester says:

    SHOCK DISCOVERY

    Old Man Grumpy And Disinterested In Following Popular Culture

    Footage at 11.

  6. Gummo Trotsky says:

    That’s tim off the hook, Jacques, but what’s the Dook of Edinboig’s excuse?

  7. Jacques Chester says:

    Ha! So much for using the Slashdot memes.

  8. tim says:

    Kens upset that Troppo isn’t listed at my new site. Oh, well; at least he didnt call me an obsequious Tory blogger with cancer (ha! ha!), in the manner of his preferred bloggers.

  9. Niall says:

    Not likely to be listed either, is it, Timmy?

  10. Geoff Honnor says:

    Lighten up Ken. It’s a good news story all round:

    Grumpy yet weirdly loveable old bloke in his 80’s may or may not have said something curmudgeonly after receiving an unwanted botanical exposition – possibly he mistook Jamie for Robert Manne; I would have fled as well – when he was only trying to be polite and hence confirms his well-deserved reputation as a man who doesn’t mince his words.

    Great Australian Cycad Custodian – and intended recipient of alleged curmudgeonly comment – strategically leaks details of what might have been said.

    Brit media run the story as front-page news.

    Australian garden at Chelsea Flower Show is inundated with visitors desirous of checking out controversial cycad and its custodian – who has come a long way from the days when he used to make a living waving his cycads at pissed hen’s night parties.

    Jamie Durie returns a hero and is appointed to head a federal government review of the Australian cycad industry with reportback no later than 2010.

    Where’s the downside?

  11. Yobbo says:

    I’m surprised Jamie Durie wasn’t invited to the 2020 summit to be honest.

    At the very least, he’s experienced life as a sex worker. He has a lot more knowledge of the real world than Claudia Karvan.

  12. Liam says:

    I could mistake Durie for Manne. I could see how that could happen.

  13. Marks says:

    I am a devout republican.

    But I have to admit the Duke is in touch with most of his Missus’ subjects on this.

    Who gives a rats *rse what the flaming tree like things are? The old codger was only trying to be polite, and got a bloody lecture for his pains.

    What next? Abuse him because he can’t tell the difference between a Melbourne W type tram and a Sydney O type?

  14. Geoff Honnor says:

    “I could mistake Durie for Manne. I could see how that could happen.”

    Liam, when you’re pushing 90, in the shade of a treefern, I imagine that all lecturing Australians would kind of fade to blend…….He could probably still spot the difference in a Manpower line-up, but.

  15. patrickg says:

    I wish I could say I am surprised that a good quarter of the commenters don’t appear to have read the article. Going off without bothering to understand what you’re talking about: a very Phillipian (and perhaps Blairite?) trait.

    All he he got served with was, “Actually -” That Jamie Durie, what an uppity little prick, hey? Had a bit of a downstairs look to him, that’s for sure.

  16. Ken Parish says:

    Precisely. The only person who characterised Durie’s entirely reasonable response as a “lecture” was Philip, one of the world’s great publicly funded human leeches. Durie’s amiable, laid back public persona hardly suggests that he would have “lectured” or hectored the prince. What are you supposed to do when someone makes a conversational opening apparently expressing interest in the plants you’re displaying but makes a mistake about them? Assume that they’re not really interested at all and are just making a patently insincere remark (even though you’d know that was very likely to be the case)? Or assume that they really DID have some degree of interest in the topic as their opneing remark attempted to convey? Surely it would have been downright rude to automatically assume that Philip was utterly disinterested and just making a meaningless remark. Replying that the plant was a cycad not a tree-fern is hardly a “lecture” unless you’re the sort of arrogant, boorish waste of space that Phil the Greek manifestly is.

  17. saint says:

    Garbage Ken. Even the Brits didn’t see it that way.

    And as one commenter said:

    The complaints coming from Australians are amusing. They are, after all, not a country known for polite small talk and the only place I know where “Bastard” is considered a term of affection.

    I am willing to bet that the average real Australian man, rather than the nancy boys from Melbourne, put in the same position as Prince Philip, would have replied similarly.
    Posted by Simple Sailor on May 22, 2008 4:04 PM

  18. Gummo Trotsky says:

    And as another commenter on the same article said:

    For heaven’s sake! All of you incontinent ranters. One extra sentence, and Mr Durie becomes a ‘crashing bore’. One comment from the D of E and all you republicans crawl out of the woodwork to add a penn’oth of vitriol. The Duke of Edinburgh has worked more hours for Britain than the lot of you put together. He is in his 80s and may perhaps be forgiven the occasional carmudgeonly remark. Or is it one rule for the elderly poor and another for the rich? You should be ashamed of yourselves.
    Posted by Roddy Campbell on May 22, 2008 1:33 PM

    This one’s good too:

    Its something of a truism that the English have no interest in knowledge or facts.

    They actually delight in their ignorance and even boast about just how stupid they are when for instance – any arithmetic is required. Boris Johnson couldnt even express one twelfth as a percentage ! ! !

    As soon as anyone starts to talk about anything requiring understanding or knowledge the typical English person will pretend to yawn or fall over into coma.

    Could this be why the English are absolutely rubbish at everything? Why we have virtually no industry of our own and we would all be eating grass if it were not for the Americans the Japanese and the Germans running (the wholly foreign owed) city of London for us.

    Never mind our football.

    I thought we could be proud about the way we are surrendering our way of life to the immigrants and our good manners.

    We are still surrendering brilliantly – but it seems the good manners have gone.

    What a foul, stuck-up, ignorant, cretin the Duke has turned out to be.

    Posted by Old Man on May 22, 2008 11:49 AM

    Both sock-puppeting Aussies no doubt.

  19. Geoff Honnor says:

    “What are you supposed to do when someone makes a conversational opening apparently expressing interest in the plants youre displaying but makes a mistake about them?”

    I guess you could try, “yes. It is a magnificent plant, isn’t it.”

  20. tim says:

    Jesus, Ken. I didn’t want a bloody lecture …

  21. saint says:

    In terms of the top most stimulating subjects for conversation blog post, tree ferns – or tree fern lookalikes – must come somewhere close to 1,789,087th on the list.
    […]
    Britain Club Troppo would, after all, come to a grinding halt if, every time someone alluded to the “nice weather we are having”, we should feel the need to give the full seven-day forecast, complete with year-on-year comparisons and the usual boring commentary about global warming.

    Nice weather we’re having.

  22. Ken Parish says:

    “if, every time someone alluded to the nice weather we are having, we should feel the need to give the full seven-day forecast”

    But if in fact it was pouring with rain and blowing a gale at the time, would you just answer “Yes, superb weather, your highness”? Probably the answer is yes, because he’d either be joking or so utterly senile that any meaningful response is pointless, so it’s a poor analogy. However, if someone seemingly expresses a genuine or at least polite interest in the plant you’re displaying, I would regard it as rude and demeaning to answer as Geoff would have me do yes. It is a magnificent plant, isnt it. I wouldn’t insult him by assuming he was just making an inane remark with no interest whatever in the topic. I wouldn’t be surprised, however, if it turned out that the intent was indeed meaningless conversational filler (like “hallo, how are you?” when the last thing the person actually wants to know is how you really are). But I would be both surprised and appalled (as would Saint if being honest rather than arguing for the sake of it) if they just walked away muttering about being “lectured”. Clearly manners are superfluous when you’re a royal personage.

  23. This thread is actually pretty funny. Except for the lecture…

    (And I have revealed for all time my relationship with popular culture, at least as regards television. I had to google Jamie Durie to see what he looks like. In light of which, I second Yobbo’s suggestion).

  24. But if in fact it was pouring with rain and blowing a gale at the time, would you just answer Yes, superb weather, your highness?

    In England, yes. But it would be ironic.

  25. saint says:

    Crikey Ken. Might as well tell me Durie is an exhibitionist but don’t tell me you really care about Durie, tree-fern look alikes, Philip or manners. (And I’ve lived and worked in Greece with Greeks, and in Britain with Brits, and can probably tell you more about their manners than you can.)

    And it’s sunny and warm here today.

  26. Geoff Honnor says:

    “And its sunny and warm here today.

    Yes, saint. It’s quite splendid.

  27. Niall says:

    Tempest in a tea-pot or yet another opportunity to slag off the royals and those who pander to their protection from public ridicule. I’ll take the latter every time. On Ya, KP!

  28. saint says:

    On ya Geoff.

    No Niall, judging by Ken’s tortuous explanations it seems that like you, he just likes to take gratuitous swipes at Tim.

  29. rf says:

    He has a lot more knowledge of the real world than Claudia Karvan.

    aha, stripper in male revue = the real world, actress involved in many films, TV shows equals what? the unreal world? A parallel universe? Cosseted taxpayer funded shangri-la?

  30. Helen says:

    What are you supposed to do when someone makes a conversational opening apparently expressing interest in the plants youre displaying but makes a mistake about them? Assume that theyre not really interested at all and are just making a patently insincere remark (even though youd know that was very likely to be the case)? Or assume that they really DID have some degree of interest in the topic as their opneing remark attempted to convey?

    Yes, in a country,and with a subset of the inhabitants of that country, which are renowned for making gardens. WTF? Yes, it was rude (but true to form for Phil the Greek, what’s new!)

    And Geoff H, “weirdly lovable old bloke”? Speak for yourself!

  31. Caroline says:

    I don’t think I could ever correct anyone who was needlessly showing a passing, casual interest in whatever I was displaying by starting with the word Acutally as it implies that they be, compared to me, purveyor and evidently all-round expert on specimen in question, a blithering idiot in dire need of re-education. I never like to point out in so many words, to people particularly strangers or royalty, that they be blithering idiots as I think it far more effectively achieved through that which is left unsaid.

    Arrogance meets arrogance in this case. Who doe these people think they are?

  32. Caroline says:

    by starting with the word Acutally or even actually

  33. James Farrell says:

    Ken is on the right track at #22, but a better analogy might have been a visit to the zoo. If HRH had said alligator when it was a crocodile, it would have been pedantic to contradict him: convention allows us to be sloppy about this precisely because most people are actually aware of the distinction. But emu/cassowary would have warranted an intervention — a genuine, but understandable mistake that any remotely curious person would expect to be corrected on.

    Paul Theroux has a hilarious essay about an encounter with Phil in My Other Life.

  34. Geoff Honnor says:

    Speaking of crocodiles, it’s crocodile tears (and cassowary-like ccnviction) that I’m detecting here on the part of those allegedly seeking reparative civility for the Cycad Ecdysiast.

    Comments like: – “senile old turd,” “Phil the Greek” (he’s actually “Phil the German Danish” for those interested in genealogically accurate vituperation), “rude and arrogant” etc, lead me to conclude that the primary motivation of those posting here is to savagely beat up on a defenceless, elderly old Returned Man in a Panama hat (and I’m not talking about Tim Blair).

    As a bunch of aspirant Miss Manners you’d make a good NRL team on an off-season trip to Bali.

    James, I think it would be permissible to offer a corrective to HRH were he to remark on the beauty of one’s treefern when it was actually a crocodile – or a cassowary – particularly if he was intent on stroking the “foliage.” However, Parish et al would no doubt sing a very different tune in those circumstances.

  35. Laura says:

    James, you are exactly right, in fact I was going to make an almost identical comment only with a kangaroo and a wombat standing in for tree fern and cycad. Only then I started thinking about siberian hamsters and it was off to the land of dreams again for me.

  36. FDB says:

    “I started thinking about siberian hamsters”

    Filigree, I hope.

  37. Ken Parish says:

    fricassee?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.