ellinor (ellinor) wrote,
ellinor
ellinor

  • Mood:
  • Music:

The Cantot-Ellinor Papers



Before I start, here are some other names I considered giving this entry:

* Federalism and the summer-associate problem
* Why I hate meeting and conferring
* Eat this, founding fathers (or don't eat it, if you refuse to paint pottery first)
* How can it all start so innocently and go so horribly wrong?
* Inequitable conduct and bisque firing
* cantot and ellinor don't go to White Castle
* Law happens
* How troubling is it that this is how Cantot and I spend our free time?
* Tongue, cheek, and invitational interpretation
* Irrational pottery fears, textualism, and hermeneutics
* Escalation and you
* Cracked pottery or crackpots?
* 43(a) was wise to stay out of this one

A preface by future historian B. W. Frankenhandler:

While it is the most extreme example of the Cantot-Ellinor discourse, and the only one surviving in print to this day, the historical record indicates that Cantot and Ellinor frequently engaged in this style of debate, and by all appearances enjoyed it, as if it were sport. As is true of so many historical figures, we cannot pretend to understand the obscure minds of Cantot and Ellinor, but we can be sure that they remained close friends until their too-early deaths, in what was either a tragic caramel-related accident, or a duel, we can't be sure. Future history is complicated, folks.

And now, in the spirit of Gossage and Vardebedian, I give you the following:




-----Original Message-----
From: ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:37 AM
To: Summer Associates and some Associates, including 43(a) and cantot
Subject: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


43(a) [formerly known to ellinor-blog readers as friend MA] and I are planning a summer outing to the Color Me Mine for pottery painting, followed by a casual dinner (probably at [Mexican restaurant]). For those who have never heard of Color Me Mine, it has a wide selection of unfinished pottery -- you select and decorate the piece and when you are through, Color Me Mine will fire it for you. It's a bundle of fun, and I assure you, no artistic skill is required.

Time: [withheld to protect the innocent]

If interested, please RSVP to me and let me know whether you will be bringing a significant other.

:)
Ellinor

-----Original Message-----
From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:40 AM
To: Ellinor
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


Can I just come for dinner?



From: Ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:52 AM
To: Cantot
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


NO. IF YOU WANT YOUR FOOD YOU WILL HAVE TO PAINT YOUR POTTERY. THERE IS NO COMPROMISING.

WHAT KIND OF A HYPOCRITE CAN'T BRING HIMSELF TO PAINT POTTERY BUT STILL WANTS TO BE FED? I ASK YOU. 43(a), we should flog him. Also, eat your lima beans.

:)
- e (the enforcer)



From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:58 AM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


All I'm saying is that the company looked good, but I cannot compromise my boycott of Color Me Mine.

I'm in a catch 22.

A little understanding would be appreciated. I get none of that from you.



From: 43(a)
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:06 AM
To: Cantot; Ellinor
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


You could make pretty light cover switches for your new condo.


From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:07 AM
To: 43(a); Ellinor
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


Ummm … I don't think that will exactly match the style of my condo. But, 43(a), thanks for working with me on this, as opposed to ellinor, who just yells at me. (So typical.)

- Cantot


From: Ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:15 AM
To: Cantot; 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


I am not yelling anymore, I am cool and collected. My eyes in slits like almond slivers, my jaw set.
All I am saying is that there are rules. Rules that must be followed. You are not above the law. You are not superior to this activity. There is no Mexican food without pottery. Period.

There are plenty of modern pieces with clean lines available at Color Me Mine. Your prejudices will surely come back to hurt you someday. If you can make peace with Color Me Mine now, much suffering will be prevented in the future.

:|

-ellinor


From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:26 AM
To: Ellinor
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


E,

Please remember, you are not the law. You have created these arbitrary rules subsequent to notification of the event.

That is unfair and unequitable. I expect more from you.

C


From: Ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:34 AM
To: Cantot
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


These rules existed all along, I assure you.
Keep in mind that the invitation was for pottery, followed by dinner. Not for dinner, preceded by optional pottery.
There is nothing I can do about your unreasonable expectations.

;|


From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:38 AM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


E,

I am surprised by your adherence to such a technical argument. Remember that there are two sides to our justice system: law and equity. I came to you requesting equity. You have offered me none. I am deeply disappointed.

Remember for the future that in order to receive equity you must do equity.

C


From: Ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:42 AM
To: Cantot
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner



Where is the equity in bending the rules? Everyone must live by the same rules. To make different rules for you would be inequitable for the others. In fact, the only equity in this circumstance is equal and equitable the enforcement of rules for all. Your disappointment fazes me not, as it is clearly based on the fallacy that the exercise of inequitable discretion is somehow tantamount to equity.

;\



From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:48 AM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


I am not asking for inequitable enforcement of the rules. In fact, I am not opposed to allowing anyone to join for dinner and not pottery.

I am asking for an equitable interpretation of rules which were never clearly stated at the outset. Even your e-mail of 11:34 recognizes that these "rules" can only be gathered by implication.


From: Ellinor
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:13 PM
To: Cantot
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


You continue to equate equity with imprecision. I am not opposed to everyone going 85 miles per hour on the highway, but I don't expect the police to make an exception when they catch me speeding. This is a Color Me Mine event with dinner. There are also dinner-only events, this just isn't one of them. This event is for those who want to go to Color Me Mine. If you are not such a person, this event is quite simply not for you.

But keep in mind that by missing this event, you would miss the company of the other people who want to go to Color Me Mine, with whom you presumably have something (other than a love of Color Me Mine) in common. Perhaps it is just that you have not entirely weighed the positive aspects of Color Me Mine and, in turn, this event. You note in your e-mail of 10:58 that the "company looked good." You are free to enjoy such company by coming to Color Me Mine and even refraining from painting, if you must (although that will just mean sulking in the corner and watching everyone else have fun), but your e-mail of 10:58 (alluding to an irrational and as-yet unexplained "boycott" of Color Me Mine, which as far as I know has never done you any harm) implies that you are not willing even to do that. Continued refusal to give Color Me Mine, and pottery painting, a fair shake would only be your loss. You could have a nice modern vase or salad bowl, or as 43(a) noted, some switchplates.

O_o



From: Cantot
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:16 PM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


Your e-mail has again darkened my doorstep.

at this point, I phoned Cantot and we had lunch together, with 43(a), during which we three met and conferred regarding the issue at hand. The following morning, i.e. today, I received the following:


From: Cantot
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 9:24 AM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: FW: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner


In light of our recent conversations, I must again express disappointment at your attitude which is neither cooperative nor collegial. Your below correspondence contains numerous misstatements and mischaracterizations, only a few of which I will address now.

First, your speeding analogy is entirely inapplicable to this situation. In the case of speeding, individuals are given clear notice of the speed limit through road signs and more generally through the licensing process. In that situation, selective enforcement would be inequitable.

Nonethless, your analogy underlines the key fact here: your "rule" precluding me from attending dinner was never clearly noticed. I quote your original e-mail: "43(a) and I are planning a summer outing to the Color Me Mine in Santa Monica for pottery painting, followed by a casual dinner." (emphasis added.) There is simply no indication that one must attend Color Me Mine to attend the casual dinner. During our meet and confer yesterday, you stated that "followed by" indicated a conjunctive. However, in that same conversation you indicated that you would allow me to attend pottery, but not dinner, undermining your position that there is a conjunctive relationship between Color Me Mine and dinner. Given that you cannot even adhere to a clear interpretation of your "rule", it is patently inequitable to enforce such a rule to my detriment.

You have further made an inflammatory and entirely unnecessary characterization of my aversion to Color Me Mine. I have an instinctive reaction against unpainted pottery that I have not personally thrown. My reaction has handicapped me. Surely, you will say this is irrational. But, I need not remind you that we are rationalizing, not rational, beings, as evidence from your post hoc rationalization of a "rule" precluding me from attending dinner.

Again, I have simply asked whether I may attend dinner with the group that attends Color Me Mine. You have insinuated that my motivation is for a free dinner. That is not the case. I am willing to pay for myself if I must. The company attending Color Me Mine seems delightful, and I would like to share a meal with them. As expressed above, my personal disabilities prevent me from attending pottery painting events.

I am discouraged by the decline in our relationship and even more disappointed in your evident prejudice against those who cannot paint pottery they have not themselves thrown.

It is still my hope that you will rectify this situation.

Very truly yours,

Cantot

The correspondence continued:


From: Ellinor
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:37 AM
To: Cantot
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner



I am in receipt of your e-mail of 9:24 a.m., and respond to its most glaring assertions.

I maintain that the invitation was clear that the raison d'etre of this event was going to Color Me Mine, and that the rule (and my interpretation of it) are therefore both clear and consistent, and that the record will so reflect. It appears to me that further debate on this topic is unlikely to be fruitful.

I also note that I have never imposed a requirement that you paint pottery, and refer you to the portion of our in-person conversation in which you explained your aversion to painting pottery that you had not thrown yourself. In our conversation, I invited you to pretend that you were painting on paper, or canvas, thereby perhaps therapeutically challenging what may ultimately be a phobia to bisque-fired pottery. 43(a) suggested an even more radical approach, namely that you come to Color Me Mine and work with Play-Doh (or, if you prefer a less salty or less colorful sculpting material, I now suggest modeling clay) rather than painting. If you do not wish to observe the unpainted, bisque-fired pottery that you have not thrown, you are welcome to wear a blindfold, which I add may also have an interesting artistic effect upon the results of your sculpting and/or painting. You are still more than welcome to attend under these circumstances, which I submit are more than sufficient reasonable accommodations to your claimed "disabilities", notwithstanding that such claimed disability does not strictly require accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").

I would certainly enjoy your company at Color Me Mine and the subsequent dinner. However, given the apparent intractability of our dispute, I invite you to make a formal motion before the Court, which coincidentally is myself. I will warn you that if you do make such a motion, I am inclined to rule that you are welcome to attend the event only if you are willing attend the Color Me Mine portion.

:)


From: Cantot
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:56 AM
To: Ellinor
Cc: 43(a)
Subject: RE: Summer event! Pottery Painting & Dinner



Let me clarify: my disability involves the inability to be near unpainted pottery I have not myself thrown. It is not the painting of the pottery nor the observation of others painting pottery to which I have an aversion. Moreover, I believe that your suggestion of blind-folding me is an unreasonable accommodation.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I will be taking legal action against you. However, as it would be futile to bring a motion in your Court, given you obvious prejudice against those with unpainted pottery aversions, I will file a writ of mandamus challenging your authority in an appellate jurisdiction.



at which point, we all went to lunch again, and 43(a) came up with her spiffy new nickname.

Epilogue: I still don't know whether Cantot will be coming. This is a bummer, as I kind of need to make reservations.

Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 6 comments