Found myself in need of a discussion of parody. I got a very negative reaction to my dove-tail parody Froggie went a courtin', to the tune of In The Mood. I think satire is more about poking fun, parody is about having fun, especially with patterns, and mimicry. I thank the dictionary for it's support.

   My question is why some people hate parody. Especially educators, WriteWhatYouKnow literary people, people who affect a claim to a cultural authenticity beyond their actual experience, and serious artistes. Originality isn't really the issue--Shakespeare? Originality is only good when it's good, too. I've noticed I seem to be the only person who really likes Nabokov--who is essentially a high-lit parodist.

   Does parody really have any educational value is my question I suppose. Education people often don't seem to care for it as an open strategy. But I think it's really how we learn many things--by imitation and mimicry, and hopefully having a little fun, too. It's how I learned to paint, it's also how you know what answer the test-makers want to hear. Frankly I think more people do parody than know it, or want to know it, and most original work is not very original. Does parody imply something unseemly about lines of cultural connectivity in general?