Would like your thoughts on this please:?

Question

Came across an old book (not mine) & found a sort of screwed up note/ page inside that reads:
The fact that you quoted may be interesting.
The fact that you quoted it is NOT.
Anon.

Set me thinking, but bit of a mystery. How would you interpret this?

Answer 1

Suppose that I quoted someone that said, "25% of the population doesn't like chocolate milk". Your phrase would be saying that the fact I quoted (about chocolate milk) might be interesting, but that the speaker doesn't find second-hand knowledge interesting.

I would think this was probably said by a professor/teacher (or perhaps an editor) who was trying to tell the writer/speaker to stop quoting others and start thinking for him/her self!

Answer 2

I believe the first line means that it is interesting that you quoted something from somewhere. But the fact that you (being the person who said the quote) said the quote it has somehow lost its meaning. such as if some whom you have know for a long time this person not being intelligent says something that is deep and meaningful you tend to be caught off guard and are impressed by that person. But if u has a friend that is very intelligent and is constantly saying deep and meaningful quotes or phrases than it kind of looses it glow after a while. Making the fact that they said the quote not as deep as if the unintelligent person had said that quote. Meaning it not only depends on the situation in which the quote is used but also who is saying the quote. That’s how interpreted the quote

Answer 3

I would say it sounds like the remarks of a teacher about a composition. I think the remark means that it is interesting that the person drew on a quotation rather than expressing their own opinion, but that the quote itself was used as a regurgitation of facts rather than an analysis of what was said. You can use a quote to support an argument but it is in itself not an answer to an argument. A problem that I See Christian's do all the time in the R & S section. Quoting from a text does not provide an argument for or against.

Answer 4

There are two ways of interpreting this. 1. The ''fact'' that you quoted may be interesting (ie the world is not exactly round) that is a quote and maybe interesting ..............then 2. ''The fact'' that ''you'' quoted it is NOT! ............meaning that even though the fact is interesting it isn't because ''you'' quoted it. A bit Oscar Wilde don't you think? Good ole English grammar hey lol.

Answer 5

Facticity is no mystery. Therefore it is not interesting. Keeping things hidden perpetuates interest. By quoting something, the author of the note wrongly concludes, one blocks or obscures the original author, in an odd way. With the "Anon" added at the end of the observation, it seems to be just a shrewd observation about the degradation of intellectual matter as fact. Perhaps it is also a despairing observation.

Answer 6

It means that what you quoted (what someone else thought of or said) was interesting.

But you are not interesting - that quoting someone else(rather than thinking of and saying something original) isn't interesting.

That was an interesting fact. But quoting facts is not an interesting thing to do.

Answer 7

Seems the quote wasn't required as all the information required was already there, even though the quote in it's self was an interesting piece of information.

Answer 8

It's a misnomer the fact you are asking this question is interesting. The fact that you quoted is not! See

Answer 9

keep on thinking. it might mean that you should make up your own quotes. That if you quote someone else that you have no intelligence of your own.
Who knows what that person was thinking. it is a quote of it own.
Necessity drives the needy.

Answer 10

The "fact" in the 1st statement refers to some fact that was being quoted.
The "fact" in the 2nd line is along the same lines as:
"the fact i'm broke is due to my lack of money", in other words it refers to the action of stating the fact.

Well that's about as clear as mud :)