Comments on: One small step for Neil Armstrong: the wheels of justice grind slow, but they grind exceedingly fine

By: Tatterdemalian

Tatterdemalian — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 01:39:54 +0000

I suppose it’s a matter of opinion, if you think it’s better to make 150 million Americans say “huh?” instead of “HELL YEAH!” Just don’t be surprised if hardly anyone shares it.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 22:31:40 +0000

the literary juxtaposition is better without the a.

By: benning

benning — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 02:10:10 +0000

When that was first broadcast the sound crackled. No wonder his full quote was missed. Good news, then, for NAA!

By: unknown blogger

unknown blogger — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 22:46:23 +0000

Neo, it seems this is all a bit too much “nuance” for most of your readers.

By: Tatterdemalian

Tatterdemalian — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:02:09 +0000

It’s a literary technique called “juxtaposition,” Ymar. The impact of the second clause, “one giant leap for mankind,” was to have been increased by preceding it by the clause focusing on the simple, everyday action Armstrong was taking, “one small step for a man.” If Armstrong had started with the line, “one small step for the men and women of the NASA Apollo program,” there would have been significantly less power in the juxtaposition.

The line was carefully planned out beforehand, polished into what would have been a truly elegant statement to insipre a nation.

And it got blown. How it got blown really doesn’t matter, it still got blown.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 02:09:54 +0000

The syntax isn’t wrong, but it just wasn’t what Armstrong was trying to say. One small step for a man, just means differently than one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.

The reason I like the altered one, the one that Armstrong didn’t mean, is that if Armstrong was just talking about “one man”, he would be talking about himself. But if he said one small step for man, you can feel yourself part of this endeavour, perhaps walking in his shoes as well because you are part of mankind.

The altered phrasing, thus creates a more lasting appeal, because it appeals to all of mankind, not just to “one man” who walked on the moon.

By: DirtCrashr

DirtCrashr — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 01:09:05 +0000

It was never a big deal to me whether it was grammatically wrong or not, as a pretty verbal 6th grader it made just as much sense to me colloquially.
As far as a rehearsed or even scripted line goes, I’d sure as hell hope *someone* would think long and hard beforehand, for something to say when about to go do the impossible and unheard-of – instead of casually and extemporaneously ad-libbing something trite.

By: Tatterdemalian

Tatterdemalian — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:53:35 +0000

Heh. It doesn’t really matter whether it was an error in grammar, an error in Mr. Armstrong’s diction, or even a technical error that caused a skip in the transmission.

The moment came, the world was watching, and the line was blown.

Me, I actually like the fact that the line got screwed up. It makes the whole thing seem more an act of ordinary, falliable human beings, rather than perfect, manicured gods that only exist in Hollywood movies.

By: SCATTERSHOT

SCATTERSHOT — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:55:19 +0000

Neo, I worked at KSC at the time and I was irked at what I thought I heard. The quote was scripted of course, but it was secret. I remember the announcer, very quietly, almost a whisper (like it was a putt for the Masters)say “here’s his quote…”. Then a little confusion on his face, before he repeated what Armstrong seemed to have said. I don’t remember what TV channel I was watching. I do remember the contrast between the live broadcasts and the edited (for time) rebroadcasts. Do you?

By: Trimegistus

Trimegistus — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:33:13 +0000

I like The Onion’s version best.