International Journal of Nana Studies 1(2)

Background and Objective

Nana enjoys making conversation that employs special forms of logic of her own origin. The objective of this report is to examine nanoconversation Way 2, known as Pretzel Logic. This way of nanoconversation may not be dismissed as an artifact of Nana's inability to apply communal forms of reasoning to a simple set of facts, but it is better understood as a highly refined mode of social interaction where no obvious basis for such activity is in evidence.

Analysis

When employing Nanoconversation* Way 2, Nana begins with a statement festooned with more hooks than a Rapala jigging shad rap, any one of which may snag the living flesh of a person temporarily attracted by the glint of it. Then, once nanoconversation is initiated, Nana will use her free-range associative capabilities to advance the talk in any direction that simulates a logical interaction.

The following example is a typical application, wherein Nana comments upon an invitation to Sunday breakfast, telephoned to her on Saturday evening:

Nana: I almost broke my neck getting to the phone last night. I'd just gone to bed.
StuporMundi: Don't you have a phone in your bedroom?
Nana: No.
StuporMundi: Would you like me to put one in there for you?
Nana: No, I have another phone somewhere.
StuporMundi: Well, I can hook it up in your bedroom for you if you want.
Nana: No, it would always be in a place I couldn't get to it.

Discussion

As with other ways of nanoconversation, the central motivation for Pretzel Logic is to construct a controversy, a mystery, or another rhetorical framework designed to maximize interaction based on the minimal amount of substance. In the example above, the rhetorical framework was an implicit unjustified admonishment. The genius occurs when an attempt to correct the imaginary transgression (i.e., installing a telephone in a convenient bedtime location) is rebuffed with a logic that indicates no corrective measures are possible under conditions normally prevailing in the universe.

Conclusion

Nana enjoys maximal conversation with minimal intellectual or factual input. Nanoconversation Way 2, Pretzel Logic, enables Nana to insert drama into a mundane event, imply external blame or responsibility for said event, then rebuff offers of help or reparations with the sort of recursive reasoning that drove Hal 9000 into a fateful series of illegal operations.
_____________________________

*Erratum [Int'l Journ. Nan. Studies 1(1)]

In the subject issue of this journal, the term nanoconversation was incorrectly conflated completely with nanoconversation Way 1. That variety of nanoconversation is correctly identified as "smallest talk". The editor regrets the error, and this erratum has been posted as a late update to the subject issue of this journal.