Or so you choose to read it that way.
Because why should I answer a question that didn’t care about the answer anyway? “Who the hell is…” or “Who the fuck is…” (from a Barry Cowsill thread I started once after he’d died) are not honest questions. They’re “I revel in my ignorance” questions.
Or so you choose to read it that way.
As I said above, that could indicate any number of things. Astonishment, for one. Confusion. Wonderment.
To (try to) be fair, Miller, I read it that way, too, and I wasn’t in the original thread, just been reading this one. If anyone responded to some person I’d mentioned with “Who the hell is _________ ?” I’d take it negatively rather than as a simple inquiry.
Since when has adding “the hell” to a who is question turned it into a passive query?
Sadly, with my luck, I’m guessing I will remember her. I WISH I could forget her-right now, in fact.
:mad:
As for the original question, I cannot see the big deal in saying “who the hell?” If that’s offensive, then this certainly isn’t the Dope I remember.
Who says it’s passive? Certainly, the modifier indicates something, but it’s not necessarily negative.
Who the hell was Miniver Cheevy?
I don’t necessarily take adding “the hell” as rude or negative. IRL it would depend on the situation, voice inflection, facial expression, the relationship of those involved and still other factors.
It seems silly to me to be condescending to someone for his ignorance when that very person was just at the point of seeking to end his ignorance. We perpetuate the very thing we criticize (or find depressing) by not answering the question.
Who the hell is lissener?
I kid, I kid. I know who you are 
As I said, I’ll cheerfully answer “Who is…?” questons, just not “Who the hell is…?” questions. They can go Google. They won’t, of course. They’re more concerned with letting everyone know that knowing who the person in queston is of little value simply because they’ve never heard of the person.
Speaking of condescending…
You’re absolutely right (as is everyone else who’s said this.) The question wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, actually. It was meant more to parallel Sedgwick’s minor cultural importance with Miller’s.
I really don’t think the word “hell” is offensive, but the phrasing was totally wrong for the point I was trying (and completely failed) to make, so it was dumb wording. I didn’t mean it aggressively, and it came out that way. My fault, for that anyway.
My pitting of lissener, however, stands.
Obviously your question was not an “honest question,” despite Frank’s disingenuous posts. If it had been a serious question, it would have taken less effort, and been more productive, to high thee to Wikipedia. Rather, it was a childish avowal of self-righteous ignorance.
It just cracks me up that a “kids these days” aside, linked to a cite it would’ve been faster for you to find yourself than to type in the self-righteously ignorant “Who the hell is Edie Sedgwick?”, apparently hit such a raw nerve that you found it worth the extra effort of a toddler-level tantrum of defensiveness.
If you had said, “Who’s Edie Sedgwick?” I’da been only to happy to pompously show off my knowledge. Instead, you shitted “Who the hell is Edie Sedgwick?” which means only “I can’t be bothered to look it up.” And the only point it makes is that you think it’s more retarded to know who she is than not to know. Even so, all I communicated was a world-weary sigh of the “am I really that old?” variety, which sets off this hilarious aria of petulant defensiveness. Thanks for the laugh, RickJay.
You still missed his point. He knew who Edie Sedgwick was, he was trying to point out her cultural importance.
I wonder what the Spanish word is for “whoosh.”
Who the fuck are you again?
Oh, and quit hogging the “Grey Poupon” will ya…
Not a one word translation. Silbido = whistle. “Pasar como un silbido” = whoosh.
The closest equivalent, I think, would be zumbar, “to zoom.”
Or slang = Zas!