Roger Zelazny
Chris Gilbert
I don't know why I'm writing this. I guess I just wanted to
share my thoughts with some people who might understand. I've
spent the day feeling like I could almost cry if I tried hard
enough.
I first came across RZs work in that empty gap between getting
bored with the hack and slay type SF/Fantasy and discovering
that there are writers whose intellectualism and creativity
appeal to another part of our psyche altogether. The first book
of his that I read was 'The Guns of Avalon', I'd just found it
in the local library without realising it was part of a larger
story. Needless to say, I thoroughly enjoyed it and promptly
set off on the hunt of the rest of them. Having consumed Amber
with gusto I then dug up 'Roadmarks', 'This Immortal', 'To Die
in Italbar', 'The Dream Master' and others. On the way I
discovered that masterpiece 'Lord of Light'. In the remote
possibility that someone out there hasn't read it then please do.
Anyway, I have RZ to thank for revitalising my interest in
the genre and if, as I hope, I ever get around to finishing
my book, I know who its going to be dedicated to.
Thanks for listening
ChrisG
PS. If this is a hoax, it's a sick one and someone deserves
to be disconnected from the net for it.
Alan Robson
convention just two months ago. He was warm and wise and he read to us
from 'A Night in the Lonesome October' and he was the best reader I have
ever heard. I admired him as a writer for many years before I met him,
and when I met himn I admired him as a person. I knew him for only a
short time but I have lost a friend.
--
Best wishes,
Alan
---- | God in his wisdom made the fly
_ | And then forgot to tell us why.
o( ) |
Alan Robson tri...@iconz.co.nz / /\ | Ogden Nash
Steve Arlow
On 16 Jun 1995, in article <3rstn8$8...@news.duke.edu>,
Joel K. Furr <jf...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>
>bd...@midway.uchicago.edu wrote:
>>Now, Zelazny has passed over to this side of the boundary. The stories
>>are over, there is no more. All good things must come to an end,
>>but damn it, I wasn't ready.
>
>When I heard the news, I looked at my brother and said "Good."
>
>Zelazny had produced nothing but tripe for the last few years --
>excepting, of course, _A Night In The Lonesome October_, and his death at
>this point prevents him from further sullying the body of work he
>accumulated earlier in life.
I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues. You
were certainly prompt, publishing your comments as soon as
possible, while they were *most* relevant. But I would note
that his immediate family probably did *not* get a chance to
read your post.
If you would like to correct this oversight, and express your
pleasure at Roger's death to them directly, his widow and
children can be reached at:
Devin, Trent, and Shannon Zelazny
Judy Zelazny
1045 Stagecoach Road
Santa Fe, N.M. 87501
and his dear friend, biographer, and collaborator at:
Jane Lindskold
1709 Avenida Cristobel Colon
Santa Fe, N.M. 87501
I am sure that you will want to write to them soon, before
their shock and grief begin to subside.
Tell me, Mr. Furr, do you plan to attend any science ficiton
conventions in the near future? You should, you might get the
opportunity to speak directly to some of Roger Zelazny's
friends, and tell them in person, face to face, just how "good"
it is that he has died. After all, the internet can be *so*
impersonal.
Roger Zelazny was a brilliant author and a kind man. He was a
bottomless well of knowledge and an endless fountain of ideas.
He had a wonderful sense of humor, often sly and subtle. His
death is a tremendous loss to all who knew him or his work.
Joel Furr is known on the internet primarily for his efforts on
behalf of lemurs and other lower primates. Perhaps he feels
some kinship with them that he does not feel for human beings.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a
iQCVAgUBL+TUbv3TCxfnZAYBAQHZgAP9GNxrRhu2yB0tEg7lZmJktzwFmnRaLWPN
4D1ZIlhGZlZAA5EqyT97r61o11XnoFqpcdTsry0AGhXz0afQKjhWjbqi276HR8NH
VcnGc8I1j0Z2WXRes5lJIh3pgJcUrIsxFC9R1Y0i/xplMQcIBOSev68zo8VCEInp
UyeHUaxA/I4=
=x1uB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Shiba no to ni | Steve Arlow, Yorick Software Inc. | (810) 473-0920
cha o konoha kaku | 39336 Polo Club Dr. #103,
arashi kana _ | Farmington Hills, MI 48335-5634
-- Matsuo Basho | http://www.msen.com/~yorick | mailto:yor...@msen.com
Craig Clark
business for his fans, and snide comments from those who dislike his more
recent works seem inappropriate.
Like many I feel that Zelazny never really lived up to his early promise. In
particular, those novellas of his first decade - `The Doors of his face, the
Lamps of his Mouth', `A Rose for Ecclesiastes', `At this moment of the
storm' are three which I recall - are among the best works of their era:
literate, well-written, witty and moving, evidence of a skilled writer
utterly familiar with the conventions of genre SF, and able to use them for
his own idosyncratic ends.
I never felt Zelazny was able to sustain these strengths at novel length:
with very few exceptions - _Lord of Light_ and _Damnation Alley_ - I found
his novels disappointing. And his later work seems to me to have betrayed
the talents he showed at first. I own a copy of an anthology of early
Zelazny stories with a foreword by Theodore Sturgeon in which Sturgeon waxes
fulsomely about Zelazny's talents, and suggests that Zelazny's faults are
those of a young writer, and that he would surely grow out of them. Alas, I
do not feel that he did, and several notable critics - Brian W. Aldiss among
them - concur.
No matter. Zelazny is dead, and we should remember him, not as a writer who
failed to live up to his promise, but rather as a writer whose early works
are still memorable, thirty years after their first appearance. Zelazny will
be remembered, and missed by all those who cherish good writing and
intelligent use of SF motifs. His failings as a writer not withstanding, I'd
sooner that he were alive than any one of a hundred people churning out
_Star Trek_ tie-ins.
Craig Clark
cl...@mtb.und.ac.za
Kathryn Graham & John Coxon
:-).
Nevertheless, I shall mourn the writer of the Amber series for many years
to come. His acid wit was always quite fun to read.
I hope he is happy in writer heaven.
Kate
*************************************************************************
John T. Coxon * Wordsmyths Int'l * Kathryn A. Graham
Offering services to the business and film communities.
http://www.pic.net/~wdsmyths/home.html
Kevin B. O'Brien
>jeffrey brown gabbard (jbga...@ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
>: Out of respect for Mr. Zelazny. (a concept lost on Mr. Furr.) I am not
>: going to get involved in a flame war here. All I'm going to say is that
>: if 20 years from now I read in a news post that Joel Furr has died, I will
>: look at my brother and say, "Good."
>Why wait twenty years?
Damn, I was going to say that!
Kevin B. O'Brien
ko...@ix.netcom.com
Paid for by the Tirebiter for Political Solutions
Committee, Sector R
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
> >: All I'm going to say is that if 20 years from now I read in a news post
> >: that Joel Furr has died, I will look at my brother and say, "Good."
> >
> >Why wait twenty years?
>
> Damn, I was going to say that!
Um, folks, before we flame Joel to death, I suggest we consider the fact
that IIRC he is fairly young. The young can be incredibly cruel at times
without really meaning it. He may very well regret it 10 years from now
the way I now regret a very similar mistake that I made many years ago.
Back to Zelazny. For some reason, I can't get Bulgakov's "He doesn't
deserve Light, he deserves Peace" out of my mind." OTOH, "Of this, we can
not be certain, any more than we can know the real end of the Lord of
Light."
--
Ahasuerus http://www.clark.net/pub/ahasuer/, including:
FAQs: rec.arts.sf.written, alt.fan.heinlein, alt.pulp, the Liaden Universe
Biblios: how to write SF, the Wandering Jew, miscellaneous SF
Kevin B. O'Brien
>Sorry, Bruce, but I'm not particularly saddened by *anyone's* death;
Perhaps Ahasuerus is correct. This hardly seems like an adult
sentiment.
PETER POOLE
-> Newsgroups: alt.peeves,rec.arts.sf.written
-> Yes, and...?
-> I don't have a great deal of sentimentality when people die unless they
-> died in unusually cool and/or heroic circumstances. Simply snuffing it
-> after a long career of turning out science fiction does not cause the
-> cockles of my heart to swell with sorrow.
I was almost tempted to ask what qualify as 'unusually cool
circumstances' for 'snuffing it', but fortunately the general contempt
and disgust I feel for your words on this matter prevent it.
'Arsehole' seems to sum it up pretty well though.
'PLONK!'
* 1st 2.00e #339 * Angry cat. Feather on the wind. Autumn comes. The grass dies
wolf_359
>>What if they were basically good and decent people whose deaths were
>>surprising, unexpected, and annoying capable of bringing to mind the
>>caprice of the universe?
>Everyone's death is annoying. I know I'll certainly be somewhat annoyed
>when I die.
At this rate, you'll be the only one who is.
(BTW, drop the "somewhat" ... brevity, as you know, is the
soul of wit).
>I'm sure most people who die have someone who loves them as a human
>being.
Ah, the innocence of youth ...
>I didn't greet news of his passing with cheers. I greeted the news of
>his passing with a sardonic "Good. At least now we know not to expect
>any more rotten books."
Recalculated like a true sophist.
The sad thing is, the underlying point you make is a good one.
Too bad it has to be buried under such self-aggrandizement.
>I'm not what I'd call a science fiction fan; I'm a fan of good writing.
>Unfortunately, science fiction fandom has evolved to the point that
>certain authors are guaranteed good sales even if they publish the veriest
>crap; why you people rush to purchase such stuff is beyond me.
So quit yer yapping and write the effing Masterpiece of the Universe,
will you? Sheesh! It's like listening to the neighborhood
Chihuahua ...
=================================================================
Michael Weholt | wolf...@delphi.com
=================================================================
David Wren-Hardin
>geo...@netcom.com (Geoff Miller) wrote:
>
>
>>What's the deal? Did you have some sort of jones for Zelazny, a
>
> Check your newsreader. This is rasf.written, not
>alt.tasteless. The drivel you posted is both an insult to Mr.
>Zelazney's memory and the intelligence of the readers of rasf.written.
>I am curious, sirrah: how do you stand being yourself?
>
>
At least he spelled "Zelazny" properly.
--
David Wren-Hardin | Confusion will be my epitaph.
bd...@quads.uchicago.edu | As I crawl a cracked and broken path.
http://student-www.uchicago.edu | If we make it we can all sit back and laugh.
/users/bdh4/ | -King Crimson on Grad School
Rob Furr
> jf...@acpub.duke.edu (Joel K. Furr) writes:
>
> >bd...@midway.uchicago.edu wrote:
> >>Now, Zelazny has passed over to this side of the boundary. The stories
> >>are over, there is no more. All good things must come to an end,
> >>but damn it, I wasn't ready.
>
> >When I heard the news, I looked at my brother and said "Good."
>
> Well, this is obviously flamebait, but it does strike me that perhaps Joel
> Furr should get out from in front of his computer monitor once in a while.
And I'd just like to say, at this point, that I do *not* share my
brother's opinions, I consider his taste in nearly everything to be
suspect, superficial, and ill-informed, and I have nothing but respect for
Zelazny (with the exception that I didn't think much of the post-Corwin
Amber series and the two novels that were extended from novellas.)
--
Rob Furr's HTMLized .SIG is at http://www.groucho.com/
James Resinger
>In article <NILS.95Ju...@sparrowhawk.dartmouth.edu>,
>Nils Nieuwejaar <ni...@cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>j...@cegt201.bradley.edu (John Novak) writes:
>>>
>>> Peeve: Watching the readers of rasf.written back Joel into the
>>> corner of rationally defending his off-the-cuff callousness,
>>
>>Peeve: Joel letting himself be backed into said corner. Rather than
>>spending 20 posts temporizing, a simple "Bite me" would have been
>>easier and more appropriate.
>Or a simple "Yeah, I know I came across as a horse's ass, and I'm
>sorry".
>--
>#include <std_disclaimer.h>
>Dan S.
Better yet: "Yeah, I know I came across as a horse's ass, but then I
AM a horse's ass."
Jim R.
06/19/95
11:46 am
_______________________________________________________
James T. Resinger | If you believe in telekinesis,
klaa...@ix.netcom.com | raise my hand.
Joel K. Furr
>Roger Zelazny was a brilliant author and a kind man. He was a
>bottomless well of knowledge and an endless fountain of ideas.
>He had a wonderful sense of humor, often sly and subtle. His
>death is a tremendous loss to all who knew him or his work.
Actually, no, it's not.
I'm sure many people who knew him or enjoyed his earlier works will miss
him and quite properly so, but I won't particularly be upset that no
further Zelazny Amber books will be forthcoming.
We didn't lose *anything* in terms of fine talent unrealized. He'd long
since written just about everything good he had in him, and unfortunately,
didn't sit back and work on doing particularly *good* stuff; instead, he
simply was content to publish piece of trash after piece of trash.
My whole thesis, from beginning to end of this whole idiotic mess, is that
too many formerly-great authors start putting out trash when their talent
fades and ruin their reputations accordingly. I've talked to younger fans
who've read the last few Amber books and thus lump Zelazny in with people
like John "Gor" Norman and other authors of boilerplate fantasy. Getting
them to read stuff like _This Immortal_ or _Doorways In The Sand_ is hard
work, because they've *read* Zelazny and they know his work sucks, see?
I am not sad that Zelazny will not be putting out more books. I am
regretful that someone who once wrote some really good books is dead, but
I don't feel particularly bad about the fact that he won't be putting out
any more atrocious books.
--
Moderator: alt.folklore.suburban, comp.society.folklore
Co-Moderator: news.admin.net-abuse.announce, alt.humor.best-of-usenet
<a href="http://www.danger.com">Joel Furr home page</a>
jus...@lrc.edu
Roger Zelany.Ever since the annoncement of his death,it has been the main
topic of discussion,with some people saying good about him and some saying
bad.And this is not to say I support Joel,but it sure seems like there are
some people practicly flaming him (Joel) wrongfully since he commented that
he was glad that RZ was dead.Now, I think that he is wrong in saying that,
but I see his point.Yes Zelany was a good writer, and yes he wrote some
stuff that wasn't so good.In his later years he started to turn out some
things that were simply wasted paper. But I think what reeeaaallly got some
people ticked off was that there other people who weren't "honoring
Zelany's memory." Now, this brings up an interesting point. For the next
few weeks, should we try to remember RZ as he really was, or should we try
to remember just the best things about him? In Orson Scott Card's book,
Speaker for the Dead (which is an exellent book, if you haven't read it)
there are certain people which will "speak for the dead", telling about how
a person lived. These people would tell all, not holding back anything,even
if it might be painful to hear.It is true, after all, that the truth hurts.
But isn't it true that it's better to tell the truth in the end? So what do
we do when someone dies? What would Zelany want? There are a lot of
questions we need to answer before we say too much more. Let me hear what
you think. (Let's also hear what you think on this speaker for the dead
concept)
-Justin Pullen
Donald G. Jr. Lee
about five years ago. He was doing a reading, and since I had been
hanging around there a lot, and had run a couple of errands, the owners
let me sit in and listen to the radio interview taped by Richard Lupoff
and another guy whose name unfortunately escapes me, for KPFM. It was
extremely cool, and Zelazny was terrific. He talked some about what it
was like to collaborate with Philip K. Dick, and I was delighted to get
his autograph on a copy of DEUS IRAE with the Richard Corben cover...and
I did ask him a question I'd brought with me, whether he'd ever
considered writing a sequel to ROADMARKS, my favorite book of his. And
he said, sure, he'd thought of it...maybe later...
This is really seriously depressing.
Donald Lee
don...@comp.uark.edu
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity to anyone, but
they've always worked for me."
--Dr. Hunter S. Thompson
Jon_M...@unc.edu
>I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
>Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
>of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues.
One should also not ask why one seeking a career as a professional writer
chooses to publish insensitive comments in a forum read by publishers and
editors.
Joel K. Furr
I wouldn't call my comments insensitive. As has been repeatedly pointed
out, I did not rejoice in the man's death but rather in the fact that
whatever circumstances were in effect causing tome after tome of bad
writing to come out under the Zelazny name are now dispensed with. I
would not be in the least surprised to find that publishers were rushing
certain Zelazny works to market before they were reading for publication,
simply because they no longer cared. If you need evidence that this is in
fact possible, simply look at all those _wonnnnnnnnderful_ Rama sequels.
Kevin Maroney
Either your comment was insensitive-- that is, you did not realize how
offensive it would be-- or it was deliberately rude. Which would you prefer?
I will not argue against your point that, in some ways, it is a relief
that no more bad novels will come out from Zelazny. I don't agree with
you, but I will not argue it. However, your initial comment along those
lines-- "Good."-- did not communicate that; it communicated a celebration
of the death of the man.
That was, as I said, either insensitive or rude, and neither one is
something of which to be proud.
--
Kevin J. Maroney|k...@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
At night, the ice weasels come.
Tom Galloway
>>I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
>>Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
>>of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues.
>
>One should also not ask why one seeking a career as a professional writer
>chooses to publish insensitive comments in a forum read by publishers and
>editors.
Speaking of which, did anything more come of the incident a couple of
months back where it was posted what appeared to be credible evidence
of Joel plagarizing for a published article about NetTrek?
Bret Jolly
>
>and why not? What puts a sci-fi hack above and beyond a mortal human and thus
>beyond scrutiny?
>Why must he never be criticized?
What criticism???? To criticize a writer is to offer
a reasoned appraisal of his work. The offender did not do
this. He just decided to seek attention by showing the
world what an insensitive jerk he is. Insults are not
criticism.
Bruce Baugh
hla...@panix.com (Arthur Hlavaty) wrote:
:Joel K. Furr (jf...@acpub.duke.edu) wrote:
:
:: Actually, I like to look at it as "I rolled in the mud with pigs"
-- since
:: y'all certainly seem to enjoy the rolling around over something
as trivial
:: as this, the characterization seems apt.
:
:If anyone ever says that you aren't fit to sleep with pigs, I'll be
happy
:to speak up for you and say that you are.
I'll argue it. I've met some real pigs in my time. They tend to be
clean, well-mannered, and courteous to their pen-mates. I wouldn't
inflict Joel-in-a-snit on them.
bru...@teleport.com _____________ http://www.teleport.com/~bruceab/
List Manager, Christlib, for Christian and libertarian concerns
Preview S.M. Stirling's forthcoming novel DRAKON at my home page
PGP signing on hold while I fool around with beta software
"Encrypt! Encrypt! OK! All-One-Key-Steganography-Privacy!
God's law prevents decryption above 1042 bytes - Exceptions? None!"
Steve Thomas
>though it's plainly written to formula and intended to do nothing but sell
>books...
??? Are you for real? Writing second-best stuff can be very relaxing. Must
authors only write the very best they can write every day? That way lies insanity,
or at the least writer's block.
The only really bad thing a writer can do for money is:
write propoganda for a cause he/she disagrees with
destroy a work of art by writing a bad sequel
Many people are happy with second-best work or even pulp. Those of us who aren't
should be wise enough to read the reviews or wait from recomendations from those we
trust. Those of us who are wise. Not, apparently, Mr. Furr.
sfthomas (ottawa, canada)
steve....@bbs.synapse.net
Robert Pearlman
What people are objecting to, though they seem unable to say so,
is not your judgement of Zelazny's writing. It's that you claimed to welcome
the death of another man, a man who presuambly wanted to live.
We don't like your feeling that way, for very practical reasons. Suppose Roger Zelazny had been a bit better and standing before you, and suddenly turned
blue and dropped to the ground. Would you call the medics, or would you say
"Good. Now he won't write more junk" and leave him to die? We don't like
having someone about who might choose the second. You're supposed to help out,
you know? Enough graveyard bravado, get to the phone.
There _are_ people whose death you may desire. For example, if you stay away from certain alt.soc.serb groups, Slobodan Milosevic. In other social groups
you are allowed to ask for the death of Salman Rushdie, or even to plan it.
The rule is -- you may approve the death only of someone you would be willing to
kill, and of course that must be someone considered an enemy.
Considered by whom? By the society evaluating you. Can't you even
choose whom you want dead? Sure, but if you choose wrong and tell about
it you will be despised, expelled, kill-listed. Roger Zelazny was of our
tribe, and you may not gloat about his dying.
This is all too serious? You would not in fact have killed Zelazny had you
the chance? If you had been in his hospital you would have smoothed his bed,
called the nurse, brought him a drink? We mostly rather think so and would
be relieved to see you say it.
Kindest regards,
Robert Pearlman
Bruce Wright
>
> And I'd just like to say, at this point, that I do *not* share my
> brother's opinions, I consider his taste in nearly everything to be
Well, folks, I believe that just about says it all--except to note
that you are giving this Joel guy WAY too much credit simply by
debating him.
The net is full of these little vest-pocket Bill Buckleys, sitting in
their dorm rooms attempting to be "acerbic." Ignore him like the
nonentity he is.
Bruce Baugh
will...@beat.ugcs.caltech.edu (Will Smit) wrote:
:jf...@acpub.duke.edu (Joel K. Furr) writes:
:>We didn't lose *anything* in terms of fine talent unrealized. He'd long
:>since written just about everything good he had in him, and unfortunately,
:>didn't sit back and work on doing particularly *good* stuff; instead, he
:>simply was content to publish piece of trash after piece of trash.
What Joel misses here, of course, is that had Zelazny died at the age 55, Joel
would be making this precise same argument...and we would have all been denied
the chance to read A NIGHT IN THE LONESOME OCTOBER, which is Zelazny's comic
side very well-presented.
We can therefore not say that we didn't lose anything. The evidence at hand -
a particularly good book after a long period of stuff I can't slog through,
mixed in with the continued high quality of Zelazny's Wild Cards stories -
suggests that indeed there was more good to come.
Joel is, it seems to me, asserting a negative that is a) unprovable and b) not
even supportable by Zelazny's recent body of work.
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
> And isn't it "Sacher-Masoch" anyway [snip]
Yup. Braino :(
--
Ahasuerus http://www.clark.net/pub/ahasuer/, including:
FAQs: rec.arts.sf.written, alt.fan.heinlein, alt.pulp, the Liaden Universe
Biblios: how to write SF, the Wandering Jew, miscellaneous SF
Please consider posting (as opposed to e-mailing) ID requests
Bruce Kvam
> Stop writing open-ended books in a never-ending series. Tolkien
> managed to wrap things up in 3 or 4 books (if you count The Hobbit),
> and he had a hell of a lot more to say than Zelazny.
But you miss the point. Readers *want* books that go on and on. This
is demonstrated by the fact that on-going series sell forever. If
people didn't like them, they wouldn't buy them and publishers
wouldn't sell them.
Piers Anthony complained in an interview several years ago about this
phenomenon. Whenever he wrote "important" non-series books they were
ignored by the public, while people gobbled up the Xanth books like
candy. What message does this send to writers?
Writers are like anyone else: they need to earn a living. Does a
programmer tell his employer, "I refuse to write that program because
I wrote one just like last year, and I wouldn't learn anything new."
Did Rembrandt say, "Sorry, but I've painted 10 portraits in that same
style, and any more like that would stunt my artistic development."
Do you believe artists should starve for their art, while the rest of
us keep cranking out the same widget day after day and live high on
the hog?
It's unfair to compare Tolkien's "moral standing" on sequels to
Zelazny's, because he died before the series mania really took hold.
henry
In article <Jon_Meltzer....@unc.edu>, <Jon_M...@unc.edu> wrote:
>In article <3s2ktd$g...@conch.aa.msen.com> yor...@msen.com (Steve Arlow) writes:
>>I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
>>Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
>>of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues.
>
>One should also not ask why one seeking a career as a professional writer
>chooses to publish insensitive comments in a forum read by publishers and
>editors.
your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
h
[ For Public Key: finger anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6
iQCVAwUBL+lFs9OUGUXWNqytAQHgFAQA01ejMqxP/6JgpDkNSE/tUyNFlwI+mD1t
GkLqQyD/9aRGx15eIpCUtbK8af4Spiysf3WMmUWxpIljkUfX1FP0fzZzfolYWlS+
BSwG4ZXwwL5ohPBKkfQyyeZ2WTbEkG1+p9kWRtGKJfbeeOT03xm/e3bC8MkAEFe1
rCTGbWebEWE=
=yv2F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jim_...@transarc.com
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> In article <Jon_Meltzer....@unc.edu>, <Jon_M...@unc.edu> wrote:
> s:
> >>I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
> >>Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
> >>of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues.
> >
> >One should also not ask why one seeking a career as a professional writer
> >chooses to publish insensitive comments in a forum read by publishers and
> >editors.
>
> your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
> there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
>
Do you know any publishers or editors? I know a few and they certainl
are capable of reading. Did you have a reason for making such a silly
statement, or were you just trying to be "clever"?
******************************************************************
Jim Mann jm...@transarc.com
Transarc Corporation
The Gulf Tower, 707 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 338-4442
WWW Homepage: http://www.transarc.com/~jmann/Home.html
Kevin Maroney
henry <anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
>there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
Patrick has more sense than I do, and has probably kill-filed you by now,
so I'll respond:
There are several people who are active presences on rec.arts.sf.written
who have the power to purchase manuscripts and convert them into
published books. Being insulting and defensive in their presence is an
excellent way for Joel to establish a name for himself in their eyes.
Mean Green Dancing Machine
>
>Kevin J. Maroney|k...@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Uh-*huh*. Any relationship to Tim?
(This from r.a.sf.fandom.)
--
--- Aahz (@netcom.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
Androgynous kinky vanilla queer het
Usenet is not a democracy. It is a weird cross between an anarchy
and a dictatorship.
Ian McDowell
On 20 Jun 1995, Joel K. Furr wrote:
> I wouldn't call my comments insensitive. As has been repeatedly pointed
> out, I did not rejoice in the man's death but rather in the fact that
> whatever circumstances were in effect causing tome after tome of bad
> writing to come out under the Zelazny name are now dispensed with. I
> would not be in the least surprised to find that publishers were rushing
> certain Zelazny works to market before they were reading for publication,
> simply because they no longer cared. If you need evidence that this is in
> fact possible, simply look at all those _wonnnnnnnnderful_ Rama sequels.
I'm afraid this isn't adequate. As I've noted before, you've changed
your tack and backpedaled (to mix metaphors) since your first posting,
but so far no message has turned up in my newsreader in which you've
expressed remorse for the gloating tone of your original comment, in
which you said, whether you meant to or not, that you were *glad* he was
dead. Yes, you've qualified it since then, but you've never apologized
for that now notorious one-word sentence that was your initial response
to the news of Mr. Zelazny's demise: "Good."
I've corresponded with a sampling of editors and writers on this matter,
people who work for computer-related as well as sf publications, and they
got the same impression from your postings as I did. Whether you meant
to or not, you seem to have alienated at least a small percentage of your
potential market.
You and others have indeed repeatedly denied it, but yes, in your first
posting, you did indeed seem to be rejoicing in the man's death, and
nothing you've posted since has admitted that. Due to the vagaries of
Usenet, you may well have done so and I've just not read it yet. If
that's the case, I apologize.
Ian McDowell
Lawrence Watt-Evans
: It's unfair to compare Tolkien's "moral standing" on sequels to
: Zelazny's, because he died before the series mania really took hold.
Besides, Tolkien (a) had a day job -- he was an Oxford don, not a
full-time writer, and (b) was WORKING on more of the same all along --
don't forget THE SILMARILLION, and all the other unfinished tales about
Middle Earth.
Steve Patterson
[much sewage that I have deleted]
This calls to mind a line of pom-pom waving cheerleaders singing:
Go pot go! Call the kettle black!
Blast 'im, insult 'im, show 'im what you lack!
* SLMR 2.1a * Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand.
Matthew Crosby
agree with you:
two other points
1) Don't forget that LOTR itself is a sequel
2) There exists extremely fragmented outlines of a possible sequal for
LOTR (an idea which he admittedly abandoned as unworkible). Probably
published in "The Book of Middle Earth, Vol 64: The Shopping Lists"
--
Matthew Crosby cro...@cs.colorado.edu
Disclaimer: It was another country, and besides, the wench is dead.
Kevin Maroney
Mean Green Dancing Machine <aa...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>Kevin J. Maroney|k...@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Uh-*huh*. Any relationship to Tim?
Most assuredly. In fact, part of the purpose of that portion of my .sig
is an implicit apology to my brother for the brief period in which I
removed "Maroney" from my account name to avoid Tim-detecting killfiles.
But no longer. Maroney we is, Maroney we is proud to be.
--
Kevin J. Maroney|k...@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Ian McDowell
On 22 Jun 1995, Kevin Maroney wrote:
> There are several people who are active presences on rec.arts.sf.written
> who have the power to purchase manuscripts and convert them into
> published books. Being insulting and defensive in their presence is an
> excellent way for Joel to establish a name for himself in their eyes.
Exactly, which is why those who defend him and so egg him on do him no
favors. If this thread had not continued, not only would he not have
made such a prematurely black mark for himself in the industry, but those
of us who were appalled by his initial comment yet remained originally silent
would not now have the satisfaction of knowing that his own brother has
reservations about his good judgement, that he is an accused plagiarist,
and that at 27, he's almost a decade too old for the rhetorical stance
that he's adopted. Writers as different as Charles Platt, Harlan Ellison, and
David Gerrold have managed to overcome or even capitalize upon an
"obnoxious" and antagonistic public persona (some growing out of it, others
dragging it kicking and screaming into late middle age). Perhaps Mr. Furr's
own talent is sufficient to bear such a burden or even make it a virtue,
but I get some petty satisfaction out of my profound suspicion that it is
not.
Ian McDowell
Bruce Baugh
:anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu (henry) writes:
:> your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
:> there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
:>
:Do you know any publishers or editors? I know a few and they certainl
:are capable of reading. Did you have a reason for making such a silly
:statement, or were you just trying to be "clever"?
If Patrick Hayden _can't_ read, then he does a remarkable job of faking it
here on a regular basis.
Kevin B. O'Brien
>On 19 Jun 1995, Joel K. Furr wrote:
>> I couldn't care less if I come across as a horse's ass to science fiction
>> fanboys who for some mistaken reason have come to believe that famous
>> authors are analogous to saints and must never be criticized.
>The question is not one of how you came across to fans (or fanboys), but
>to the deceased's friends and colleagues, to editors to whom you
>presumably hope to sell one day (assuming that the poster who said that's
>where your aspirations lie was correct), and, apparently, to your own
>brother.
Ian,
Joel has apparently established a reputation across much of Usenet
as a horse's ass, and to all appearances enjoys it. I doubt very much
that anything you say will have any effect. He is why killfiles were
invented.
Kevin B. O'Brien
ko...@ix.netcom.com
Paid for by the Tirebiter for Political Solutions
Committee, Sector R
Jon_M...@unc.edu
>your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
>there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
A hit, a very palpable hit ...
henry
In article <3sc5on$b...@panix2.panix.com>, Kevin Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <3sbgkb$3...@nyx10.cs.du.edu>,
>henry <anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>>your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
>>there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
>
>Patrick has more sense than I do, and has probably kill-filed you by now,
>so I'll respond:
>
>There are several people who are active presences on rec.arts.sf.written
>who have the power to purchase manuscripts and convert them into
>published books. Being insulting and defensive in their presence is an
>excellent way for Joel to establish a name for himself in their eyes.
frankly, if it were guaranteed that being insulting, defensive, or
indeed being an utter asshole were an absolute bar to being published
in the science fiction field, which is all, dear, that is covered
by the assorted denizens of rec.arts.sf.written, it would be virtually
guaranteed that most writers in the field would have been doomed to
remain unpublished.
i really doubt joel furr or anyone else need fear for their career
before the doubtless overrated wrath of a bunch of skiffy-sucking
geeks.
any sensible editor or publisher, of which there are few, would not
decide based on the name of the author but the quality of the
manuscript.
it is generally fools on usenet, and specifically fools on
rec.arts.sf.written, who judge everything based on a name,
whether the name is joel furr, harlan ellison, or even
henry for that matter.
h
- --
SUPPORT THE DENNIS ERLICH DEFENSE FUND! READ ALT.RELIGION.SCIENTOLOGY!
Send checks to MORRISON & FOERSTER, 345 California Street, San Francisco,
California 94104-2675. Telephone: (415) 677-7000 Fax: (415) 677-7522
Contact People: Carla Oakley and Katie Walsh.
MAKE SURE YOU LABEL YOUR CHECK "DENNIS ERLICH DEFENSE FUND". Checks
should be made out to Morrison & Foerster. For verification of this info,
email sst...@eff.org (Shari Steele) SAVE THE REV!
[ For Public Key: finger anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6
iQCVAwUBL+tFV9OUGUXWNqytAQE8ZgQAveZGsQgqAR8mCmXn/ncMn0YsGaxEHN4N
Z2MTpv/is+wdb7TN+SPOb/xFDGvc1mlP6ULSlLA3GRG+AJJHk3LuMdWuzhs3n6Gi
fY2CVo0hbnZZY1k3/iTqNRA3tUWteCgA3xLoIbM2IqyqpSYDfrfvlq1z/TjZ0Zog
VmYOiu0ycDE=
=GOnY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Lawrence Watt-Evans
: and that at 27, he's almost a decade too old for the rhetorical stance
: that he's adopted. Writers as different as Charles Platt, Harlan Ellison, and
Good Lord, he's twenty-seven?
Seth Breidbart
Tom Galloway <t...@quip.eecs.umich.edu> wrote:
>Speaking of which, did anything more come of the incident a couple of
>months back where it was posted what appeared to be credible evidence
>of Joel plagarizing for a published article about NetTrek?
If I have the correct incident in mind, apparently Joel published some
information that the players thought should be kept confidential, but
which was available to anybody upon initial connection at any time.
(That is, it was as "confidential" as a .plan file.)
Seth
Kevin Maroney
henry <anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>frankly, if it were guaranteed that being insulting, defensive, or
>indeed being an utter asshole were an absolute bar to being published
>in the science fiction field, which is all, dear, that is covered
>by the assorted denizens of rec.arts.sf.written, it would be virtually
>guaranteed that most writers in the field would have been doomed to
>remain unpublished.
Many blowhards are published in all fields of writing. What _I_ said was
that being personally insulting to an editor is unlikely to further one's
career.
wolf_359
Ian McDowell <ikmc...@hamlet.uncg.edu> wrote re: jfurr:
>If this thread had not continued, not only would he not have
>made such a prematurely black mark for himself in the industry,
>but those of us who were appalled by his initial comment yet
>remained originally silent would not now have the satisfaction
>of knowing that his own brother has reservations about his good
>he's almost a decade too old for the rhetorical stance that he's
>adopted.
You're joking, right?
Oh, jeez. For a minute you had me going there.
=================================================================
Michael Weholt | wolf...@delphi.com
=================================================================
Bruce Baugh
writes:
:>your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
:>there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
:A hit, a very palpable hit ...
Well, yes, it is, but masochism isn't necessarily on-topic here.
Self-immolation gets the gold medal only in the Buddhist Monks Biathlon event
(a lifetime of self-abnegation followed by a public death in protest of some
inhumanity).
Vaillancourt Alain
>: - Tony Q. (One imagines Ellison will drop dead from starvation any day
>now...): ---
>And how much of Ellison's work have you seen in print lately?
I just read the illustrated version of his screenplay for a film version
of Asimov's robot stories.
The illustrations were outstanding.
The screenplay was ghastly.
The funny thing is that I usually like Harlan Ellison's stories.
Can't understand what drove him to put out such an abomination. Or how
he could have the gall or inconscience to invite readers to write to
studio execs asking for the screen play to be put on the big screen.
How he ever got that book/screenplay published is another marvel, unless
there really are some illiterate publishers who appreciate good artwork.
Au revoir!
--
DE: Alain Vaillancourt vail...@ere.umontreal.ca aa
Tom Collins
>I wouldn't call my comments insensitive. As has been repeatedly pointed
Well, no. YOU wouldn't.
>out, I did not rejoice in the man's death but rather in the fact that
>whatever circumstances were in effect causing tome after tome of bad
>writing to come out under the Zelazny name are now dispensed with. I
Also dispensed with was the mind and heart and life experience of the man
who had written the works you claim to admire. If we are to be worthy of
life only at our prime, then who of us can be worthy of a long life? Is
beauty not something that lasts longer than youth, so that love grows and
deepens with age? Or do you contend that someone you love will lose all
interest for you when 30 years of living have been added, with their
attendant cares and heartaches, their slings and arrows?
>would not be in the least surprised to find that publishers were rushing
>certain Zelazny works to market before they were reading for publication,
It may be that minor Zelazny is of more interest than major Furr, just as
Hitchcock's worst movie is eminently worthy of attention from film fans,
and more so than many other's best. Also, fashions change in literature
as in clothes, and the popularity of art doth wax and wane. Shakespeare
was once nearly forgotten; Moby Dick ended Melville's career and was not
rediscovered until well into this century; and Rembrandt could not get
work after "The Night Watch." Who is to say Zelazny had no more masterpieces
left in him, nothing further that was worthy to be communicated, and that
the present perception of his later works will remain unchanged throughout
history, and therefore they ought not to exist?
Apparently you are that presumptuous. If so, and you live as long as
Roger Zelazny (even without achieving a tenth as much), it may be that
you have shame to look forward to as a measure of your progress through
life. Perhaps you may even come to notice that there are more measures of
a life than one, and that there were those who loved him as a man and not
only for what he achieved as a writer.
>simply because they no longer cared. If you need evidence that this is in
>fact possible, simply look at all those _wonnnnnnnnderful_ Rama sequels.
I'm sorry, I can't help but wonder.... Which exactly Rama sequels was it
that Zelazny wrote?
--
tom...@kaiwan.com Tom Collins
"Inside every old person is a young person wondering what happened."
--Terry Pratchett. "Babbitt was vaguely frightened." --Sinclair Lewis.
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
Kevin Maroney (k...@panix.com) wrote: [snip]
> I do not now, and will probably never, agree with the
> concept that it is "petty" to decline to enter into a professional
> relationship with someone because they have been personally abusive
> towards you. [snip]
Considering that "professional relationships" are between *people*, it is
hardly possible to ignore the personal side. One can overlook minor (ok,
even not-so-minor :) things, but why on Earth would I hire/sign a contract
with anybody likely to cause me major grief in the process? Why would
anybody?
D. W. James
)yor...@msen.com (Steve Arlow) wrote:
)>Roger Zelazny was a brilliant author and a kind man. He was a
)>bottomless well of knowledge and an endless fountain of ideas.
)>He had a wonderful sense of humor, often sly and subtle. His
)>death is a tremendous loss to all who knew him or his work.
)Actually, no, it's not.
)I'm sure many people who knew him or enjoyed his earlier works will miss
)him and quite properly so, but I won't particularly be upset that no
)further Zelazny Amber books will be forthcoming.
)We didn't lose *anything* in terms of fine talent unrealized. He'd long
)since written just about everything good he had in him, and unfortunately,
)didn't sit back and work on doing particularly *good* stuff; instead, he
)simply was content to publish piece of trash after piece of trash.
So speaks an ignorant man. I take it you didn't read "A Night
in the Lonesome October", or his short story in this months Fantasy and
Science Fiction...
The fact that he was able to grind out the second Amber series
and put his kids through college has zip to do with his ability to
write incredible stories.
There was a time when we thought that he had shot his wad in
the 60's and that we were going to see 'second rate' work from then
on. And he wrote "24 Views of Mt. Fuji, by Hokusai" and proved us
wrong. "...October" wasn't serious, but then neither was "Creatures
of Light and Darkness" (which he never expected to be able to sell),
and both all the more fun for that.
90% of SF is crap, it is said, but Roger beat those odds, time
and again; his worst (and he had stories published he didn't ever
want to see again) is still worth reading. There are writers who
are more consistant, some of them even positively so, but very, very
few saw the heights that Roger did, and now we'll never know what
other heights he might have scaled, had he the time.
Aside from that though, I was looking forward to talking to
Roger a few more times over the next 20 years or so, and now I, and
a lot of other people who enjoyed talking to him in the past, won't.
Even if he had never written another word, we've still lost his company,
and that is a serious loss indeed.
Vnend
--
Acta non verba
vn...@princeton.edu URL http://www.princeton.edu/~vnend vn...@pucc.bitnet
WKDU: Broadcasting with TEN MILLION microwatts of POWER!
David Zink
an editor to refuse to read your manuscript. This is no different.
In article <3sfghc$p...@nyx10.cs.du.edu>
anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu (henry) writes:
>frankly, if it were guaranteed that being insulting, defensive, or
>indeed being an utter asshole were an absolute bar to being published
>in the science fiction field, which is all, dear, that is covered
>by the assorted denizens of rec.arts.sf.written, it would be virtually
>guaranteed that most writers in the field would have been doomed to
>remain unpublished.
The point is not whether one is an asshole, but whether the editor
knows one is an asshole before he or she picks up your manuscript.
>i really doubt joel furr or anyone else need fear for their career
>before the doubtless overrated wrath of a bunch of skiffy-sucking
>geeks.
Actually skiffy editors are less likely to be put off by this stuff
than other sorts. After all lit'ry types can't expect to make money
on the process, they're just doing it for love, and you've got to give
them the chance to feel that love, rather than bile.
--David
David Zink
>anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu (henry) writes:
>> your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
>> there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
>
>are capable of reading. Did you have a reason for making such a silly
>statement, or were you just trying to be "clever"?
He's probably just speaking to the same point Lester Del Ray was
making (was that the Nebula banquet?).
Why did you bother responding to this flame-bait? Get a clue.
--David
Loren Joseph MacGregor
follows:
>
> In article <3sbgkb$3...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu (henry) writes:
> >your statement makes the utterly unwarranted assumption that
> >there is a publisher or editor in the country capable of reading.
>
Well, actually, no it's not. Not even as attempted humor. Of course,
if you are one of those who consider that Henry Speaks Truth while
others Lie, then I suppose it is reasonable to discount all the
intelligent, occasionally satirical and frequently funny and profound
comments that have been made by editors and publishers acroos the
country, including some that participate in this forum.
hig...@murray.fordham.edu
> dsw...@pugsley.osf.org (Dan Swartzendruber) wrote:
>>Or a simple "Yeah, I know I came across as a horse's ass, and I'm
>>sorry".
>
> Except that I'm not; Zelazny wrote almost* nothing but shit for most of
> the last few years of his life and I'm exceedingly glad that there will
> be no more shitty Zelazny books coming out. I'm sorry HE's dead, but I'm
> not sorry that his writing career is over.
>
Well, that's all you had to say in the beginning. Instead you
posted what looked like obvious flame-bait with apparently
hurtful intention and acted *surprised* that people were angry
at you. That's why you came across as a horse's ass.
Think about it. Maybe it'll come to you.
Regards,
Dennis
henry
In article <3shnhd$l...@panix3.panix.com>,
so, you mean joel committed the heinous atrocity of revealing
the secret ot levels of the netrek geeks? what unforgivably
horrid behavior!
h
[ For Public Key: finger anon...@nyx10.cs.du.edu ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6
iQCVAwUBL/J3bNOUGUXWNqytAQHOQgQAv3nGqDrGimhu3ETxW7HhC1mlQKnBRIfo
9dzUUvGGcsp4a5WVXB2i8WFhZGMEnzXnPwKSwXYeq8mhHpni01AfFb3+rhyrLcdC
WWCWzccZm9gvUTHU1ooBHGt0rOo2STQfpUqiNsPKCQ6dbX2aUR55u6SmYbg9dLqK
7Z2YVN7hPKo=
=j2P9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
HarryCCat
wrote:
>David Zink <zi...@panix.com> wrote:
>>I really don't have to go very far to find examples of
>>editors, publishers and book-store employees who have
>>done these things.
>
>Name names, Zink, or drop it.
>>I'm not intending to start a personalized sort of
>>flame-fest by naming names.
>
>No, no. Far be it from me or any editor reading this to
>suggest that you should actually present any kind of
>proof for such an assertion.
>>And where it is that you are an editor or publisher.
>
>Sorry, but I don't conduct business through this account.
This dialogue reads like a Monty Python sketch. Pot, kettle, black.
Akiya Lab.
d
1
d.grant
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> On 16 Jun 1995, in article <3rstn8$8...@news.duke.edu>,
> Joel K. Furr <jf...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
> >
> >bd...@midway.uchicago.edu wrote:
> >>Now, Zelazny has passed over to this side of the boundary. The stories
> >>are over, there is no more. All good things must come to an end,
> >>but damn it, I wasn't ready.
> >
> >When I heard the news, I looked at my brother and said "Good."
> >
> >Zelazny had produced nothing but tripe for the last few years --
> >excepting, of course, _A Night In The Lonesome October_, and his death at
> >this point prevents him from further sullying the body of work he
> >accumulated earlier in life.
>
> I will not ask, Mr. Furr, why you chose to rejoice at Roger
> Zelazny's death in a forum which is read, not only by hundreds
> of his fans, but by dozens of his friends and colleagues. You
> were certainly prompt, publishing your comments as soon as
> possible, while they were *most* relevant. But I would note
> that his immediate family probably did *not* get a chance to
> read your post.
>
> If you would like to correct this oversight, and express your
> pleasure at Roger's death to them directly, his widow and
> children can be reached at:
>
> Devin, Trent, and Shannon Zelazny
> Judy Zelazny
> 1045 Stagecoach Road
> Santa Fe, N.M. 87501
>
> and his dear friend, biographer, and collaborator at:
>
> Jane Lindskold
> 1709 Avenida Cristobel Colon
> Santa Fe, N.M. 87501
>
> I am sure that you will want to write to them soon, before
> their shock and grief begin to subside.
>
> Tell me, Mr. Furr, do you plan to attend any science ficiton
> conventions in the near future? You should, you might get the
> opportunity to speak directly to some of Roger Zelazny's
> friends, and tell them in person, face to face, just how "good"
> it is that he has died. After all, the internet can be *so*
> impersonal.
>
> Roger Zelazny was a brilliant author and a kind man. He was a
>
> behalf of lemurs and other lower primates. Perhaps he feels
> some kinship with them that he does not feel for human beings.
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.3a
>
> iQCVAgUBL+TUbv3TCxfnZAYBAQHZgAP9GNxrRhu2yB0tEg7lZmJktzwFmnRaLWPN
> 4D1ZIlhGZlZAA5EqyT97r61o11XnoFqpcdTsry0AGhXz0afQKjhWjbqi276HR8NH
> VcnGc8I1j0Z2WXRes5lJIh3pgJcUrIsxFC9R1Y0i/xplMQcIBOSev68zo8VCEInp
> UyeHUaxA/I4=
> =x1uB
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Shiba no to ni | Steve Arlow, Yorick Software Inc. | (810) 473-0920
> cha o konoha kaku | 39336 Polo Club Dr. #103,
> arashi kana _ | Farmington Hills, MI 48335-5634
> -- Matsuo Basho | http://www.msen.com/~yorick | mailto:yor...@msen.com
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
pig...@netcom.com (pig...@netcom.com) wrote: [snip]
> You've got the bitchy mentality down. It's
> just when you play that sensitivity card that you kink my cock. [snip]
And once again, folks, please think carefully about this thread before you
make the fateful decision to crosspost. TIA.