(OT) Flannery O'Connor --Master Short Story Artist
Allegory60
Milledgeville, Ga) -- American novelist and short story writer whose works,
usually set in the rural South and often depicting human alienation, are
concerned with the relationship between the individual and God. She was one of
the most idiosyncratic and distinctive of American short story writers. Perhaps
her relatively rare POV as a Catholic who wrote from a Southern perspective,
partly explains her distinction. (Merriam-Webster's Encyc. of Lit.)
She lived most of her life on a farm close to Milledgeville. She died at age
39,tragically, of lupus, an inherited disease. She was intensely religious, and
saw the world around her as "grotesque" -- a consequence of a secular and
vulgar society. There is little, however, in her writing that suggests she was
a Roman Catholic. Indeed, there is an absence of faith that engages her
adamantly unsentimental sympathies. (Oxford book of Am. Short stories)
My favorite O'Connor story is "A Good Man is Hard to Find." I was influenced by
it in writing "It Was a Good Neighborhood Then."
FC published only two short novels (Wise Blood--1952, and The Violent
Bear--1960). Her genius, like the others I've featured here in my office, was
for the short story. During her lifetime, she pubbed 2 collections--A Good Man
is Hard to Find (1955) and Everything That Rises Must Converge (1965). She
first published a short story in 1946, entitled "The Geranium," while working
on her master's degree at the University of Iowa. "The Complete Stories" was
later published and includes 12 stories that did not appear in the first two
collections--31 in all.
Her letters were published in 1979 as "The Habit of Being."
I have not seen these. You usually see the same 2 or 3 stories anthologized. I
think you can learn a great deal about Flannery and her stories from her own
words:
"Much of my fiction takes its character from a reasonable use of the
unreasonable, though the reasonableness of my use of it may not always be
apparent. The assumptions that underlie this use of it, however, are those of
the central Christian mysteries. These are assumptions to which a large part of
the modern audience takes exception. About this I can only say there are
perhaps other ways than my own in which the story could be read, but none other
by which it could have been written. Belief, in my own case anyway, is the
engine that makes perception operate.
"The heroine of this story [A Good Man is Hard to Find], the Grandmother, is in
the most significant position life offers the Christian. She is facing death.
And to all appearances she, like the rest of us, is not too well prepared for
it. She would like to see the event postponed indefinitely.
"I've talked to a number of teachers who use this story in class and who tell
their students that the Grandmother is evil, that in fact, she's a witch, even
down to the cat. One of these teachers told me that his students, and
particularly his Southern students, resisted this interpretation with a certain
bemused vigor, and he didn't undestand why. I had to tell him that they
resisted it because they all had grandmothers or great-aunts just like her at
home, and they knew, from personal experience, that the old lady lacked
comprehension, but that she had a good heart. The Southerner is usually
tolerant of those weaknesses that proceed from innocence, and he knows that a
taste for self-preservation can be readily combined with the missionary spirit.
"The same teacher was telling his students that morally the Misfit was several
cuts above the Grandmother. He had a really sentimental attachment to the
Misfit. But then a prophet gone wrong is almost always more interesting htan
your grandmother, and you have to let people take their pleasures where they
find them.
"It is true that the old lady is a hypocritical old soul; her wits are no match
for the Misfit's, nor is her capacity for grace equal to his; yet I think the
unprejudiced reader will feel that the Grandmother has a special kind of
triumph in this story which instinctively we do not allow someone altogether
bad.
"I often ask myself what makes a story work, and what makes it hold up as a
story, and I have decided that it is probably some action, some gesture of a
character that is unlike any other in the story, one which indicates where the
real heart of the story lies. This would have to be an action or gesture which
was both totally right and totally unexpected; it would have to be one that was
both in character an beyond character; it would have to suggest both the world
and eternity. The action or gesture I'm talking about would have to be on the
anagogical level, that is, the level which has to do with the Divine life and
our participation in it. It would be a gesture that transcended any neat
allegory that might have been intended or any pat moral categories a reader
could make. It would be a gesture which somehow made contact with mystery.
"There is a point in this story where such a gesture occurs. The Grandmother is
at last alone, facing the Misfit. Her head clears for an instant and she
realizes, even in her limited way, that she is responsible for the man before
her and joined to him by ties of kinship which have their roots deep in the
mystery she has been merely prattling about so far. And at this point, she does
the right thing, she makes the right gesture.
"I find that students are often puzzled by what she says and does here, but I
think myself that if I took out this gesture [touching the Misfit] and what she
says with it, I would have no story. What was left would not be worth your
attention. Our age not only does not have a very sharp eye for the almost
imperceptible intrusions of grace, it no longer has much feeling for the nature
of the violences which precede and follow them. The devil's greatest wile,
Baudelaire has said, is to convince us that he does not exist."
(wish i could enter the whole thing, but it goes on quite a ways and you may be
able to find it on the net.)
If you haven't read O'Connor, you are missing one of the great Masters of the
short story.
Alaric
I'll spend some bloody money.
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021208193506...@mb-fr.aol.com...
John
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at0pa8$gi9$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
| ALL RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
| I'll spend some bloody money.
Shut up, Arse-lick McDoormouse. Nobody cares about the little greenies you
and Hanky-Panky are passing back and forth on your little pinkies to your
tastes.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
nativelaw
I love her stuff as well and was very influenced by it in college. I hadn't
read it in years, though. I pulled out "A Good Man is Hard to Find" and it
made me smile, because it's helpful to look at her opening in terms of our
criticisms, here. Look at the opening of the story:
The grandmother didn't want to go to Florida. She wanted to visit some of
her connections in East Tennessee and she was seizing at every chance to
change Bailey's mind. Bailey was the son she lived with, her only boy. He
was sitting on the edge of his chair at the table, bent over the orange
sports section of the "Journal." "Now look here, Bailey," she said, "see
here, read this," and she stood with one hand on her thin hip and the other
rattling the newspaper at his bald head. "Here this fellow that calls
himself The Misfit is aloose from the Federal Pen and headed toward Florida
and you read here what it says he did to these people. Just you read it. I
wouldn't take my children in any direction with a criminal like that aloose
in it. I couldn't answer to my conscience if I did."
Bailey didn't look up from his reading so she wheeled around then and faced
the children's mother, a young woman in slacks, whose face was as broad and
innocent as a cabbage and was tied around with a green handkerchief that had
two points on the top like a rabbit's ears. She was sitting on the sofa,
feeding the baby apricots out of a jar..... "
(c) Flannery O'Connor
Okay, who might say:
You've got your dialogue buried, Flannery.... it's very confusing... you
need to start a new paragraph with your dialogue.
-or-
What's the name of the grandmother? How about the baby's mother?
-or-
You need a comma after......
-or-
This is telling, not showing.....
<G>
Damn, she's good.
There is a book I had as a college text, if you can find it anywhere, that
is I think one of the best compilations ever put into print. It's called
"The Story And Its Writer -- An Introduction to Short Fiction" and was
assembled by a University of Connecticut fiction professor named Ann
Charters. Great stuff. Hawthorne, Poe, Turgenev, gogol, Melville,
Flaubert, Tolstoy, Twain, Bierce, James, Jewett... the list goes on. And it
has the criticisms too. Find it, or a book like it....it is really a
godsend.
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at0pa8$gi9$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
Allegory60
>"The Story And Its Writer -- An Introduction to Short Fiction" and was
>assembled by a University of Connecticut
My college will offer a class in the short story next year, and has tentatively
chosen "Perrine's Story and Structure" by Thomas Arp and Greg Johnson. I am
arguing for "Longman's Compact Anthology." Both texts have great sections on
criticism. Longman's also includes segments by the writer's themselves, much
like Flannery's essay, and also a history of the short story. If I teach the
class here are the stories that have tentatively been chosen for focus:
1-Hemingway: The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber.
2-Graham Greene: The Destructors.
3-Alice Munro: How I Met my Husband
4-Alice Walker: Everyday Use
5-Katherine Mansfield: Miss Brill
6-Tobias Wolf: Hunters in the Snow
7-James Joyce: Eveline
8-Eudora Welty: A Worn Path
9-Nadine Gordimer: Once upon a Time
10-Willa Cather: Paul's Case
11-Shirley Jackson: The Lottery
12-Faulkner: A Rose for Emily
13-DH Lawrence: The Rocking Horse Winner
14-Nathaniel Hawthorne: Young Goodman Brown
15-Gabriel Garcia Marquez: A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings
16-Frank O'Connor: The Drunkard
17-Lorrie Moore: You're Ugly, Too
18-Albert Camus: The Guest
19-O.Henry: A Municipal Report
20-Edith Wharton: Roman Fever
21-Fitzgerald: A New Leaf
I told them I wouldn' t teach the class unless I could add 3-5 to this list for
focus--that teaching a short story class without focusing on a story of Raymond
Carver would be like celebrating Christmas in the dark.
Hank
Robert McClelland
"nativelaw" <l...@nativelaw.net> wrote in message
news:uv7s0t1...@corp.supernews.com...
> The grandmother didn't want to go to Florida. She wanted to visit some
of
> her connections in East Tennessee and she was seizing at every chance to
> change Bailey's mind. Bailey was the son she lived with, her only boy.
He
> was sitting on the edge of his chair at the table, bent over the orange
> sports section of the "Journal." "Now look here, Bailey," she said, "see
> here, read this," and she stood with one hand on her thin hip and the
other
> rattling the newspaper at his bald head. "Here this fellow that calls
> himself The Misfit is aloose from the Federal Pen and headed toward
Florida
> and you read here what it says he did to these people. Just you read it.
I
> wouldn't take my children in any direction with a criminal like that
aloose
> in it. I couldn't answer to my conscience if I did."
>
The grandmother didn't want to go to Florida. She wanted to visit some of
her connections in East Tennessee and was seizing at every chance to change
her only son's mind. Bailey, the son she lived with, was sitting on the
edge of his chair at the table, bent over the orange sports section of the
"Journal." "Now look here, Bailey, see here, read this." She stood with one
hand on her thin hip and the other rattling the newspaper at his bald head.
"Here this fellow that calls himself The Misfit is aloose from the Federal
Pen and headed toward Florida and you read here what it says he did to
these people. Just you read it. I wouldn't take my children in any
direction with a criminal like that aloose in it. I couldn't answer to my
conscience if I did."
I don't know, which is better?
nativelaw
"Robert McClelland" <robert.m...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:HxSI9.1429$281.2...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Hi Robert,
I guess the way I would look at it is, it isn't a matter of 'better' or
'worse', it's a matter of 'different'. Your way, and about three or four
other ways the above paragraph could be written, with periods instead of
conjunctions, or with more commas than she uses, are really a matter of
style, not (to me) a matter of better or worse. I think that as critics we
can sometimes get hung up on critting stylistic things, or suggesting that
someone say something the way that we might say it. Sometimes it causes us
to miss the forest for the trees. It may also be unnecessarily discouraging
for beginning writers to crit that way. I am trying to stay conscious of it
myself, I know I've been guilty of it in crits. It's important to know the
rules, but once you do, I think you do yourselves a disservice to be a slave
to them. She has a voice, which makes her write it the way she does.
Personally, I find that with the writers here who I know are more
experienced I am moving away from line by lines as a critic to focus on the
bigger picture on the work here, which as much as anything else is a
reflection on the ever-improving quality of the stories here. Although
sometimes, the odd word or phrase is about the only thing I can find to even
mention in some of the stories here these days, other than "I like it",
because they are improving so much <g>.
FWIW,
Andrea
nativelaw
have a Chekhov story in there, too, and something like Gogol's The Overcoat
and Melville's Barleby the Scrivener and.... and....
I think you, too, would like WS Penn, Hank. I recommend him to everyone.
He has a story called "In Dreams Begin Realities" which is going into an
anthology soon with Flannery O'Connor, Chekhov and others. He has a
dynamite collection called "This is the World" with some stories in it I
think you would really enjoy. (Not to mention his book called "Killing Time
With Strangers" which is what you might call "magical realism", though I
hate that name. I highly recommend this book -- Robert W. would
particularly love it too, I think--, about the search for his 'one true
love', by a mixblood Nez Perce growing up outside Los Angeles whose mother
wants to name him Palomino and it gets screwed up by some white lady in the
hospital so "Palimony" gets put on his birth certificate and it goes on from
there... the story is narrated by his Indian spirit guide, who, when he
screws up, gets turned into a squirrel, a black hobo, the bloated corpse of
a college English professor and other sordid forms.....it's funny as hell...
characters named Bena and Dryl, sadistic twins living in a religious commune
that torture squirrels and assorted other fun things <g>. He won the
American Book Award for it. (Check it out on Amazon....<g>)
Sorry for any who are not interested in this stuff but it's an OT post and
god I love to talk about good stories..........
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021208203528...@mb-fr.aol.com...
Allegory60
>sometimes, the odd word or phrase is about the only thing I can find to even
>mention in some of the stories here these days, other than "I like it",
>because they are improving so much <g>.
Andrea, don't you think it's extremely important to tell the writer WHY you
like a story? I mean, specifically what aspects grab you? It may be easier to
note and point out what we see as limitations or flaws,but the good stuff needs
dissecting too.
Hank
nativelaw
don't. I don't think it's fair to withhold that kind of feedback because my
views, as everyone's, are subjective and who the f--k am I, frankly, Alex
Ahente? (or however you spell his name <g>).
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021208225605...@mb-fr.aol.com...
John
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at0r71$vmbb2$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
|
| "Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
| news:at0pa8$gi9$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
| | ALL RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!
| |
| | I'll spend some bloody money.
|
| and Hanky-Panky are passing back and forth on your little pinkies to your
| tastes.
I see that this comment needs amendment: Nobody except those who most
particularly have an acquired taste for just this sort of gourmet fare.
The AFO by-word: "We pick 'em, we admire 'em, we munch 'em and dog gone
it--we just pass 'em around and share 'em!"-- and by Allah, the greener and
gooier, the better and the tastier.
What a bunch of douche-bags.
MerryKat
MerryKat
Alric Knebel
I've read O'Connor and I agree with you completely. I even have that book
you're talking about -- the collected short stories -- but I haven't read
but a few short stories. She is remarkable, and the stories I did read had
some strange humor in it. Like the story about the guy who went to see the
"gorilla" at the movie theater, and how he kind of mocked the guy in the
gorilla suit. She is always vivid and never plodding. It's always feels
like the story just passed by.
Alric
Ejucaided Redneck
> Mary Flannery O'Connor(b. 25 Mar 1925, Savannah, GA; d. 3 Aug 1964,
> Milledgeville, Ga)
I remember reading O'Connor in college and thinking the work was
wonderful.
A while back, mostly because Westermeyer was raving about O'Connor, I
bought a single volume collection and tried climbing back into her
stories, and simply couldn't. I don't think the work has aged all that
well.
> Her letters were published in 1979 as "The Habit of Being."
>
> I have not seen these. You usually see the same 2 or 3 stories anthologized. I
> think you can learn a great deal about Flannery and her stories from her own
> words:
The collection I bought is _Flannery O'Connor: Collected Works_ and the
ISBN is 0-940450-37-2. It's got _Wise Blood_, _A God Man Is Hard to
Find_, _The Violent Bear It Away_, and _Everything that Rises Must
Converge_. Additionally, it's got an enormous selection of "essays and
letters." And there's a wealth of biographical data.
> If you haven't read O'Connor, you are missing one of the great Masters of the
> short story.
Then you'd probably like John McManus, a 26 year old from TN whose
_second_ volume of short stories (_Born on a Train_) will be published
in March by St. Martin's Picador imprint. An editor there sent me an
advance copy, and when I read it I thought of O'Connor.
--
If a writer has to rob his mother,
he will not hesitate; the "Ode on
a Grecian Urn" is worth any number
of old ladies.
-- William Faulkner
--
New stories, new essays, new pages:
http://bobsloan.home.mindspring.com/
R. Westermeyer
<briarh...@yall.com> wrote:
>I remember reading O'Connor in college and thinking the work was
>wonderful.
>
>A while back, mostly because Westermeyer was raving about O'Connor,
I"m usually raving about some thing or another. Yesterday it was the
garage remote control. :)
>bought a single volume collection and tried climbing back into her
>stories, and simply couldn't. I don't think the work has aged all that
>well.
>
REally? How come? I mean, one could say Shakespeare hasn't aged very
well, with Ghosts and witches coming otu of fantasy land to move
things along. Is it because the language in O'Connor's stories is not
particularly complex? I've always loved that about her work. Simple
stories with incredible depth and complexity in the message. I
recently read The Enduring Chill for the first time, and I thought and
rethought the ending all day.
--Bob
*****
It's the rainy season where I'm living
Death comes leaping out of every doorway
Wasting you for money, for your clothes
And for your nothing
Entire towns being washed away
Favelas exploding on inflammable spillways
Lynch-mobs, death squads, babies being born without brains
The mad heat and the relentless rains.
--Nick Cave
R. Westermeyer
Good for you, Hank. Ever read Sherwood Anderson's Winesburg, Ohio?
Those stories left an indelible mark, especially "Hands".
Ejucaided Redneck
> On Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:47:40 -0500, Ejucaided Redneck
> <briarh...@yall.com> wrote:
>
>
> >I remember reading O'Connor in college and thinking the work was
> >wonderful.
> >
> >A while back, mostly because Westermeyer was raving about O'Connor,
> >stories, and simply couldn't. I don't think the work has aged all that
> >well.
> >
>
> REally? How come?
A number of reasons.
The work seems self-consciously inaccessible. I think O'Connor
deliberately set out to "be literary," and the self-consciousness shows
through.
I prefer fiction written in a "real world" setting, and much of
O'Connor's work seems set in an alternative universe made up of
characters that are uh, made up.
Shakespeare wrote in the "real world" that he knew. And even if his
language is occasionally difficult to penetrate for contemporary
readers, much of it was aimed at common people, was written to be
accessible. And lord knows his characters reverberate with realty.
> Is it because the language in O'Connor's stories is not particularly complex?
I most admire writers who are able to write what will probably sooner or
later be deemed "literature" without resorting to needless complexity.
Tom Franklin's one of them, and so is the youngster I mentioned in
another post. And of course there's always Jim Harrison, who is
breathtakingly simple and complex at the same time.
One the other hand, there's Faulkner, and Cormac McCarthy and others who
can write complex prose that nevertheless captures a reader's eye (and
ear).
You'd appreciate the collection I mentioned a whole lot more than I.
Hell, I doubt I"ll ever feel moved to crack it again. Email me a postal
connection and I'll send it to you in the next little while.
--
Sniffy Smith's Colossal Maw From War-Woman Dell
more mouth on
that woman
than ass
on a goose
-- Jonathan Williams, from AN EAR IN BARTRAM'S TREE, c. 1962
Allegory60
>Those stories left an indelible mark, especially "Hands".
>
Read that a couple of years back. I noted at the time I could see why Hemingway
was influenced by SA, who was also a master of the short story.
DH
Alaric
> Shut up, Arse-Lick McDormouse. Nobody cares about the little greenies you
and Hanky-Panky are passing back and forth on your little pinkies to your
tastes.
I'll take advice from anyone who can write and engage in rational debate as
to what I might read, Davey boy. Sadly, both qualifications exclude you.
Heigh-ho!
John
vanity press . . .
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at2nuv$b6r$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
"grizzellda" <gre...@hotmailnospam.com> wrote in message
news:tvjI9.1276$0y5.1...@news.uswest.net...
| You're a fine writer Daddio/Jervie-poo/Uncka John/whoever
| you are this week. Yes, right up there with some of the best. When you're
| inspired the words flow out and they hit the page like nothing else.
<snip>
| Look
| forward to the next installment as long as it's as fluid as this. I saw a
| post where you stated indicated you are eschewing rewrites. I wouldn't
touch
| this. I am not being sarcastic here. Honestly. I'm also not buttering you
up
| or trying to get on your good side or stroking your ego. You have
something
| here, though I don't know what.
Initially, this whole discussion was about Colette, until Hanky Wanky got
green and started spouting all this tripe about his favorite douchebag . .
.
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:...
|
| "William Starr Moake" <wsm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
| news:f4n5vucevt4b1hkaj...@4ax.com...
| | I'm also a professional writer who gets his own work published.
|
| So is every hack that fills the supermarket rack with pulp trash, so is
| every anonymous, illiterate glorified go-fer and word processor jockey
| writing behind the scenes of a CBS soap opera. So is every no-name
| journalist, and so are you--and I say, so what? So is Colette who writes
a
| first sentence in one of her fine little novels as follows . . .
|
| "It is not the calm circle of light thrown by a lamp lit every night on
the
| same table that shows a woman what little she can perceive of herself: yet
| by changing the table, the lamp and the room, what have I acquired?"
|
| Well I can tell you what she has acquired by writing such an exquisite
| opening as that: a reputation as one of the great novelists of the 20th
| Century. She knows how to show a reader right away that what she has to
| write is a cut above the rest--she knows how to show that it will be worth
| reading. In her very first sentence she takes you to the heart and soul
of
| universal human experience--she shares with you that very depth of
existence
| which is her subject, and which is about far more than the lamp and table
| she describes, she makes the lamp and table describe what really needs to
be
| described, the inner-life of author and reader.
|
| | How
| | about you?
|
| You're just refusing to get it, aren't you? This is about *you* not me.
| It's not about what you published yesterday, but about what will be
| published of you tomorrow that could establish you as the sort of writer
who
| would not have to go around telling people that he is published in order
| that people should know that. You see?
|
| I've never heard of you, never saw a book of yours on the shelves at
Barnes
| and Noble, so the information that you've been published has no force
where
| the rubber bookbinding cement meets the road in front of the bookstore.
| Inside those doors, you don't exist as anyone who had been published, and
it
| is as if you had never been published--at that real world level of things,
| where I should know your name, you have not been published and neither
have
| I, not to an extent that even so much as bears talking about--because if
you
| have to talk about it, it isn't really being *published* in the fullest,
| broadest, widest application of the word--else the world would have heard
of
| you, or I, and if one or two small towns in northern California had heard
of
| me by reading a miserable little newspaper column under my by-line--what
is
| that? It might mean something to me, but to the world at large--nothing.
|
| | Let's see some links to your published writing. Or are you
| | only a pretentious reader?
|
| So long as I am reading something entitled "Tango in the Midnight Sun", I
am
| most certainly a "pretentious reader", for, as to being a reader of
| pretension, so you have certainly made me. I know another thing: I cannot
| get that way by reading Colette, who does not make me a reader of
pretense.
| But the minute I become aware that I am being a "pretentious reader" after
| that first or second sentence, when I've read far enough to see that this
| writer has taken upon himself the pretense of calling himself "writer", a
| person not worthy of the title since he "writes" without first having been
| imbued with the craft of the great lights of literature, not sufficient
that
| he should have been taught the basics of writing the essence of a whole
work
| in his first sentence.
|
| Yes! A whole work in one first sentence--just as a screenwriter
introduces
| to a producer his script with an introductory treatment telling the
producer
| why reading about that bucking airplane and the barf bag will be worth his
| while. If that treatment of the whole thing is not there on top in the
| craftsmanship of that first sentence, then I throw it down, in order to
pick
| up a book in which that consciousness does exist.
|
| I will take up a book or story that shows me right away that reading this
| piece matters. I will take up a story or book written by an author who
| knows the craft of letting a reader know from the very start that this is
a
| story or novel that is going somewhere, that it has something to say on a
| scale grander than "barf bags" and "driving rainstorms."
|
| No, my dear fellow, I will not allow you to change the subject to such
minor
| things as may have been, from time to time, bread and butter on my table
in
| the form of a few meagerly publisher's checks. I will stop you in your
| tracks from turning me to a "pretentious reader" or worse, a writer of
such
| pretension as that. Rather I will show you the kind of first sentence
that
| matters, that relates what I am about to read, to the world around me,
| letting me know that what I read is relevant to my life and thought, and
| worthy of my time . . .
|
| "Ours is essentially a tragic age, so we refuse to take it tragically.
The
| cataclysm has happened, we are among the ruins, we start to build up new
| little habits, to have new little hopes . . . we've got to live no matter
| how many skies have fallen" --D.H. Lawrence from the first paragraph of
| _Lady Chatterley's Lover_.
|
| Now do you get it? You let your reader know, in front, that your story is
| about more than a 'barf-bag' but the times we live in (if you have a
single
| damned thing to say about it) as you relate what you write at first to
what
| is written in the end, you relate to something larger than what you write,
| even if it should only be so pitifully trite as to an image from the
| Hollywood screen . . .
|
| | She was something strictly out of King Vidor's _Gilda_, so far as looks
go
| . . .
|
| But by this you access an entire motion picture, full of image and mood,
| perhaps even the era that would attend upon it.
|
| | but she was no Rita Hayworth, this broad, I mean in terms of class--in
| that
| | department, well, I don't call her "Jezebel" for nothing.
|
| If your reader is too much a Philistine to know about "Jezebel", it
doesn't
| matter, the name itself tells so much about her, and you know this is
going
| to be about a very special sort of woman whose story is worthy to be told.
|
| |
| | Yes, Starr is on my birth certificate.
|
| In that case, I'd have it removed, if I were you, at least until your fame
| is worthy of the name--you know, after you've had at least one book on the
| shelves at Barnes & Noble? I feel like such a "pretentious reader" every
| time I see it.
|
| | It happens to be the name of my
| | blood relatives. My father was an orphan adopted by the Moake family.
| | Any more biographical questions?
|
| No. That will do very nicely. Save it for the flap on that first
| bestseller. ;-)
MerryKat
>
>
>
> One the other hand, there's Faulkner, and Cormac McCarthy and others who
> can write complex prose that nevertheless captures a reader's eye (and
> ear).
>
Sigh, as far as I'm concerned Faulkner could be the poster child for
Over blown and boring. ;->
Studied O'Connor and Faulkner for a southern writers class way back
when. O'Connor still entertains and Faulkner still puts me to sleep.
But diversity is good for the soul, right? ;->
MerryKat
John
This coming from a person who is on record with countless praises and raves
for the literary output--such as it is--of JP David. If such
self-contradiction isn't the absolute nadir of irrationality, I don't know
what is. Don't talk to *me* about the "rational" Airhead McDimwit, you
wouldn't know a logical proposition if it came to you with tits and ass,
with a wiggle in its walk, in a teeny weenie yellow polka-dot bikini.
Only recognize one fact about yourself, McDoormat, you vain bastard: you are
continually being strangled to death by the ungodly lengths of your own
tongue. You do not know the limits of polite, rational discourse: no man
who continually stoops to the politics of character assassination ever does.
That others do not detect that pernicious quality in your conversation
reflects on the abysmal state of their own discernment.
Have I an opinion concerning some member here, as to whether they may or may
not have borrowed an idea from the work of another? If so, that is *my*
opinion, that is my perception, and I will not be persecuted for an opinion
which cannot be changed due to what stands to convince me in the obvious
facts in the matter--nor will I be accused of misogyny due to the fact that
the person in question is female. Your fearful, idolatrous quaking at the
feet of PC opinion is your sad little red wagon, chum and it ain't none of
mine. And what makes you a supremely irrational personality is the fact
that social and political opinions scare the pants off you, you quake in
fear of them, and if a person is of another opinion, your visceral reaction
is to regard that person as a heretic, whereby he becomes an ogre, a troll,
something other than human and there is no lower form of ignorance than
that: you haven't the vaguest whisper of respect for freedom of thought and
opinion. That makes you less an idiot than a dangerous, goose-stepping
fascist.
These are black times of little light in the understanding of the human
psyche and its motivations, for if those who participate here knew the first
thing about it, you'd have been marched to the pillory in the square long
ago, Airhead McDimwit.
Alaric
>
> This coming from a person who is on record with countless praises and
raves
Nobody else cared. I saw you as a lonely, depressed little skunk baby.
> no man
> who continually stoops to the politics of character assassination ever
does.
This from the guy who started this part of the thread with the
intellectually refined, "Shut up, Arse-Lick McDormouse." Heh.
> your visceral reaction is to regard that person as a heretic, whereby he
becomes an ogre, a troll,
Now let's not have them nasty ol' double standards here, boy. The evidence
of your... er... trollness is up there. You haven't addressed it. As you
said to Andrea, when the evidence is so damning, it's up to the accused to
knock it down. Don't agree, but you said it. Hoist, then, by your own
petard.
> "To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
> Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
Ah. The truth. Your view being the opposite of Wilde's. You're getting too
predictable, Davey boy. You don't even annoy me any more. Being called vain
by you is like being called small by Danny de Vito.
You're exposed and pathetic, Davey. Only answered you this time cause I was
bored.
Anopheles
You just had to get sucked in, didn't you? Look, if you had this much
control in court, even Pol Pot would have got off.
Alaric
"Anopheles" <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message
news:at5e91$10lg2l$1...@ID-34438.news.dfncis.de...
>
> You just had to get sucked in, didn't you? Look, if you had this much
> control in court, even Pol Pot would have got off.
I've been behaving for weeks, Mr. Noph.It's you who keeps getting your licks
in. So nyah nyah.
John
|
| "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:at4bb9$1044er$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
| >
| > This coming from a person who is on record with countless praises and
| raves
|
| Nobody else cared. I saw you as a lonely, depressed little skunk baby.
Jezuz Kee-rist. LOL. Then you would only reveal yourself all over again for
a liar who does not tell it as it is. You make yourself doubly a liar as you
lie to get out of a lie, however, because all those replies are on record
containing all the exclamatory effusiveness of that praise which is clearly,
so far as you are capable of it, genuine. Of course, there are as many
instances of merely begrudging praise in reviews that appear *after* some
other poster with a greater insight has stated an appreciation for matters
that would otherwise not have been able to penetrate that green snot-like
skin over your eyes.
You are the perfect poster child for the Ignorance that has its Arrogance,
which is so supremely exemplified in this . . .
| Nobody else cared. I saw you as a lonely, depressed little skunk baby.
Hah! Man.
|
| > no man
| > who continually stoops to the politics of character assassination ever
| does.
|
| This from the guy who started this part of the thread with the
| intellectually refined, "Shut up, Arse-Lick McDormouse." Heh.
Heh? Heh? Clearly you are too clueless or self-deluded to note a
difference between *character assassination* and mere sport of razzing.
God, that is ignorant. Or, is it rather just one more attempt at
transparent mendacity, the lame excuse of a character assassin to exhonerate
himself?
There is no standard of truth in you, McDoormat. None. That is why I must
expose and defeat you for the vain and rabid puppy you are.
|
| > your visceral reaction is to regard that person as a heretic, whereby he
| becomes an ogre, a troll,
|
| Now let's not have them nasty ol' double standards here, boy.
<Slap!> I'm old enough to be your schtupping daddy, punkie. So watch your
mouth and learn a bit of respect for your far more highly experienced elders
and betters..
| The evidence
| of your... er... trollness is up there.
The evidence is the same: there is no Jew Star of character assassination,
no stereotype or politics of stigma to which you will not stoop to avail the
machinations of your envious little game of social one-ups-manship. But get
a clue, Booby: it can only work so long as there are fools great as you to
lend a barbaric and prmitive credence to such methods as illustrated in the
following absurd example of stacked deck argumentation
| You haven't addressed it. As you
| said to Andrea, when the evidence is so damning, it's up to the accused to
| knock it down. Don't agree, but you said it. Hoist, then, by your own
| petard.
Thus by idiotic tautology, he justifies what is falsely perceived as an
injustice by further injustice. It never gets more irrational or
self-serving than that.
|
| > "To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
| > Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
|
| Ah. The truth.
Ah shut up Arse-Lick McDoormat.
When you *do* learn the absolute value of expelling chaos from your life by
giving an unremitting honor to the truth, let me know. Meanwhile, go back
to your little playground games and grow up the hard way.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
Allegory60
>You're exposed and pathetic, Davey. Only answered you this time cause I was
>bored.
Gosh APM, I don't see how you can be bored with so many stories to read/review,
eh? <wink>
Hank
Allegory60
>control in court, even Pol Pot would have got off.
>
You mean, like, shit or get off Pol Pot? LOL
Hank
Alaric
Go get a whisky.
You're not worth answering.
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at5gb1$ve7o1$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
John
|
| Gosh APM, I don't see how you can be bored with so many stories to
read/review,
| eh? <wink>
|
| Hank
"Hank"! What a joke. This adverb castrated wannabee Hemingway Wonk adopts
the phony moniker that old Ernie went by when in the company of his
booze-buddies and fishing friends. It might have worked for Hem, but on
this person, the name "Hank" looks like combat boots on Jessica Tandy.
Yeah, you giddy bastards got a story to review all right, the only one
presently posted by the "men" on this board worthy of the effort and here it
is, the sort of thing that Raymond Chandler and Hammet wish they could step
out of the grave to write, and as is so clear by the outrageously comical
turning away of your green-shaded eyes, so weakened by your envy, so shy of
the light, why then of course your only recourse is to a camaraderie of
blindness in which you naturally refuse to face the news that not one of you
whiny beggars could even come close, in your dewiest dreams to such
expertise as follows-so eat your hearts out you sad little amateur
scribblers or rather read the sort of thing engineered to make men of you .
. .
From: "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com>
Subject: {Novella} Jezebel {1209}
Date: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:39 AM
She was something strictly out of King Vidor's _Gilda_, so far as looks go,
but she was no Rita Hayworth, this broad, I mean in terms of class--in that
department, well, I don't call her "Jezebel" for nothing.
This dame I'm talking about was working at the same club downtown where I
was kicking the tubs for a five piece combo, at the time reduced to the
fate-worse-than-birth necessity of working the strip clubs to turn a buck.
It could have been worse since most of the time they won't hire anything
more than a trio, but since this very posh, plush joint, *Mamoulian's Club
68* is about the most flush in town, well, like I say, it could have been
worse, just like I said.
It could have been better, don't get me wrong--yeah, a whole lot better,
since we were five guys working on pay for three. But we're tight, see? We
don't screw one-another around that way, and so long as the union doesn't
find out about it, okay. Sure, we could have dumped Joe and Eddy the horn
guys (sax and coronet) and just worked the piano, bass and drums, but that's
not the way it is with us since being friends with somebody means something
solid with us, or so it had--too bad nobody put Jezebel hip to the fact, or
she wouldn't be . . .
Just a minute while I get over having a good . . . laugh -- no, don't call
it a 'cry' because I always cry when I'm really, really laughing.
All right. You know, judging by the way that broad could dance, you would
have thought she'd have had some class--but, she didn't, not one tiny
sparkle of it. You get a dame so talented as that, then you are going to
have an ego to go with it--and that's a terrible thing when you know you're
the very best there is at something; that's a knowledge most people don't
have and can't understand or sympathize with when they see it, because most
people cannot be the best there is, or everybody would be the best there is,
so then nobody would be the best--with every blessing there comes a curse.
When it came to a talent for taking her clothes off, this redhead had it in
a way that was strictly past the margins, ringing the bell and off the page.
So, leave us not talk about mere 'talent' but of *genius*. With Jezebel it
was a snake-charmer's art; it was knowing what it takes to get a male libido
uncoiled, up and dancing on its tail, with forked tongue flicking fire. You
can't take that away from her because she had it way above and beyond all
the other dames up and down the avenue both sides of the street. She had it.
Yes, she had it, in spades, Queen Jezebel, until it came to class. For that,
she was too dangerous, deadly, too apt to strike without a rattle, and
that's what was so deeply erotic about her; she had no sense of humor when
it came to sex and there was no light side to it, like with some of these
broads with the flashing lights and twirling tassels, the banal tunes they
like us to play for them. So, class or no class, this babe had taste, and it
went for the kind of music that would gas her with the premium high test
octane for burning up that runway, and I mean numbers like *Why Don't You Do
Right*, *Aint Nobody's Business*, *Tangerine*, it was all Billy Holiday,
Peggy Lee, Louis Prima and Keely Smith. So how can it happen that a dame can
have such fine taste and no class?
I'll tell you: it remains a mystery, like everything else about Jezebel,
like exactly where she'd been and what she'd done before she got here, and
where she went now that she's gone. Excuse me-- I've got this laugh jag
coming on again . . .
She'd just blown in on a cold day of mid-December, came on shank's pony the
seven blocks down the street from the Milwaukee Road depot, fresh off the
Burlington Zephyr out of Chicago, still had her suitcases in hand when she
walked in. The boys and me were on the stage for an afternoon rehearsal.
Ka-Whack! Both bags drop to the tiles either side of those gold lizard-skin
Capri's, the 4" heels, the tattiest looking leopard-fur coat to come out of
the Jungle since Jane took a powder on Tarzan.
She had presence this broad, I would not kid you and that 300 pound rat
bastard, Art Mamoulian saw it straight off; so did we, even a little before
him since the cheap schmuck was down in his office counting all his dough at
the moment she blew in. We were doing a run through of *Them There Eyes* and
the boys were looking at me like I must've left my chops in St. Paul after I
missed some necessary kicks on the bass drum. Then when I flipped a stick to
point at where the chops had dropped to the floor to do the straight-leg
splits at the feet of this chick just in at the door, then they could see
just what, where, why and how.
And how. She was already on her way coming toward us there on the bandstand,
and old Amos, in his white porter's tunic, after he dropped his push broom
right to the deck from initially staring so hard, was in train behind with
her bags. You want *no class*? Not only didn't she flip him a quarter (which
everybody working these joints knows he would depend on) she didn't even say
'thanks'. He set the bags on a chair at the first table in that corner
between the stage and runway and without a glance at him, she boosted her
gold-plated derriere up to the table-top. She wasn't saying anything, wasn't
even looking at anybody, just had her head thrown way back, blowing a long
stream of smoke, her thick shock of red hair reaching down almost to that
table. We had just come around off the bridge to the chorus, and it's, "I
fell in love with you, the first time I looked into . . ."
*Them There Eyes*. Oh, they were green, or shall I say, chartreuse? And her
complexion beneath those folding locks of tangerine was the whitest white
I'd ever seen--that was one white woman sitting there, but her voice was as
colored as something from Sarah Vaughn or Lil Green. Did I say she had
taste? You know I did, but just telling you how little class she had will
not last, won't get it, as that is something you have to see and decide for
yourself.
Mamoulian hired her on the spot. She refused any of the costumes he had in
stock off stage in the dressing room. She just stepped right up to the
runway and stripped out of what she had on, and she did it with a chair, so
slow and so tasty to a number of her own choosing, the Duke's *Blue Indigo*.
None of us had ever seen anything like it. It was *dirty*--so beautifully
low down and nasty that I'd hate to tell you the kind of effect it had on a
man, so if you have an imagination, well, Buddy, why don't you just use it?
She knew how to use her lingerie, hose and heels to an effect that had
Mamoulian's beady eyes rolling around like pimento-stuffed olives in a
blood-shot martini.
* * *
So, not only did we have a first rate peeler straight off the runway of some
of the biggest floor shows in Chicago, we had a red-hot white blues singer
into the bargain, or would have if we could get Mamoulian to recognize a
swell talent when it wasn't just rubbing a sweet-smelling pair of
pasty-clad, pink bazooka bombs in his face, that being about the only form
of talent he was equipped to recognize. At first mention of the idea he
wasn't going for it, and there was any number of pig-headed reasons for
that, not least of which was his smarmy nephew, Al LeGoré, the emcee and
standup "comic" who lived for every moment he could be out on that stage
between acts and who was not happy about the idea of having to share any of
that glory time with another act.
I was down in Mamoulian's office on the Monday after that Friday when
Jezebel, or "Louanne Lesley" as she was billing herself, first showed at his
joint; he was smoking one of those highly stinking, contraband thirty dollar
shade-grown Cuban panatelas as he sat in front of all that fuzzy red velvet
wallpaper behind his desk, regarding me through narrowed eyes while he
considered my suggestion that a vocalist like this would bring more business
for the club. After the ash had fallen to his shiny dark green silk lapel,
he lurched his bulk forward to poke the cigar toward an ashtray. Uselessly,
he was tapping the ash, all the time shaking his head: "Nah. You give these
broads a star spot like that, and next thing you know, they're too high and
mighty to take off their clothes, do the job you hired 'em for." He munched
the cigar over to the side of his mouth, giving little negative shakes to
the thought as he puffed, absently brushing the ash from his suit-coat.
"Nah. No good."
I crossed my legs and looked at the light reflecting off the polish on a
black and white loafer, "You don't think it would draw some people who like
to hear good jazz?"
He grunted. "What do I care about those people when I already got a crowd
who like good tits and ass?"
I straightened my lapel where it lay over a black and white striped knit
shirt, "We're not exactly playing to a full house every night of the week,
and so . . . well dig it, man, I figure that . . ." He was already waving
his hand at me like it was chasing so much ash off his blotter, so I took
the hat off my lap and stood up.
He was pointing at the edge of his desk. "Don't forget your check, man."
He'd said 'man' in a highly sardonic tone. I was about to say something
about how forgettable it really was, the miserable pittance of it, but times
being as they were, then of course, as usual, I thought better of it; I went
out the door.
Frank McGanahan our keyboard man was sitting at the bar over a scotch and
water and since soft drinks are free for the staff, as I took a stool next
to Frank, I told Marvin, the bartender on duty that I wanted a ginger ale; I
also handed him the check to cash. I spent a few minutes trying to put Frank
hip to the idea that if we could get something good going with this Lesley
dame, and the place started to fill up on week-nights, we could gain some
bargaining power so far as getting our pay up to where it ought to be. Of
course, I had to tell him that so far, Mamoulian wasn't going for it.
Frank sat there listening to the ice rattle as he shook it in his glass: "I
don't know, Johnny." He inclined his face and finally looked at me. Red and
blue lights were glancing off the shine atop his head and glittering in the
thick lenses of his horn-rimmed glasses. "So long as the main attraction
going on here is a skin show, well you know, how are you going to get those
college types to be coming in here with their dates to hear jazz?" He shook
his head. "I just don't see it." He drained the last of his drink, and
slammed it down. "Besides," he said, as he stood up. "LeGoré isn't going for
it. And you know him. He'll make trouble."
I swiveled around toward him. "I don't see what he can do."
He moved his hand like a talking mouth. "He'll say whatever it takes to cut
you up, so long as it gets him the upper hand. Remember when we were over at
the Brass Rail, how it went against me with Clyde Morgan?"
I remembered that all right, since it nearly broke up the band. That Morgan,
a guitarist who worked with us at the time was really something since there
was no lie, no exaggeration of fact he would not tattle on somebody else to
get people on his side. I watched Frank throw a crumpled bill from his
pocket on the counter. "Yeah," I said, "but LeGoré is different."
"How so?"
"He doesn't lie like Morgan did."
"No, not so blatantly that you could come right out and call it that. That's
what makes him so dangerous." He took his hat off the bar and put it on.
I set my glass down. "Just how do you mean?"
"What am I, a headshrinker? I couldn't explain in a few words how that guy
operates to make a Jew of his enemies--no, I couldn't analyse that if my
life depended on it. Wish I could."
"You'd have to be Jewish," I said.
"Nah, you'd have to be a Nazi."
All I could do was shrug as he went on: "Al LeGoré makes three times as much
money in this joint as all of us in the band put together. You tell me how
he rates to drive in here with that baby blue Chrysler New Yorker, how he
works it, because I sure as hell can't tell you." Just then his eyes went
kind of wide, so I turned to see Louanne Lesley headed in our direction,
having come from the door leading downstairs to Mamoulian's office. "Man, oh
man, oh man," Frank grinned through tightening lips. "What I wouldn't give
for just a taste, just a wee, tiny little bit o' that sweet, sweet . . . "
I gave him a tap in the shin off the point of my shoe, "Shut up, Frank,
she'll hear you."
It was too late, she was already moving in to take Frank's warmed up seat,
saying, "What am I going to hear, Johnny?"
I swiveled back around toward her. "Aw nothin'. Just talking about what a
fine feeling you've got for a Billy Holiday song, Miss Louanne."
She tossed her hair turning to look at Frank. "That right, Frank?"
He grinned as he turned her a tip of his hat. "Yeah, something like that."
He straightened his coat and gave a needless pull to the belt. "Too bad I
gotta take a powder, or I'd tell ya all about it."
I had to not laugh. "See ya, Frank."
She had my glass in her hand after taking a whiff of it. "What the hell have
you got in here?" I started to reach for it, but she took a sip. She made a
sour face. "Ginger ale?" I shrugged. She had her hand in the air. "Marvin!
Bring this sad cat a decent martini and put it on my tab." She turned to me
as one heavily mascara laden eye stared into mine and blinked, and since the
other was hidden by a thick fold of her hair, I didn't even know if it was
just a blink or maybe a wink.
"You like it wet or dry?" While I was trying to decide, I watched her tongue
putting a gloss on her upper lip, and when I shrugged, she said, "Marvin!
Two dry martinis, straight up, and two drops of grenadine each, just to make
it sweet and nice." He wanted to know if she was putting him on about that
grenadine, but since she wasn't, then, after he'd finished shaking her very
special pink brew and had it set sizzling before us, with hazelnuts, she
lifted her glass to me. I raised mine to the toast.
"Like it?" she asked when we had sipped. Yeah, I told her, I did. She
informed me that Grenadine was made from the juice of pomegranates, and I
told her I'd never heard of that. "You might like to know," she said, "I was
just talking with Mamoulian." I nodded; I was all ears. "Well, he says he'll
give me a shot at singing with you."
"Wow."
"He says you were talking to him about it just this afternoon."
"Right."
"You didn't say anything to me."
"I don't know you, yet."
"But you talk to him about me singing with you?"
"Well, I didn't want to . . . I mean, what would be the good, unless it
could happen, so I figure . . ." She was laughing, put a hand on my arm.
"Don't get your balls in a bindle, Johnny."
"Okay." A bindle? That's what a tramp calls that roll of rags over his
shoulder, or it's that handkerchief that holds all his worldly goods at the
end of a stick.
"He says you play some guitar, is that right?"
"Yeah well, some."
"Some? Some is some, or it might be not much. Can you blow the chords for a
Gershwin tune?"
"Chords I can do; chords I can play on a piano, no less. Yeah, I can get by,
I mean for basically working something out, if that's what you mean."
"That's what." She looked out over the sparsely populated lounge. "Where's
the clock in this goddam place?"
I pulled back my sleeve. "It's 2:30."
"Art says you got your roost next door at the Dykeman?"
"Yeah, well, that's his hotel of course, so we get a cut rate."
"So he doesn't have to pay you worth a damn."
"You got it."
"You get meals here?"
"Breakfast."
"That all?"
"Ten percent off otherwise."
"Cheap bastard." I nodded my assent. She looked around. "Well dig, Johnny. I
got some things to do right now, but say I was to stop up to your room after
we close tonight?"
"Oh, I don't know; Mamoulian's got rules about . . ."
"Did I tell you I already talked to him?" I started to answer, but, "Did I
tell ya, or not?"
"Yeah, you did tell me."
"So, it's all right." She stood up from the stool and turned her glass
toward me. "Tonight?"
What? Would I say 'no'? "Tonight, it is."
I watched her walk away toward the front door in those red, strapped toeless
pumps, the black and red zebra-striped Capri's; only now she had a new
silver fox fur jacket with the collar up; her scarlet hair thrown over to
one side so one gold-ringed ear was exposed. When she'd gone out, I turned
back toward the bar to find Marvin, his stainless shaker going in his hands.
"You lucky dog," he said. I smiled and shrugged. He poured into two glasses,
shoved one toward me and toasted with the other. "This one's on me, Johnny."
When he was called away to pour a Manhattan for a roundish looking fellow in
a five hundred dollar suit at the end of the bar, I finally had a chance to
think. I have to admit that I was a little scared. She said things were
clear so far as Mamoulian was concerned, but I didn't know her, so how could
I be sure? What was sure, is that he was no man to be messed with and it
could involve a lot worse things than just loosing a gig--far worse, like
your legs. Still, would I say no--to this?
No. But any morning of the week, we could rehearse right here in the club,
so it didn't take much to imagine what she might have in mind, so far as
visiting a guy's room, two hours after midnight. What--to sing a Gershwin
tune?
I thought about that first night she danced on Friday, and then again
Saturday. Now, here it was only the following Monday and . . . I took two
deep sips, and then a third. Whew! It was Saturday night when I first
noticed her out there at the private table down there stage left; it's gated
off from the rest of the floor and raised on a platform. It's so the
strippers and the emcee, Mamoulian or anybody else on the staff can sit
there between acts, watch the show, and that's where I first noticed those
sly green eyes on me, Saturday night. Then after the club closed, as I was
back-stage, headed down the corridor toward the stage door, past the
dressing rooms, a hand reached out and took my arm--almost scared hell out
of me, till I saw it was her, which finished the job, as I felt my knees
turn to Slinky springs. She had me stopped dead in my tracks. She was
wearing some sheer black thing over the lingerie she had last danced in, and
since she had me in a state of semi-shock, she moved in. This chick is tall,
so she has the advantage of looking you dead in the eyes when she speaks to
say, "You got the beat, Johnny."
What could I say? "Well, thanks."
"No I mean it. You really got it." The martinis on her breath were like
perfume. "You really give it to me, when I'm out there." I tried a smile.
"Nah, not like that, Johnny. I mean, you really give it to me." I watched
her fingers slowly uncoil from my arm as then her hand dropped away to
disappear behind a closing door with a freshly painted red star, and the
name . . . "Jezebel"? No. There was no name, but that's what it spelled
anyway, invisibly, in scarlet.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
John
| Heh.
|
| Go get a whisky.
|
| You're not worth answering.
Jezuz Kee-rist. LOL. Then you would only reveal yourself all over again for
Alaric
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at5ie9$10lh9a$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
Alaric
reviewed two stories before breakfast. <bg>
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210144909...@mb-mo.aol.com...
> >
John
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at5jfc$rks$1...@venus.btinternet.com...
Opus
> Looser . . .
Tighter . . .
O
Wind River
> Yeah, but I'm in a playful mood. Mum said I could play with the troll if I
> reviewed two stories before breakfast. <bg>
Mum, also, said to stop digging him up to play with him. The tombstone is
starting to lean. :-)
Alaric
Thanks for the compliment, Davey boy.
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at5mnm$10t9js$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
Alaric
I owe you.
"Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3df679fd$0$17652$272e...@news.execpc.com...
John
|
| > Yeah, but I'm in a playful mood. Mum said I could play with the troll if
I
| > reviewed two stories before breakfast. <bg>
|
| Mum, also, said to stop digging him up to play with him. The tombstone is
| starting to lean. :-)
You got something to say about me Ms Mouthful of Gossip Garbage?
You got something to say about ME, you little fatty?
See what that sort of thing gets you, Fatty?
Say! How much DO you weight, anyway? :-)
Fatty, fatty, two-by-four
Can't through the bedroom door . . .
Not mine, thank God. :-)
Later, Fatty.
John
department of ethics. Loose screw-wise in the head.
Look at that goddam haircut! What do you call that? Is that the Ringo Starr
Look for clueless Midlife Crisis Cool Cats?
I know why you wear those bangs like that.
Ask me for the psychoanalytical significance of those bangs, before I decide
to tell you anyway. Better yet, see if you can possibly guess what I got in
mind to say about those cute little gray-haired bangs of yours.
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at5vbu$599$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
R. Westermeyer
>... Jew Star of character assassination,
DING DING DING DING DING.
Antisemite alert! Antisemite alert!
Even though you didn't even use a word that rhymed with "jew",
Dingleberry Dave has fired his favorite gun (the poor fellow's only
real gun shriveled up long ago and lies curled and pallid and useless
between his thigh jowls). the implicit accusation automatically makes
your post a "hate crime", Alaric. Automatically. Now, hide your head
in shame.
--Bob
...If you stick your arm into that hole
It comes out sheared off to the bone.
--Nick Cave
John
"R. Westermeyer" <wst...@cts.com> wrote in message
news:5f3dvucjrdvgo4bun...@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:22:27 -0600, "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
|
| >... Jew Star of character assassination,
|
|
| DING DING DING DING DING.
There goes that ethnic narcissism again that receives every reference to the
Third Reich as a personal attack. Or is this a beast so completely clueless
that all form of analogy to this blockhead can recieve only a literal
interpretation?
Do you know what analogy, allegory and metaphor are, and how they operate to
bring insight by parallel convergence of significance?
Are you really that stupid, such that you cannot see how the stigma of
"troll" is *stigma* just as the Jew Star is stigma--and are you such an
abominable imbecile that you cannot perceive how the use of stigma amounts
to the same thing, that it derives from the same hateful irrationality in
every case?
How stupid are you, Westermeyer?
You never went to college did you?
|
| Antisemite alert! Antisemite alert!
Are you really that stupid or do you always wear your mendacity on your
sleeve like a rabbit-turd cufflink?
John
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at655j$111rt3$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
| Do you know what analogy, allegory and metaphor are, and how they operate
to
| bring insight by parallel convergence of significance?
That should be *geodesic* or *hyperbolic* " parallel convergence", since it
is only in Reimannian geometry that parallel lines can meet.
Allegory60
Bob,
Guess I missed the episode where the guy revealed his name as "Dave." Cheech
and Chong could do a lot with the guy.
Hank
John
Far more than you can know, short of passing you a few way overdue tokes on
a ten foot-long bong.
In any case, I don't know where they're getting this lowbrow "Dave"
nonsense. The surname is David, as in JP ben David. A typical Jewish name
that only an illiterate would think to contract after such a moronic manner.
I must admit that "Arse-Lick' is not my invention, nothing I may take credit
for, it is the genius of "Dr. Zen" in AW. My offerings have been "Airhead
McDimwit" and . . . I forget what the hell the other one was for "Alaric"
But then we have "McDormouse" and "McDoormat", all of which arise out of a
similarity to the sound of the given name, which requires some amount of
creative thought--not much but a hell of a lot more than such a total dud as
that up there. God.
Ah! "Squarehead McDirtmouth". You see? It takes a certain sophistication
of thought to come up with those little syntheses of sound and content. But
if you're so completely lacking in a capacity for symbolic reasoning that
any appearance of a phrase such as "Jew Star" is leadenly taken literally
rather than for the symbolic representation it is meant to be, that you show
yourself to be so abysmally stupid as to suggest that by such usage it is to
accuse someone of anti-semitism?
You really can't get so literally wooden-headed as that without being just a
little short of bong-juice or something. His mind is two dim, too dark, too
unenlightened to perceive two strands of thought at once, two ideas which
verge on one representation which was *stigma*. You diagram it . . .
*stigma*
/ \
Jew Star Troll Label
The emphasis is not on "Jew" but on the reality of the patch, the label.
The patch, the label which are the stigma.
How abysmally dumb must you be not to get that?
nativelaw
>
> *stigma*
> / \
> Jew Star Troll Label
>
> The emphasis is not on "Jew" but on the reality of the patch, the label.
> The patch, the label which are the stigma.
Which is why someone who resorts to namecalling instead of acting with
dignity and grace and intelligence, instead of once in a while apologizing
for his own offenses, looks sad and silly when protests come out of his
mouth.
There is plenty to be proud of being Jewish and having a "Jew Label". There
is nothing to be proud of in a "Troll" label. Trolls are the Nazis of the
group, not the Jews. Trolls are the hurtful ones that mock, disrupt, pick
on, call names. Trolls dehumanize. If you are called Jewish, and it fits,
wear it well. If you are called Troll, and it fits, take off your dark
glasses, take a good look in the mirror and decide whether you like what you
have become.
R. Westermeyer
>
>You really can't get so literally wooden-headed as that without being just a
>little short of bong-juice or something. His mind is two dim, too dark, too
>unenlightened to perceive two strands of thought at once, two ideas which
>verge on one representation which was *stigma*. You diagram it . . .
>
> *stigma*
> / \
> Jew Star Troll Label
>
>The emphasis is not on "Jew" but on the reality of the patch, the label.
>The patch, the label which are the stigma.
>
>How abysmally dumb must you be not to get that?
Impeccable reasoning. ahem.
Does your brain rattle like a wall nut in a coffee can when you walk
down the blvd?
Opus
Thank you, Bob.
O
Opus
fight with me anymore, and so far, you haven't, and I thank you. But I cannot,
in all good conscience, allow this to pass unnoticed. Why was I holding on to
an alliance with a man who has shown himself to be nothing but callous,
insensitive and obnoxious? Sue has the grace to not tell you so, but this bull
in a china shop, does not. You went one too far this time. If you wish to
remain my ally, then please tone it down and apologise. If not, then I cannot
continue to support you.
Opus
John wrote:
> "Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> news:3df679fd$0$17652$272e...@news.execpc.com...
> | Alaric wrote:
> |
> | > Yeah, but I'm in a playful mood. Mum said I could play with the troll if
> I
> | > reviewed two stories before breakfast. <bg>
> |
> | Mum, also, said to stop digging him up to play with him. The tombstone is
> | starting to lean. :-)
>
> You got something to say about me Ms Mouthful of Gossip Garbage?
<snip unneeded vitriol>
R. Westermeyer
vicious, hateful, below-the-belt reply to
>
>"Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net>
<snip>
Big guns, eh old man? Anything left in those sagging pockets besides
your hands?
--RW
Alaric
>
> You got something to say about me Ms Mouthful of Gossip Garbage?
No. Just your paranoia as usual, smeghead. She's talking mythical trolls not
real troll playground bully racist Fascist narcissistic wanker trolls like
you. Didn't stop you turning on someone who's never done you a shred of harm
though, did it? Malicious malcontent evil twat.
Let's play Me And My Fifty Personalities again.
John 1: Clearly you are too clueless or self-deluded to note a difference
between *character assassination* and mere sport of razzing.
John 2: You got something to say about ME, you little fatty?
John 1: You do not know the limits of polite, rational discourse
John 2: See what that sort of thing gets you, Fatty?
John 1: No man who continually stoops to the politics of character
assassination ever does.
John 2: Say! How much DO you weight, anyway?
Apologise to Sue, damn you, you vicious bullying toerag.
You don't see a woman with a sparkle in her eyes. A woman to dance the night
away with. A woman with an inner shine.
Well, as your prose shows, you never had any conception of beauty.
As for the guy who's latest infantile game is to insult others' physical
appearance:-
See this DylanEastwoodwannabebuttoolate at http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/.
And wonder how he has the nerve.
John
"nativelaw" <l...@nativelaw.net> wrote in message
news:uve9ulc...@corp.supernews.com...
|
| "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:at722p$111vnh$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
| >
| > *stigma*
| > / \
| > Jew Star Troll Label
| >
| > The emphasis is not on "Jew" but on the reality of the patch, the label.
| > The patch, the label which are the stigma.
|
Hah! Name-calling? You place something so benign as that into the same
category as this purely evil resort to your class of hateful stigmatic
ostracizations, this unending dissemination of prejudicial slander that you
now goosestep across my screen to perform?
Take a walk, Freulein. You are blind in your crime, as the case is always.
Wind River
> "Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> news:3df679fd$0$17652$272e...@news.execpc.com...
> | Alaric wrote:
> |
> | > Yeah, but I'm in a playful mood. Mum said I could play with the troll if
> I
> | > reviewed two stories before breakfast. <bg>
> |
> | Mum, also, said to stop digging him up to play with him. The tombstone is
> | starting to lean. :-)
>
> You got something to say about me Ms Mouthful of Gossip Garbage?
If you're addressing me, no I have nothing to say. I was joking with Alaric
about trolls. I'm not sure why that would bother you.
John
Are you really so blind, Fatty, that you cannot perceive how any use of
stigma derives from the same herd-brained irrationality in every case--and
that the just dessert for the dishing out of pain is pain in every case,
Fatty?
People who use the "troll" designation reveal themselves for the sort of
unthinking conformist idiots who blindly accept a filthy social concept
without the blink of an eye (like so many hoodwinked citizens of a fascist
state) in reference to people whose opinions and guiding principles don't
comport with their own. You both use it and abuse it, to make it all the
filthier, Fatty, as you apply it in complete hypocrisy to a man whose
serious work you personally have described in glowing terms. So make up
your mind--is he a serious writer or this absurd ogre of your ignorant
superstition known as a "troll"?
Had you the least notion of how abominably stupid, how intrinsically evil
the use of that stigma was, there would never have been a need of the
Nuremberg Trials.
That's how stupid, how filthy you make yourself, Fatty.
How's it feel, Fatty? ;-)
Not so fun when it's you on the receiving end is it?
Is it?
<Slap!>
Alaric
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at8dc2$11qblh$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
Patrick Null
>Group: alt.fiction.original Date: Tue, Dec
>10, 2002, 6:44pm (EST-1) From:
>jpd...@hotmail.com (John)
>You got something to say about ME, you
>little fatty?
I love how you capitalized "me" as if you think you're all that
important.
LOL!!!!
>See what that sort of thing gets you,
>Fatty?
What, exactly? A bunch of hot air? Yeah, she's shaking in her boots
now. Better watch out, Sue! Don't EVER say anything to him or about
him, or he'll talk you to death.
What a fucking joke that is.
>Say! How much DO you weight, anyway?
>:-)
>Fatty, fatty, two-by-four
>Can't through the bedroom door . . .
>Not mine, thank God. :-)
>Later, Fatty.
LOL!!!!! What do you think she's doing, Johnny? Cowering and crying
into a pillow because you called her names? LOL!!!! I think you got
the wrong lady there, pal. But, hey, at least you reaffirmed the idea
in our minds that the best you can do is come up with a second grade
insult.
God, I hope you don't have kids.
Better yet, I hope you never start. After they realize what kind of a
jerk they have in dear old dad, they'll probably kill themselves. Heck,
your household will have the highest suicide rate in the country.
Cheers!
John
John
"Patrick Null" <Nul...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:17560-3D...@storefull-2298.public.lawson.webtv.net...
| Johnny wrote:
|
| >Group: alt.fiction.original Date: Tue, Dec
| >10, 2002, 6:44pm (EST-1) From:
| >jpd...@hotmail.com (John)
|
| >You got something to say about ME, you
| >little fatty?
|
| I love how you capitalized "me" as if you think you're all that
| important.
Like, "think"? Did you say *think*?
|
| LOL!!!!
Pfft.
|
| >See what that sort of thing gets you,
| >Fatty?
|
| LOL!!!!! What do you think she's doing, Johnny? Cowering and crying
| into a pillow because you called her names?
Who knows. Who cares? It freaked a square like you out good and proper so
it is a job well done.
In future, sonny, don't even try to figure ME out.
nativelaw
> news:3df7ac77$0$1451$272e...@news.execpc.com...
> | John wrote:
> |
> | > "Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> | > news:3df679fd$0$17652$272e...@news.execpc.com...
> your mind--is he a serious writer or this absurd ogre of your ignorant
> superstition known as a "troll"?
<sigh>
Troll.
I usually skip the easy ones, but what the fuck.
John
| > your mind--is he a serious writer or this absurd ogre of your ignorant
| > superstition known as a "troll"?
|
|
| <sigh>
|
| Troll.
But there appears to be a difference of opinion . . .
| John, this was hilarious. That stuff about the mining, your narrator
| seeing the damage as a monument (however you said it), really captured it.
| Thanks for the first-rate entertainment. Good show, old man.
|
| Alric
And we already know that you lie. ;-)
Alaric
>
> In any case, I don't know where they're getting this lowbrow "Dave"
nonsense.
Your first identity, when you set the troll group up, Davey boy.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=John+troll+group:alt.fiction.original+auth
or:Alaric&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=arbbvp%24f23%241%40venus.btintern
et.com&rnum=2
In case anyone forgets, I WILL keep reminding them.
Alaric
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:at8hk0$11hmb9$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
R. Westermeyer
>Had you the least notion of how abominably stupid, how intrinsically evil
>the use of that stigma was, there would never have been a need of the
>Nuremberg Trials.
>
People like this guy feed the antisemites. Ha!
>
><Slap!>
You're going to have to do more than slap it, limpy.
R. Westermeyer
>In future, sonny, don't even try to figure ME out.
For certain; it's like trying to figure out that 1 + 1 problem. It
baffles the mind.
John
| I wish you wouldn't use my name when you invent your own fans, Davey boy.
Did I impersonate you and Quadpussy and Nativecop, and Aris and WindRiver
and Amanda to bring their favorable reviews before this board over the past
few months? This Alric fellow has been posting at AW for some time now, as a
simple Google visit will immediately demonstrate.
You appear to be having a great deal of trouble facing reality of late,
Airhead McDimwit. This is worrisome. It doesn't bode well for your
credibility thus to show yourself in such a weak relationship with truth--it
really makes you very small, dear boy.
I ask again: why do you comb your hair in bangs, like that? Are you hiding
something?
| > And we already know that you lie. ;-)
Dirty birds of a feather.
John
It's getting just a little too strange around here . . .
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:at8i83$6so$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
Allegory60
>remain my ally, then please tone it down and apologise. If not, then I
>cannot
>continue to support you.
>
>Opus
You support this guy? And others can't seem to stop responding to him? Listen,
folks--this sort of enmity can destroy a writing group. Ignore the nastiness.
Hank
John
Doooooiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnggggggggggg
What a whining, weaseling, nattering, nibbling cry-baby tattle-tale. Jezuz
Kee-rist! I've got to find the way to capture the essence of a charcter
like this in my fiction! No doubt about it, I'll just have to go back to Tom
Jones and read every bit of dialogue from "Blifil".
You are Blifil.
Do you know who Blifil is? He's this absolute fop that is all stuck up on
the puffery of his utterly false piety--and it is false because he uses it
to the purposes of his envy to undermine the heritage of Tom. He walks
about with his nose poked into the pages of his prayer book, pointing his
long, skinny finger at a phrase as he delectates pompously over the content,
walking into bushes and bird-baths--and he is utterly the most ridiculous,
albeit treacherous form of underhanded slandering gutter-snipe on earth.
You are Blifil.
Allegory60
>on, call names. Trolls dehumanize.
They're also the ones we need to ignore.
Hank
John
"Squire Blifil" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021212011302...@mb-mg.aol.com...
| >Trolls are the hurtful ones that mock, disrupt, pick
| >on, call names. Trolls dehumanize.
|
| They're also the ones we need to ignore.
Like "we"?
So long as you're on the subject of der volkischer myths and ancient Aryan
superstitions, how 'bout a nice little nursery rhyme?
This little piggy went to market,
This little piggy stayed home,
This little piggy had roast beef,
This little piggy had none,
And *this* little piggy went
"We-wee-weeee"
All the way home. ;-)
|
| Blifil
Quadpus
>
> "Squire Blifil" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20021212011302...@mb-mg.aol.com...
> | >on, call names. Trolls dehumanize.
> |
> | They're also the ones we need to ignore.
>
Hold on, let's try to deconstruct Hank's statement into something we can both
find sensible, shall we? Let's say that Person X thinks Person Y is a troll.
Now, we're not sewing any yellow stars to anybody's clothing, here, we're just
talking about a hypothetical person's hypothetical subjective opinion. If
Person X does not ignore Person Y, and instead replies to his/her posts with
scorn or censure or righteous indignation or smarm or what have you, the effect
is to (A) duplicate and rebroadcast Person Y's comments, which Person X
ostensibly found unnecessary and offensive, (B) contribute to the negative end
of the signal-to-noise ratio of the group, where "noise" is certain to be, from
Person X's perspective, anything relating to Person Y, and (C) provide Person Y
with an opportunity to reply in kind, thereby prolonging the so-called "troll"
thread, presuming neither party has it in mind to bow out gracefully and move
on to more productive things, indefinitely.
So, basically, if people don't ignore the posters that they consider, rightly
or wrongly, to be trolls, then they are shooting themselves square in the foot.
And I hate to see people limping around on bloody stumps. Don't you?
Doesn't everybody?
Allegory60
>So, basically, if people don't ignore the posters that they consider, rightly
>or wrongly, to be trolls, then they are shooting themselves square in the
>foot.
>
>And I hate to see people limping around on bloody stumps. Don't you?
>
>Doesn't everybody?
I was never too good with the X's and Y's in algebra. Tell me what it all
means? Don't we have a consensus about one particular nasty poster of long
standing? How can it be productive to the group, to the purpose of this site
for any regular to respond to that person? I can respect them if they stand up
and say "I don't agree that this person is a troll," and continues to respond
(but not to harangue). I can respect it if they review the alleged troll's
work here. What I cannot fathom is how those who purport to uphold the value
of the group, then turning around and engaging in flames. It simply doesn't
make sense--once or twice, maybe. But years and years worth? It's like
littering--a little here and a little there and the landscape is ruined.
Just my opinion. As if...
Hank
R. Westermeyer
> It simply doesn't
>make sense--once or twice, maybe. But years and years worth? It's like
>littering--a little here and a little there and the landscape is ruined.
Naw, haven't you seen those civic minded guys nd gals who go around
and clean up their easements. Plus, all those DUI'rs in orange.
There's always plenty to bring around for roadside clean-up.
>Hank
--Bob
Gun wears his alcoholism well
Finger in bottle and swingin it still
From bed to sink and back again
Clock is crawlin round the same
He's bustin clock (he hates its face)
Just sittin and talkin to Heart in ticks
Talkin back to clock in slow and studied kicks
The fears of Gun are the fears of everyone.
--Nick Cave
Allegory60
>and clean up their easements. Plus, all those DUI'rs in orange.
>There's always plenty to bring around for roadside clean-up.
>
Do they say "INMATE" on the back of those orange coats?
I am trying to deal with these issues in emails. I may try to post something
serious on this later. Please throw tomatoes that are at least useable for
roughage.
Hank
Opus
O
John
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021212112238...@mb-de.aol.com...
|| >And I hate to see people limping around on bloody stumps. Don't you?
| >
| >Doesn't everybody?
|
| I was never too good with the X's and Y's in algebra. Tell me what it all
| means? Don't we have a consensus about one particular nasty poster of
long
| standing?
X. In Which Master Blifil and Jones Appear in Different Lights
MASTER BLIFIL fell very short of his companion in the amiable quality of
mercy; but he as greatly exceeded him in one of a much higher kind, namely,
in justice: in which he followed both the precepts and example of Thwackum
and Square; for though they would both make frequent use of the word mercy,
yet it was plain that in reality Square held it to be inconsistent with the
rule of right; and Thwackum was for doing justice, and leaving mercy to
heaven. The two gentlemen did indeed somewhat differ in opinion concerning
the objects of this sublime virtue; by which Thwackum would probably have
destroyed one half of mankind, and Square the other half.
Master Blifil then, though he had kept silence in the presence of Jones,
yet, when he had better considered the matter, could by no means endure the
thought of suffering his uncle to confer favours on the undeserving. He
therefore resolved immediately to acquaint him with the fact which we have
above slightly hinted to the readers. --Henry Fielding
Alaric
Brian, Hank, you're great writers and until this note good friends - I hope
after it too - but it's time to be blunt.
Who gives you the DAMNED right to do all this fingerwagging? Who gives you
the DAMNED right to sit there in your ivory towers and deign to speak for
the benefit and best interests of the group? I love you guys, but I'm
getting tired of seeing you scrabbling for the high ground. ESPECIALLY when
you're not right.
Yes. Surprise.You're not right. Ain't that a kick in the ass?
Ignoring for now that anyone who stands by and watches a good friend
attacked on the basis of personal appearance better get off that high ground
pretty darned fast, you apparently haven't got the vaguest clue as to what
works with John and what doesn't. Sure, some meandering troll can be driven
off and has been by that ol' turn up your noses thing, but not this guy.
YOU'RE WRONG.
Don't you know he's hung around this and other groups for years causing
maximum trouble? Don't you know that every single tactic in the world has
been used against him? Why on earth do you think some Ivy League back
turning exercise is going to do the least bit of good? It's naive. It's
irrational. John loves his WW2 images - so you be Poland and Czechoslovakia,
but DON'T expect me to play Sudetenland, and STOP tutting at me when I
don't.
There are only two tactics that have any limited success against John.
Everybody knows them, and once I point them out, they'll stop working. But
what the hell? I'm beyond worrying about it. HE WON'T GO AWAY!!!!!
Praise. That works. Those of you who know me know that blowing my own
trumpet ain't a habit of mine, but again, what the hell? For months before
you were either regular or back as a regular, I single-handedly kept the
wanker sweet. How did you achieve that, oh zen master? Simple. I reviewed
his turgid prose and told him how good it was. I was the only one who did.
And I regularly got slammed for it. For ENCOURAGING him. Ha! I knew EXACTLY
WHAT I WAS DOING. I was giving him quotes he could use in other groups to
promote himself. I was lying. Taking positive, immoral action to limit his
outbursts. He's like a dog. When he's patted, he licks. When he's ignored,
he bites. So. I did it for twelve months. Now, I'm sick of reading the crap.
You want to go that route, one of you two guys take over. Or let Opus, which
she's bravely trying to do - she doesn't need you snipin' from I'm All Right
Jack heaven, Hank.
And the other option is to take him on. Selectively. No, of course not every
snide comment, every thread. But selectively. THAT WORKS TOO, AND I CAN
PROVE IT. On four identifiable occasions, he's left us alone for two months.
Each time someone had struck a telling blow - he retreated until everyone
had forgotten.
Ignoring? That wonderful tactic. Pretend the shit's not there and it won't
stink. Well, we've tried it twice now. That memorable first time resulted in
70 crossposts a day, drowning the group, with tossface blatantly
blackmailing - recognise me or I'm going to finish you. And by God he came
closer than we'd like. Day to day stuff was buried in an avalanche of
alt.writing and misc.writing posts, with new trolls racing to join the fray.
Do you want that again? Do you? It's already warming up. Sci groups
crossposting. Alt.writing again. And its the fault of the peacemakers (not
the cheesemakers.) I subscribed to the tactic. I now UNRESERVEDLY withdraw.
YOU ARE WRONG. WRONG!!!!
I will not sit by and think well of myself for ignoring threads like
yesterday's. You be Neville Chamberlains if you want to be. You don't have a
monopoly on theories of what's good for the group and what isn't. You don't
have a monopoly on theories about what will damage the group or not.
Sometimes the PBI are right and the officers are wrong. As now. I believe
YOUR tactic will bring us to our knees. When someone deliberately pours beer
on a friend, some folks don't want to reason. The image is valid, cyberspace
or not. The more you blank him, the more frustrated he'll get, the more
disruptive he'll get. Embarrass or mollify. Them's your choices. And Hank,
this is Usenet. Like it or not, there are friendships here. I reckon it's
the best damned writing group on the net, and it's because of those
friendships rather than in spite of it. Long distance friendships allow
honesty that face to face ones don't.
You want to retain your elegant distance, that's fine. The world is made of
different sorts of folks, thank God, and each has their virtues. I happen to
believe AFO will only benefit from direct action when appropriate against
this little Hitler.
I frankly don't understand how you find it so easy to ignore dirtmouth's
posts and at the same time have to fasten on to my responses. Give me the
same leeway, treatment, whatever. You see a post by me after one by John,
IGNORE IT. And for Christ's sake don't comment on it unless you're also
prepared to pounce on John. Kick the double standards.
I'm sick and tired of the lectures and the headshakes and the fingers moving
side to side. If you're so keen on leaving trouble alone, leave all trouble
alone. The whole thread. The whole exchange. I know you're both calmer than
me, better behaved than me, more grown up than me, more self controlled than
me, more rounded than me, better people than me. There. I acknowledge it,
now and forever. I'll even put a quote on the bottom of my messages to that
effect if you want. You don't have to tell me ANY MORE. I understand. I
understand, and I'm NOT going to stop. I'll bloody walk before I do.
Profoundly Pissed Off
Oldham
England
"Allegory60" <alleg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021212112238...@mb-de.aol.com...
John
"Hysteric McDorkmitt" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:atatgr$rd2$1...@knossos.btinternet.com...
| It's long past time this was addressed.
ALL those herepresent are prevailed upon to pay especial, highly instructive
attention to the following short bit of text from a Master Artist which
states my case with precision as it addresses to a 'T' the pea-green
substance of the putrid puddle left here as peed down the leg of the above
named purely secularized recreation of Parson Thwackum . . .
II. The Heroe of This Great History Appears with Very Bad Omens. A Little
Tale of so Low a Kind That Some May Think It Not Worth Their Notice. A Word
or Two Concerning a Squire, and More Relating to a Gamekeeper and a
Schoolmaster
AS we determined, when we first sat down to write this history, to flatter
no man, but to guide our pen throughout by the directions of truth, we are
obliged to bring our heroe on the stage in a much more disadvantageous
manner than we could wish; and to declare honestly, even at his first
appearance, that it was the universal opinion of all Mr. Allworthy's family
that he was certainly born to be hanged.
1
Indeed, I am sorry to say there was too much reason for this conjecture;
the lad having from his earliest years discovered a propensity to many
vices, and especially to one which hath as direct a tendency as any other to
that fate which we have just now observed to have been prophetically
denounced against him: he had been already convicted of three robberies,
viz., of robbing an orchard, of stealing a duck out of a farmer's yard, and
of picking Master Blifil's pocket of a ball.
2
The vices of this young man were, moreover, heightened by the
disadvantageous light in which they appeared when opposed to the virtues of
Master Blifil, his companion; a youth of so different a cast from little
Jones, that not only the family but all the neighbourhood resounded his
praises. He was, indeed, a lad of a remarkable disposition; sober, discreet,
and pious beyond his age; qualities which gained him the love of every one
who knew him: while Tom Jones was universally disliked; and many expressed
their wonder that Mr. Allworthy would suffer such a lad to be educated with
his nephew, lest the morals of the latter should be corrupted by his
example.
3
An incident which happened about this time will set the characters of
these two lads more fairly before the discerning reader than is in the power
of the longest dissertation.
4
Tom Jones, who, bad as he is, must serve for the heroe of this history,
had only one friend among all the servants of the family; for as to Mrs.
Wilkins, she had long since given him up, and was perfectly reconciled to
her mistress. This friend was the gamekeeper, a fellow of a loose kind of
disposition, and who was thought not to entertain much stricter notions
concerning the difference of meum and tuum than the young gentleman himself.
And hence this friendship gave occasion to many sarcastical remarks among
the domestics, most of which were either proverbs before, or at least are
become so now; and, indeed, the wit of them all may be comprised in that
short Latin proverb, "Noscitur a socio;" which, I think, is thus expressed
in English, "You may know him by the company he keeps."
Alaric
that one, probably. You never know much about history.
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:atb17v$12k8kh$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
John
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:atb4h2$cdb$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
| Better than your stuff.
You mean like . . .
"Quadpus" <qua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:slrnauqd93....@veenet.value.net...
| In article <asj1mp$ru5eb$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de>, John wrote:
| >
| >Oh, if it could be done in a dream,
<snip>
|
| I don't think it's news to anybody that you don't like me, and I don't
| like you.
|
| But I really, really liked this story.
Or . . .
"nativelaw" <l...@nativelaw.net> wrote in message
news:uuqpkcq...@corp.supernews.com...
|
| "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:asj1mp$ru5eb$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
| > If It Could Be Done in a Dream
| >
| > She was tweedy and brunette, certainly not the only pretty girl in that
| > first morning class at 8:30, but I wasn't seeing the eyes of any other.
It
|
| --------
|
| <Breaks vow of silence>
|
|
| Beautiful story.
|
|
| <Returns to silence>
| Good writer.
Like "good writer"? Who the hell do you think you're talking about? This is
Fielding you fool, the man who invented the English novel. The word "good"
does not apply to such an author.
Jezuz. Like, 'good writer.
LOL.
An envious man cannot, in honesty, manage a word like "great" in respect of
another, as instead you will even mete out your slimy gossip against the
greats . . .
| Good kidnapper, too. Wasted on you,
| that one, probably. You never know much about history.
So you are told, and you do without a blink believe. But I know my History
well enough to learn from it, as I do not learn by dint of a gullible
gobbling of gossip from the mouth of slavering wannabee wallaby with a
boomerang through his brain. Do you call him, "Professor Anal Awful
Disease", or just Dr. Needle Dork the Bug Schtupper?
Such a peasant you are, McDimwit.
You will one day learn that simply because a pal of yours says a thing is
so, does not make it so, just because he's a pal of yours and is therefore
worthy of your grant to him of the greater authority. I know that form of
bias is the supreme authority for you, but if you should ever get to
college, you will learn otherwise.
Now let us see how something from Fielding here bears repeating . . .
|
|> Tom Jones was universally disliked . . .
Do you see how that goes, as the envy seething in the heart of your ilk
continues in its effort to turn day to night, and bitter to sweet, never
ceases in its powerful lusts to succeed in directing the way of the world --
inspiring the likes of Henry Fielding to write, to rain these truths down
upon your dead ears?
Alaric
But I know my History
> well enough to learn from it,
In which case, why did you avoid the question.
What did I mean by the reference?
You'd best get Googling, Davey boy, so you can pretend you knew all along.
I don't need to pretend. My Henry Fielding story is already in the Archive,
long before you made him your latest literary hero. Here's the reference so
you can ignore it or trash it as you prefer:
http://www.afoarchive.com/2002june/journey.htm
Ejucaided Redneck
> It's long past time this was addressed.
I cannot imagine a life so empty, so devoid of interest or stimulation,
or a mind so dull, that disrupting newsgroups would become a passion
requiring the expenditure of so many hours. I mean, even if
Jervis/Daddio/John was a _committee_, just typing all that rot in shifts
would be a significant chunk of hours. But his life, and his mind are
just that empty, just that dull.
When you all spend so much time writing notes to one another about his
silliness, rather than do what you intend to when you read this
newsgroup, when you spend your own time developing strategies (??!!??)
to neutralize him, when you give him the sort of attention his blighted
personality demands, something's wrong.
Just my nickel's worth.
--
Time will wound all heels
And it ain't pretty.
--- Chris Smither ("Your Winsome Smile")
--
New stories, new essays, new pages:
http://bobsloan.home.mindspring.com/
Allegory60
>after it too - but it's time to be blunt.
>
Well, telling me I'm a great writer--how can I argue? ha. Be blunt, but be
civil.
>Who gives you the DAMNED right to do all this fingerwagging? Who gives you
>the DAMNED right to sit there in your ivory towers and deign to speak for
>the benefit and best interests of the group?
I don't speak for anyone but me. I made that clear in my opinion, the post
you're referring to. I hope that is clear now.
> I love you guys, but I'm
>getting tired of seeing you scrabbling for the high ground. ESPECIALLY when
>you're not right.
Well, I had no idea you loved me. My wife says I am indeed lovable, but this is
a high water mark! Seriously, I can try to make a case for ignoring the guy,
even if past actions have convinced you that it leads to more problems. Am I
right? I don't know. We can disagree on the best way to deal with ugliness
here. Perhaps you're right to separate this guy's ugliness from ugliness in
general. I don't know. I don't fault you for it and have only had my
perceptions. But you say it is "strategy" and I respect that.
I would hope you'd have the same respect for my opinion and not see it as me
"scrabbling for the high ground." I do feel we want the same things here. Don't
you?
>Ignoring for now that anyone who stands by and watches a good friend
>attacked on the basis of personal appearance better get off that high ground
>pretty darned fast, you apparently haven't got the vaguest clue as to what
>works with John and what doesn't.
John who?
(sorry to be Alaric-like cute)
>Sure, some meandering troll can be driven
>off and has been by that ol' turn up your noses thing, but not this guy.
>YOU'RE WRONG.
You mean I'm "ALL CAPS WRONG?"
Oh, well. I haven't been wrong in awhile--or, have I?
>
>Don't you know he's hung around this and other groups for years causing
>maximum trouble?
Sure. I was here before you were, remember? I was here when he was giving Jane
hemorrhoids and old calm Doc was egging him on, telling him how his great whale
tale was another Moby Dick. I think I predate you, not that it's important.
> Don't you know that every single tactic in the world has
>been used against him?
Except for one. Ignoring the guy permanently. I'd like to have a buck for all
the responses to him. I filter him. He changes names, I put on the new filter.
If I see anything by him or him posted by another, I skip on by. It keeps me
focused on why this group is here. It sure ain't for trolls, not even trolls
that you've figured out.
>
>been used against him? Why on earth do you think some Ivy League back
>turning exercise is going to do the least bit of good? It's naive.
Maybe. Still, I'd like to see it done for 6 months, a year. Total ignoring. No
responses by regulars. None.
>It's
>irrational. John loves his WW2 images - so you be Poland and Czechoslovakia,
>but DON'T expect me to play Sudetenland, and STOP tutting at me when I
>don't.
Seems like hysterical perspective to me. Playing paddy cake with an idiot may
be okay for his keepers, but we've better stuff to do, eh?
>There are only two tactics that have any limited success against John.
>Everybody knows them, and once I point them out, they'll stop working. But
>what the hell? I'm beyond worrying about it. HE WON'T GO AWAY!!!!!
>
As far as I'm concerned he IS away. I refuse to recognize him here. For me that
works. And, since it works for me, I was hoping it would work for you.
Whether he actually leaves or posts is of no importance to me. You see, we each
have adopted a strategy of dealing with the same problem. Now that you've
outlined yours I respect you for it, and I wont shout YOU'RE WRONG YOUR'E
WRONG!! I promise I won't.
>Praise. That works. Those of you who know me know that blowing my own
>trumpet ain't a habit of mine, but again, what the hell?
I never saw anything to praise, even when I did acknowledge him. Honest.
Nothing at all.
>For months before
>you were either regular or back as a regular, I single-handedly kept the
>wanker sweet.
Where did that "wanker" term come from I wonder. We have a Wanker's Corner spot
here in Oregon. I wonder if they know what the Brits mean when they say it? ha.
Oh, seriously, APM, this "single-handedly" stuff is above you, ain't it? I
mean, this is Usenet. But then, I'm getting ahead of you again.
> How did you achieve that, oh zen master? Simple. I reviewed
>his turgid prose and told him how good it was. I was the only one who did.
>And I regularly got slammed for it. For ENCOURAGING him.
How many Hail Mary's would that justify, I wonder? I dunno. Not Catholic. The
idea isn't catholic, either.
>Ha! I knew EXACTLY
>WHAT I WAS DOING.
Oh, I have no doubt. You really had me fooled though. I thought you simply
weak-willed. Maybe you should have put it in an email? I doubt I would have
agreed with the strategy, but at least I wouldn't have looked so dumb wagging
my finger all the time. Now I have carpal finger.
> I was giving him quotes he could use in other groups to
>promote himself.
The guy must have loads of time.
> I was lying.
Well, it's not like a black lie, is it?
>Taking positive, immoral action to limit his
>outbursts. He's like a dog. When he's patted, he licks. When he's ignored,
>he bites.
Most ignored dogs whine. If you ignore FEEDING THEM, they find new homes.
>So. I did it for twelve months. Now, I'm sick of reading the crap.
Okay. I'm sure that's understandable. Everyone gets tired of reading the crap
now and then. I just get away for a bit when that happens. When I have to
search through the troll threads to find good fiction, I look elsewhere.
>You want to go that route, one of you two guys take over. Or let Opus, which
>she's bravely trying to do - she doesn't need you snipin' from I'm All Right
>Jack heaven, Hank.
I figured Opus was Opus. She may have her own strategy.
>And the other option is to take him on. Selectively. No, of course not every
>snide comment, every thread. But selectively. THAT WORKS TOO, AND I CAN
>PROVE IT.
It may work for you, but then we have more crap flying.
>On four identifiable occasions, he's left us alone for two months.
>Each time someone had struck a telling blow - he retreated until everyone
>had forgotten.
You really think it was because you threw crap back at him? I dunno. Even
ignored dogs have to go into the woods to take a shit now and then.
>Ignoring? That wonderful tactic. Pretend the shit's not there and it won't
>stink. Well, we've tried it twice now. That memorable first time resulted in
>70 crossposts a day, drowning the group, with tossface blatantly
>blackmailing - recognise me or I'm going to finish you.
So, why not ignore the crossposts? We know who the regs are here.
>And by God he came
>closer than we'd like. Day to day stuff was buried in an avalanche of
>alt.writing and misc.writing posts, with new trolls racing to join the fray.
>Do you want that again? Do you?
I'd just ignore it. My blood pressure wouldn't waver a snip.
>It's already warming up. Sci groups
>crossposting. Alt.writing again. And its the fault of the peacemakers (not
>the cheesemakers.) I subscribed to the tactic. I now UNRESERVEDLY withdraw.
>YOU ARE WRONG. WRONG!!!!
One exclam mark is plenty. You used enough there for a couple of novellas. I
may be wrong, I admit. But do you admit to that also? We each must grope
through the black AFO night to find the inner peace we seek. Or, hell, we can
just focus on review and write and crit and edit and write, etc. etc.
>I will not sit by and think well of myself for ignoring threads like
>yesterday's. You be Neville Chamberlains if you want to be.
The poor "bloke" isn't it? I'm only glad he wasn't American, he's taken such a
beating for sixty+ years. One thing--NC made peace, appeased. I don't do those
things with evil, and I do believe this particular man is evil. (Sorry Geo.
Bush, but you dont have a monopoly on evil doers!)
>You don't have a
>monopoly on theories of what's good for the group and what isn't.
Of course I don't. Maybe Baltic and Mediterranean Avenue only. I'm just trying
to get past "Go." I do have a mind, and I do have opinions. I speak only for
me. When my mind checks in, I post.
>You don't
>have a monopoly on theories about what will damage the group or not.
No, but I have seen groups wrecked by less.
>Sometimes the PBI are right and the officers are wrong. As now. I believe
>YOUR tactic will bring us to our knees.
I doubt my tactic will work except for me. I do believe it will work for anyone
who consistently uses it, however, and who doesn't back down when he pulls the
cross posts out of his backside.
>When someone deliberately pours beer
>on a friend, some folks don't want to reason.
I'd hate to see a waste of good suds.
>The image is valid, cyberspace
>or not.
The beer would definitely be "light" then, eh?
>The more you blank him, the more frustrated he'll get, the more
>disruptive he'll get. Embarrass or mollify.
Blank who?
>Them's your choices. And Hank,
>this is Usenet.
My choice has been made, my friend, as has yours. We're like pals at a nudist
camp here--we're merely airing our differences.
>Like it or not, there are friendships here
sure. Bobby is my pal. Even when he writes weird. Andrea too is great. Sue?
well, she's windy but nice. ha. But I don't trust Aussies--their wine is too
damned good. Shiraz, shiraz. What willbe willbe.
>I reckon it's
>the best damned writing group on the net, and it's because of those
>friendships rather than in spite of it. Long distance friendships allow
>honesty that face to face ones don't.
>
I'm only on 3 groups. It's okay. Certainly not the worst. But these things
evolve. I can see why folks like it. I save my praise for good prose.
>You want to retain your elegant distance, that's fine.
In Oregon, everywhere else is elegantly distant. Thank God!
>The world is made of
>different sorts of folks, thank God, and each has their virtues.
(some are inscrutable)
>I happen to
>believe AFO will only benefit from direct action when appropriate against
>this little Hitler.
You mean a plot to blow up a bomb in a suitcase when he calls a meeting? Egads!
I sure hope it works. What if it fails?
>I frankly don't understand how you find it so easy to ignore dirtmouth's
>posts and at the same time have to fasten on to my responses.
BEcause you, sir, are usually civil. For me, that's all the difference. I
consider the source.
>Give me the
>same leeway, treatment, whatever. You see a post by me after one by John,
>IGNORE IT.
I may have to do that from now on.
>And for Christ's sake don't comment on it unless you're also
>prepared to pounce on John. Kick the double standards.
I stay off of shitpiles. Dirties the clothes and attitude.
>I'm sick and tired of the lectures and the headshakes and the fingers moving
>side to side
I never wanted to flag it up there straightaways. Too juvenile.
>If you're so keen on leaving trouble alone, leave all trouble
>alone. The whole thread.
Never saw the responders as trouble. I saw them, and you, as regulars, good
folks who needed reminding now and then. The motive was good. But okay, you
dont have to throw all caps and exclams at me.
>The whole exchange. I know you're both calmer than
>me, better behaved than me, more grown up than me, more self controlled than
>me, more rounded than me, better people than me.
Tut, tut. Calm is overrated.
>There. I acknowledge it,
>now and forever. I'll even put a quote on the bottom of my messages to that
>effect if you want.
Horrid! Nah. Not necessary. >You don't have to tell me ANY MORE. I understand.
I
>understand, and I'm NOT going to stop. I'll bloody walk before I do.
Still, I WISH you'd just ignore him. I mean forever ignore him. Forget his
name. Hurl it into the bottomless pit. That sort of thing.
>Profoundly Pissed Off
>Oldham
>England
Old ham in Oldham?
direct your pissedoffness in the right direction.
Hank the Yank
KellyT
I've ben lurking so long I hardly remember myself but, I use to post here
not too long ago.Oh, maybe it was in a different time but who cares about
that. I've been reading faithfully since my lurkdom and its until now I have
felt a need to contribute Truth is, I quit smoking which pretty much stunted
any writing but thats not why I'm speaking out.
This is more of a silent support for Alaric. I bet there are a few of us who
lurk that were part of the older group. The thing is, that while being
involved, sometimes objectivity is lost. I was a big Jane supporter, still
am and god bless her wherever she is. However, Alaric has made this group
thrive and there are no two questions about it. I see a flower blooming.
Sometimes objectivity can be good. And I say to those who have gathered up
in the wools clothing, leave alone. Focus on the good fight of helping
fellow writers. My god people, look around. Its paying off in spades. No
worries about trolls. Focus. Alaric is righting an unbalanced usenet ship..
impossible mate. I just want to say as an observer.. the work coming out of
here is superb. Keep writing and don't get bothered down in the bullshit.
Alaric, you are doing good man. I know it must not be easy, but stay the
course.
Kelly
Alaric
> Well, I had no idea you loved me.
Oh, it's that sorta Travolta turn away and comb your hair sorta love (best
scene in Grease.)
> I would hope you'd have the same respect for my opinion and not see it as
me
> "scrabbling for the high ground." I do feel we want the same things here.
Don't
> you?
I might have sat on the high ground stuff for a day or two, I admit. It's
the Irish in me.
>
> You mean I'm "ALL CAPS WRONG?"
Emphasis. I NEVER shout, but I prefer NEVER shout to *never* shout.
>
> If I see anything by him or him posted by another, I skip on by.
No,ya don't, ya big fib. Otherwise you wouldn't be picking up the flames.
Now that you've
> outlined yours I respect you for it, and I wont shout YOU'RE WRONG YOUR'E
> WRONG!! I promise I won't.
Okey dokey. I'll settle for that.
>
> How many Hail Mary's would that justify, I wonder? I dunno. Not Catholic.
The
> idea isn't catholic, either.
The proper Catholic punishment would probably be reading MORE of his
stories.
>
> You really think it was because you threw crap back at him? I dunno. Even
> ignored dogs have to go into the woods to take a shit now and then.
It has to be the right crap, and I can't find any right now.
>
> One exclam mark is plenty.
They're like buses. They come along in groups <g>.
> I may be wrong, I admit. But do you admit to that also?
No. I'm adopting a John attitude <vbg>.
> The poor "bloke" isn't it? I'm only glad he wasn't American, he's taken
such a
> beating for sixty+ years.
And deserves it.
> I do have a mind, and I do have opinions. I speak only for
> me. When my mind checks in, I post.
Of course.I was just getting the other POV up for once. You know how hung up
I am on POV.
>
> BEcause you, sir, are usually civil. For me, that's all the difference. I
> consider the source.
Heh. Usually.
I'll slink off now, unforgettably disgraced <vvvvvvvbg>.
Alaric
During 2001 a number of like minded people did a lot of work to keep AFO's
head above water after we lost our leading lights. Most of them are still
here. It was very much a communal effort, in which I played a lesser part
than many. Truly.
Keep reading. I LOVE the notion that there are silent readers. I got this
note this week from a UK sixth form teacher (I asked her for permission to
quote this bit):-
"We read and criticise in class a story from the group every week. It makes
a change to look at work in the process of development."
She goes on to list MY Hiroshima story (yay!), Moran's Moggies (Fraser's
black marked for killin' them cats,) Subverse, Pots and quite a few others.
They also look at OUR crits of those stories after they've discussed the
stories. She uses reviews and recommendations direct from the group AND from
the monthly (the reason she wrote to me - it was on the back of that
thread - one particular story the reviews in the monthly didn't rave over
had gone down very well - hah - bribe me. It was a story from one of our
female contributors.)
The students don't access the group - they aren't even know what group it
is - whether its Usenet, web based, private, whatever - although I'm sure
some of them have found out. This is because (not axe-grinding) (a) of one
particular individual - she doesn't want them taking him as a role model and
calling one another fat - heh - no, she does think there's a problem
particularly with that guy, but to be fair there's also (b) there are some
extremely adult stories, she says. I dunno. These kids are16 and 17. Maybe
she's right.
Anyway, thought (as I say, with permission) that I'd share this.
"KellyT" <bird...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atbubd$ffc$1...@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
> Hi Everyone
>
> I've ben lurking so long I hardly remember myself but, I use to post here
"KellyT" <bird...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atbubd$ffc$1...@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
Wind River
Hope you don't mind if I take it out of the Flannery thread with a new
subject line. I'll leave your full message below.
What a nice letter to receive. It must have made your day -- it did
mine. :)
I wonder how many silent readers follow this small area of Usenet?
Sometimes, I forget about our lurkers, even though we all probably
lurked for awhile. I'll just take a moment to say hello if any are
reading <waving and saying hi>.
Sue
Alaric
sound good to me. They're doing Pepys at the moment and they're all keeping
a diary - but not their own - they have to watch their friend and do a diary
for them. Apparently it raises some laughs at the end of each lesson.
"Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3DFA18DC...@voyager.net...
John
| It's a nice thing to say, Kelly, but improperly flattering I'm sorry to
say.
|
| is - whether its Usenet, web based, private, whatever - although I'm sure
| some of them have found out. This is because (not axe-grinding) (a) of one
| particular individual - she doesn't want them taking him as a role model
and
| calling one another fat - heh - no, she does think there's a problem
| particularly with that guy,
You better believe there's a problem with *that* guy, you square-headed,
bourgeois, social-climbing, pc value pandering, pap-spewing, Palestinian
pudenda kissing, crap-headed cretin. Any evil-minded school teacher that
doesn't want her students to learn how to think for themselves sure as hell
better keep her head under cover any place where the champions of that
liberty are out here on the front lines keeping freedom free for free
people, you jack-brained toad.
You better believe there's a problem, and that problem is here to stay!
Is it the brownies that little squares like you are all worried about? Well
get a clue budddy: It's a foregone conclusion that those brownies are not
for kids, no more than a shot of tequila. So let's not see tight-corsetted
square-headed school marms coming around here suggesting that my brownies
are corrupting the morals of the youth any more than if I were to come
around here singing the praises of the excellent favors of a bottle of
vintage Chassagne Montrachet.
Corrupting the morals of the youth, eh? That's the charge that brought the
hemlock to the mouth of Socrates you half-witted, egotistical, self-serving,
nose-in-the-air pompous fraud.
You fraud.
Dig it: Kids are already on a natural high, so they have no right to be
messing around with the beer and the brownies. Adults are the ones who have
lost their natural high and that is why we need the beer and the brownies to
get a taste of what it was like to be a naturally high kid again.
No, the kids DON'T get to have their natural high AND their brownies too.
Get it?
You pompous fraud.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
but to be fair there's also (b) there are some
Alaric
morals, that's your horse, not mine, ridden just to twist the argument.
A teacher can take a story from anywhere, braindead. If she reads Fielding,
does she have to identify it as the 1932 Faber and Faber edition. She can
resource where she wishes.
She's more concerned, as I said and you ignored, about the disruption and
personal abuse - particularly against women. She wants to teach respect
between the sexes not assault. She's teaching creativity, not demolition.
Just as no teacher would take her children to see a dog pissing in the
street, a right minded one will steer them clear of YOU.
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:atdhqh$12iiui$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
Pat J. O'Brien
alive. Can't we let her rest in peace?
John
| Oh, I'm sure they know all about drugs, asshole. And as for corrupting
| morals, that's your horse, not mine, ridden just to twist the argument.
|
| A teacher can take a story from anywhere, braindead. If she reads
Fielding,
| does she have to identify it as the 1932 Faber and Faber edition. She can
| resource where she wishes.
|
| She's more concerned, as I said and you ignored, about the disruption and
| personal abuse
Fraud.
| - particularly against women.
Like Angry Petunia?
| She wants to teach respect
| between the sexes not assault.
You'll rot in hell for that lie, as the women in my life and on Usenet who
know me better, well know. You suffer from a typical psychosis that is
rampant in these times which is this beaten-down, pudenda pandering attitude
of suck-up among pc males come as a result of feminist male-bashing. A
whipped pussy puppy like you perceives any straight off the shoulder
criticism of a person who happens to be a woman as misogynistic
"abuse"--that's how crazy you are. Yeah, that is unless she happens to be
your target, the target of your gang as was the case with Angry Petunia,
then she just becomes some androgynous, genderless thing in your hate-eyes.
Your senses tell you that she is a gang-hater, and your hackles as a
gang-member get right up--woman or no woman. She looses her goddess status
when you get hip to the fact that she's out to get your gang.
There is no stigma of Scarlet Letter to which you will not resort to
preserve your gang and your status in it you dirty little pipsqueak. You
are a gang boy because you have no guts to relate to people individual to
individual outside the protective skirts of the group--you always like the
little coyote yipping and yapping for the help of the pack.
Get a clue Group Nazi: the designation alt.fiction.original is nothing but
an internet address. It is a place in cyberspace. The word "group" does not
refer to the posters who show up here, you fool. The word "group" refers to
a grouping of subject categories.
There is no schtupping "group" as you would impose it. You want to turn
this thing into a gang--but so long as I am here, punkie--that is not going
to work. This will remain as an address, a place, a space for individual to
encounter individual and nothing else.
Get it? I will see to it that the day dawns when the little Angry Petunias
of the world will not be abused by the dishonest cowering gang-groupie likes
of you and Nativecop with your fake steeeenking badges of gang authority.
You will not be permitted to do it. Got it? You DON'T drag that social pap
of bourgeois crap here into a free Cyberspace. I stop you dead in your
dirty billy-clubbing tracks,
You tell the lie here that to be a critic of feminist excess, of the gender
narcissism and egotism and male bashing that comes of it is to be
misogynistic and you don't even have the insight to know how you lie, let
alone the honesty to admit that millions of women agree with me. You want
the list?
You pussy-whipped puppy--get a clue: I do not enjoin you in your idolatry
as you make the word "woman" synonymous with the word "goddess". I piss on
that altar of yours, along with every other fake and primitive superstition
and you just better get used to it.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
Anopheles
"Alaric" wrote:
> This is one cool lady. She has all sorts of odd techniques, most of which
> sound good to me. They're doing Pepys at the moment and they're all
keeping
> a diary - but not their own - they have to watch their friend and do a
diary
> for them. Apparently it raises some laughs at the end of each lesson.
Any chance of getting copies?
Alaric
"Anopheles" <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message
news:atdloh$12map8$1...@ID-34438.news.dfncis.de...
Alaric
>
> Like Angry Petunia?
Forgot you admitted you WERE Angry Petunia? Oops. Oh. Was that the OTHER
John P. David? Want the reference? Are you actually going to deny something?
>A
> whipped pussy puppy like you perceives any straight off the shoulder
> criticism of a person who happens to be a woman as misogynistic
Fatty.
>
> You tell the lie here that to be a critic of feminist excess,
Fatty
> of the gender
> narcissism and egotism and male bashing that comes of it is to be
> misogynistic
Fatty.
> and you don't even have the insight to know how you lie, let
> alone the honesty to admit that millions of women agree with me. You want
> the list?
Are they fat?
Forget what you posted before, did you?
You don't take the high ground with facile juvenile insults like fatty,
Davey boy. Wanker.
Huw Lyan Thomas
> I got
> this note this week from a UK sixth form teacher
Way cool, Alaric. Thanks for sharing.
--
John
"Huw Lyan Thomas" <h...@NOhexlibrisSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92E411EAA71...@192.168.1.4...
| "Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote:
|
| > I got
| > this note this week from a UK sixth form teacher
|
| Way cool, Alaric. Thanks for sharing.
Puke.
Next time you talk to her, don't forget to give her this to write on the
blackboard, Monday Morning:
"A turd in the hand is worth two in the tush."
--JP David
|
| --
|
| Huw
| www.hexlibris.com
John
|
| "John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:atdkkk$134oef$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...
| >
| > Like Angry Petunia?
|
| Forgot you admitted you WERE Angry Petunia? Oops. Oh. Was that the OTHER
| John P. David? Want the reference? Are you actually going to deny
something?
You have to be crazy.
Nuts.
Zapped in the haystack.
Flipped.
Anything but tripped.
Zipped, clipped and nipped,
Stripped of all significance.
You're a dud in the bud.
You got bees in the bonnet,
Bats in the belfry,
And why oh God why,
do you actually
comb your hair like that?
I want to know.
I got to know!
I gotta know right now.
Oh yes, you say you are the long lost eleventh Beatle?
Those bangs are so cool,
Did you think you could show up at the party and be mistaken for Mia Farrow?
Did you marry Frank Sinatra?
Did your barber have a bone to pick with you?
How did you ever get a hair-do like that?
I know. Oh yes, I do. I know just exactly what you're up to.
But those bangs will never hide all those lies behind your forehead, the
main one being that there is a mind of your own in there.
And there you have it. The nightly news from BBC.
Goodnight and Sweet Jesus shine his everlovin' light on thee
in thy everlasting darkness, Poopsie,
that you may awaken to a new day,
cleansed of all that poop in your head.
Amen.
--
JP David http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"To be spoken of, but not spoken to--is delightful!" -- Oscar Wilde in
Paris, upon his release from Reading Gaol
|
Opus
> |
> | Forgot you admitted you WERE Angry Petunia? Oops. Oh. Was that the OTHER
> | John P. David? Want the reference? Are you actually going to deny
> something?
>
> You have to be crazy.
> Nuts.
>
Opus
Alaric
"John" <jpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ate6cm$13r5so$1...@ID-167346.news.dfncis.de...