An image of my grandmother
her head appearing upside-down upon a cloud
the cloud transfixed on the steeple
of a deserted railway-station
far away
An image of an aqueduct
with a dead crow hanging from the first arch
a modern-style chair from the second
a fir-tree lodged in the third
and the whole scene sprinkled with snow
An image of a piano-tuner
with a basket of prawns on his shoulder
and a firescreen under his arm
his moustache made of clay-clotted twigs
and his cheeks daubed with wine
An image of an aeroplane
the propellor is rashers of bacon
the wings are of reinforced lard
the tail is made of paper-clips
the pilot is a wasp
An image of the painter
with his left hand in a bucket
and his right hand stroking a cat
as he lies in bed
with a stone beneath his head
And all these images
and many others
are arranged like waxworks
in model bird-cages
about six inches high.
by David Gascoyne
Thanks for posting these, but I never really like Gascoyne much. It
strikes me that when he is most in his "surrealist" mode, he tends to be
derivative and self-conscious (as in the above example) and when he
moves on from that (as in the previous example), his imagery tends to
flatten out and become almost banal. Quite a number of the English
surrealists of the time do this - utilizing the superficial qualities of
"surrealist art" over a very conventional armature. For instance, when
French surrealists paid "homage" to other surrealists they would produce
"parallel" texts, not direct evocations, as David has done.
dmh
Keith
Why not post something constructive instead of your endless rambles,
abusive language and excessive punctuation?
Which surrealist artists and poets do you like?
regards
Marcus
Rather ask him what surrealism means to him in its greater aspect? He
doesn't have a clue. He thinks it has something vaguely to do with being
a loud-mouthed madman, like his hero Dali, but he doesn't appear to have
any ability for anything. That's his "bag." In general, it is best to
ignore him. He's just a bitter little boy with an ugly personality, who
has read too much and understood too little. Usenet is full of idiots
like him. Their only inner resource is the delusion they are "being
noticed" and it is the one thing we can deny them. He won't go away, but
that's because he probably hasn't got much of a life. He's pitiable in
his way, and the details of his growing irrelevance and mania are
probably best left to a psychiatrist, or his guilt-ridden parents, who
might wonder if they brought him up with enough love and attention.
dmh
Whose movement are you talking about? And what have *you* done to
advance this movement in any way?
Whose meetings?
Do you realise that your posting contains more negative words about
people you dislike than positive words about people you like?
What does that say about you as an individual?
No, no... get a stretcher. Quick, is there a doctor in the house ?
We have a seriously wounded invalid. The invalid needs a vowel
resection or the invalid might become even more deranged.
R.
Regarding the excretions of, what's his name, Dorki W8:
I hear,
I hear ‘the strange voices on the web'.
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to read & laugh,
(With apologies to Lord T.)
Whatever else one could say about Dorki, he is a pitiful creature;
and, as such, is collectable as a disgusting specimen of ontology run
awry. Perception of Dorki brought me a flashback into my youth. We
who caddied for a few bucks per bag took our sport at the golf
courses' frog ponds where we used castaway bamboo green whips to whack
croakers as they sang their tunes on the muddy margins amongst the
lily pads and swamp grass. Occasionally, we'd crack the back of an
in-utero victim of DDT, PCBs, or another chemical variant of "better
things for better living". Sometimes three-legged ones, sometimes
other obvious abnormalities, were thus found. But these weird ones
were the ones we'd lug home to show to our brothers or gross out the
girls next door. Dorki is such a spectacle. Croaking. Creepy.