"So What?" The Start of the Final 'Final Draft'
dadd...@yahoo.com
like, "on topic" here? I mean, I wouldn't want to step on any goddam
stinking turdpiles of rules or anything. Oh, no! Dear me, {squish} dear
me. Oof! was that "a rule"? Oh gawd. Where can I find a stick.
THE SWINGER - FINAL DRAFT - PART ONE
There we were like any couple of tourists snapping pictures of the
towering Picasso sculpture in downtown Chicago; well, I was snapping the
pictures, while she, Marcie stood in the doorway of the Mayflower coffee
shop yawning. This was supposed to be our honeymoon, sort of, after a
two year delay; and it was a flop from the beginning.
Riding the _Zepher_, the express midday Burlington streamliner down from
Minneapolis, even that was turned into a deluxe chromium clad purgatory
on wheels when she wouldn't sit with me. At first, of course, it
couldn't be helped, there having been no two seats together in any of
the coaches; as we'd searched, lugging suitcases across the vestibules
and down the cramped corridors until at last we'd had to settle for two
nearly adjacent seats on opposite sides in the car we'd first boarded.
It wasn't until the train had come into northernmost Illinois that the
seat beside me came available, at which point, having motioned across
the aisle to show her the vacancy, she turned her glance to the fellow
seated next her, then back to me to say, "No, John, I'm just fine right
here."
And now, wouldn't anyone on earth wonder why I didn't immediately jump
up, jerk the emergency cord and hijack the train, or at least again
simply lean over to insist she come join me? Actually, I didn't wonder
anything of the kind. No, I was yet too much of a sufferer for any of
that sort of thing. Indeed, had she succumbed to the demand only out of
mere mecessity of not making a scene, I well knew how fiercely she'd
have resented it. So, it's one thing to be ignored, quite another to be
hated. I could see only the dreaded conflict, but not the possibility
of peace on the far side of receiving a little respect.
Turning the film to the next shot in the Brownie, I came off the plaza
back to the foyer where she stood out of the wind. I took aim. She
ducked. "Marcie. C'mon. We're here now. What do you say we try and enjoy
ourselves?"
She pulled away from my hand where it had nearly been placed on the
shoulder of her light gray, white collared spring coat, and stepped out
to the walk grousing under her breath that she "never wanted to come
down here in the first place."
"What?"
"Oh, nevermind. We're here. What do you want to do?"
"Well, I don't want to stand here all day in the middle of Chicago under
God and Picasso, arguing." I started in the direction I thought we
might go, retarding my pace till she had stubbornly set herself into
motion.
"Well, where _do_ you want to argue, then?" She removed some wind-blown
strands of black hair from her mouth. "Under the Sears Towers up on
State Street?"
"No, Marcie, let's do it under the monkeys at the Lincolm Park Zoo."
"Under the monkeys!"
"Among the monkeys, then. Christ, I never thought you didn't want to
make this trip! It's been in our plans for two years."
Her neck-length hair, centrally parted and brought to her cheeks in a
very Sassoon little flip bobbed with her forward motion as she looked up
at me in just a flash of her hazel eyes. "This has always been your big
idea, not mine. I just went along 'cause you thought it was such a big
deal."
"Now you tell me. Jesus, Marcie, this is Chicago, the big town. Can't
you dig being in it?"
"Oh, 'dig' fig! What's the big deal? Big town, big deal. So what."
"So what?"
Soooo what. Not quite bop because it's way too cool, gone real close to
frozen, like in the sound of a police siren's wail against the back beat
of the big city. Drop dead. "Sooo what." Shattered dreams. Bug off.
Sudden screams. "So what?" Ghost images stealing by in glass; two people
walking together, alone; orphans of estranged desire, two escaped
mamikins paired in mutually inflicted irony down there so small in the
tall, blue-white cold of glass and steel. "Reeee-bop!" The lips stretch
to thin membranes hissing the vibrant kiss of bluest breath to the
coronet making it glaringly clear in brass: Soooooo what. So, Miles
rarely smiles through his horn, as it pours forth moans of cold gold
over the city, talking slow and smooth, in cool blue muted tones all
about it.
We walked along in the wind spill of the big lake, through the rumbling
urban canyon of Randolf Street passing the neon and mega-bulbed arbors
of movie palaces. "So what, Marcie? Just 'so what'?"
"So what if I said 'so what'?"
"Jesus jumping Christ! So sure! So okay, Marcie, to me it is a big deal
to be here, y'know, to finally, finally, finally for once in our lives
have a look at a real big city, just to be here, baby, walking around in
it like this; just to feel it throb, man. Wow!"
"_Like_, what throb, _man_?"
"Ah, forget it."
"I can't feel any throb except what's in my poor goddam feet from all
this aimless wandering. Minneapolis doesn't throb enough to suit you,
John?"
"No. Besides, it's our honeymoon. Remember?"
--
--==--
Jervis http://members.tripod.com/daddio45/swinger.htm
--==--
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
TrinityApp
-- > There we were like any couple of tourists snapping pictures of the
> towering Picasso sculpture in downtown Chicago; well, I was snapping the
> pictures, while she, Marcie stood in the doorway of the Mayflower coffee
> shop yawning.
I could be wrong, since I don't have my art book handy, but... Picasso was a
painter, not a sculptor and if he were a sculptor his work would be so
valuable it sure in the hell wouldn't be left outside, towering or not. Find
an artist who does those incredibly ugly impressionist or abstract red
missile things that look like a set of dicks set to explode.
Tracy Meisenbach
daddio
<trini...@lynchburg.net> wrote:
> Jervis wrote:
> -- > There we were like any couple of tourists snapping pictures
> of the
> > towering Picasso sculpture in downtown Chicago; well, I was
> snapping the
> > pictures, while she, Marcie stood in the doorway of the
> Mayflower coffee
> > shop yawning.
> Picasso was a
> painter, not a sculptor and if he were a sculptor his work would
> be so
> valuable it sure in the hell wouldn't be left outside, towering or
> not. Find
> an artist who does those incredibly ugly impressionist or abstract
> red
> missile things that look like a set of dicks set to explode.
> Tracy Meisenbach
Be assured however that you are dead wrong. Picasso was indeed a
sculptor, as in this case, he created a small model of the piece and
then commisioned a team of welders in Chicago to the purpose of the
construction. It was in all the papers at the time; every art critic
in the world was there for the unveiling.
http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/picasso/picasso.html
Sorry.
But, hey! Is this all you can do, sit around taking snide, baseless,
ill-considered potshots, instead of offering a proper critique as is
the mode here in AW? You, after all are the person who is such a
stickler about research? You need only have tried the keyphrase,
"Picasso +scupture +Chicago".
http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/picasso/picasso.html
What's the deal? I thought you and I had parted on cordial terms the
last time we communicated, girly-girl. Did you get off on the wrong
side of the horse today?
--
Jervis
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
William Penrose
It looks good on you. Lose the stick.
Bill (remainder of deathless prose unread)
--
************************************************************
Information on gas sensors and related instruments:
Check us out at http://www.customsensorsolutions.com
************************************************************
Bill Penrose, President, Custom Sensor Solutions, Inc.
526 West Franklin Avenue, Naperville IL 60540, USA
email wpen...@customsensorsolutions.com
************************************************************
Purveyors of contract R&D and product development to this
and nearby galaxies.
************************************************************
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Jervis wrote:
>
> > There we were like any couple of tourists snapping pictures of the
> I could be wrong, since I don't have my art book handy,
> but... Picasso was a painter, not a sculptor
> and if he were a sculptor his work would be so valuable it sure
> in the hell wouldn't be left outside, towering or not. [...]
> Tracy Meisenbach
Why don't you stick with your horsies, you embarrassingly ignorant
slut. Picasso's sculpture in Chicago is very well known, and photos of
it have appeared in practically every newspaper and magazine in the
world. (I've passed by it many times.)
You know shit about art, English, writing, editing, foreign languages,
and virtually everything else you brag about, you psychotic bitch from
hell. Fact is, your knowledge is limited to horsies and how to be a
foul-mouthed, vulgar, ignorant trailer-trash slut.
--
Reinhold ("Doc") Aman, Editor
Santa Rosa, CA 95402, USA
http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/
Steve Pritchard
TrinityApp wrote in message ...
>Jervis wrote:
>
>-- > Now, now, now! Let's have no more of that. Just please don't be
taking
>> your shame out on the name of the greatest artist of the 20th Century.
>> It only makes your error all the worse.
>
>He's not the greatest. He may have made more money while alive but he's
not
>the greatest.
140 pieces of Picasso's have been sold for over £1m or more, making him
the most "richly" collected artist in the world.
>Tsk Tsk Jervis. Calm a nerve you are being completely irrational, moreso
>because you're fighting a battle against yourself and no one else.
No kidding? But it is fun to watch at times.
TrinityApp
-- > Be assured however that you are dead wrong. Picasso was indeed a
> sculptor, as in this case, he created a small model of the piece and
> then commisioned a team of welders in Chicago to the purpose of the
> construction. It was in all the papers at the time; every art critic
> in the world was there for the unveiling.
>
I finally found the damn thing. Ok, you got me there. I was thinking along
the lines of a marble sculptor like Michelangelo, not steel sculptor.
> What's the deal? I thought you and I had parted on cordial terms the
> last time we communicated, girly-girl. Did you get off on the wrong
> side of the horse today?
>
Nope I was just trying to help, however, I will freely admit I should have
found the damn book before I posted. On another note: I hate Picasso's work.
However, the image
of some steel monstrosity fits in with the tone of your story. Pity you
can't include all the cow sculptures dotting the Chicago landscape now, I
think they're far prettier than the Picasso sculpture.
Tracy Meisenbach
TrinityApp
-- > Why don't you stick with your horsies, you embarrassingly ignorant
> slut. Picasso's sculpture in Chicago is very well known, and photos of
> it have appeared in practically every newspaper and magazine in the
> world. (I've passed by it many times.)
Truly, Reinhold, you do run on. I've never been to Chicago and Picasso isn't
to my taste. But then I doubt you know much about Georges De la Tour or
Boucher. Just how much time do you have on your hands that you read every
magazine and newspaper in the world. Just how do you make a living? Let me
guess, the government and my tax dollars support your lazy no working ass.
As for ignorance, well you're the expert on that, tell us more.
> You know shit about art, English, writing, editing, foreign languages,
> and virtually everything else you brag about, you psychotic bitch from
> hell. Fact is, your knowledge is limited to horsies and how to be a
> foul-mouthed, vulgar, ignorant trailer-trash slut.
>
Foul mouthed? This from you? RFLMAO! Vulger? From the self proclaimed
dictator of verbal aggression. What an ape you are. HINT: They are called
horses by anyone with an education above third grade level.
For the record, your opinion of me matters not a whit to anyone but you.
Your inability to form coherent sentences and your ranting and raving give
truth to the fact that you are the consummate rug muncher and complete waste
of flesh, and a lot of flesh it is.
Tracy Meisenbach
daddio
<trini...@lynchburg.net> wrote:
> I finally found the damn thing.
Now, now, now! Let's have no more of that. Just please don't be taking
your shame out on the name of the greatest artist of the 20th Century.
It only makes your error all the worse. It is not a "damn thing". It
is a work of art worth millions that Picasso just opened his hand and
gave gratis, freely to the people of Chicago, to a city in a nation he
never once visited in his life. Shame on you. And do forego the stupid
joke you're starting to think of about how maybe giving it away was the
only way he was going to get rid of it. Let's not be so predictable as
that; especially considering that they came to him to commission the
work to start out with. When it turned out that the city of Chicago
did not have the funds to pay the price that appraisers from the art
world had placed on it, then Picasso decided to donate it por nada. So,
have a little goddam respect for your betters.
> Ok, you got me there.
Got you? I didn't get you. The truth got you.
> I was
> thinking along
> the lines of a marble sculptor like Michelangelo, not steel
> sculptor.[sic]
Here are your words: "Picasso was a painter, not a sculptor and if he
were a sculptor his work would be so valuable it sure in the hell
wouldn't be left outside, towering or not." Picasso did sculpture in
every medium known to the art of scupture and then some, including
wood, clay and marble. You are simply trying to wiggle out of your
error, and I think you ought not be allowed to do that. You're still
trying to kid yourself into thinking that you weren't really flat
wrong. And why wouldn't a towering structure weighing over a hundred
tons be left outside? I doubt you were thinking of theft, but of
weather and rain. And why would rain bother marble? Rain and weather
would only be thought to bother metal. I think you _were_ thinking of
metal. As it happens however, the steel in the Chicago Picasso, was a
special alloy that would develop a nonrusting matte patina, for the
last finishing touch to the work.
> >
> Nope I was just trying to help...
Help! Great gods in heaven, there babycakes. Your kind of help I don't
need. What? For you to come around here wrongly accusing a person who
has his facts dead straight as if he were some know nothing poseur? Get
out, eh?
You say I "got you"? Not. You got me. Thought you really had me in
the dunce's cap there didn't ya? You were out to get me 'cause you had
some axe to grind, some hard-on against the story, or who knows what.
What? Maybe you saw something of yourself in the mirror-face of Marcie
that ballbusting little tyrant; yeah you saw something of Tracie in
Marcie that was just too hard to look at? Face it, kid. Not all women
are like, "goddesses" ya know. Ever meet PButler? Ever get a load of
yourself? You may thnk you're a regular of divinities you broads, yeah
and that just may be the problem. That just may be the whole trouble.
If that's what all this jive feminist dreck is doing to your heads,
it's high time y'all got pulled back down to earth here with the rest
of us poopers and pissers. Yeah, time you jive feminist bags were
trotted off the the dunking stool. Yeah, set that sucker up in the
Civic Center right next to the Chicago Picasso there, get dunkin'; I
got dibs on the donut concession.
>, however, I will freely admit I
> should have
> found the damn book before I posted.
You should have done a hell of a lot more than that, sister! You
needed to apologize for your false accusation.
> On another note: I hate
> Picasso's work.
I'm glad to hear that. Now I feel a lot better seeing your opinion of
my work. I'll consider the source.
> However, the image
> of some steel monstrosity fits in with the tone of your story.
Yeah. Sure. You bet, kid. Like I say, I'm really glad to know YOU see
it that way. I can rest assured on that score that someone who does
know enough about art and literature to recognize it when they see it,
well they would stand a good chance of holding an opinion quite in
contrast with yours.
I'll just let the following stand of its own accord.
> Pity you
> can't include all the cow sculptures dotting the Chicago landscape
> now, I
> think they're far prettier than the Picasso sculpture.
> Tracy Meisenbach
It shouldn't be hard to find someone a bit more qualified to offer a
critique than Cow Sculpture Girl here, so in that event, here's the
link to the story in question:
http://members.tripod.com/daddio45/swinger.htm
Do bear in mind that only the first third of the story is in its final
draft. Check out the new graphics.
APhi77ips
Hi, Jervis. I read your story with care, and have made a few
suggestions.
(...)
>It wasn't until the train had come into northernmost Illinois that the
>seat beside me came available, at which point, having motioned across
>the aisle to show her the vacancy, she
I can tell you meant that the narrator motioned, but for a moment,
it reads as though "she" had. I think you need to
clean it up and make the stimulus and response clear, for example: "I
motioned across the aisle to show her the vacancy..." Even that is too
vague. What motion? Did he pat the seat, or beckon with his hand?
turned her glance to the fellow
>seated next her, then back to me to say, "No, John, I'm just fine right
>here."
>
>And now, wouldn't anyone on earth wonder why I didn't immediately jump
>up, jerk the emergency cord and hijack the train, or at least again
>simply lean over to insist she come join me?
I'd make this clearer, more direct: "I was so humiliated that I had
the urge to jump up and jerk the emergency cord..."
Actually, I didn't wonder
>anything of the kind. No, I was yet too much of a sufferer for any of
>that sort of thing.
(...)
Snip good, clear dialogue. "Dig" and the Brownie suggest we're in the
Chicago of a few decades ago. Am I right?
>
>Soooo what. Not quite bop because it's way too cool, gone real close to
>frozen, like in the sound of a police siren's wail against the back beat
>of the big city. Drop dead. "Sooo what." Shattered dreams. Bug off.
>Sudden screams. "So what?" Ghost images stealing by in glass; two people
>walking together, alone; orphans of estranged desire, two escaped
>mamikins paired in mutually inflicted irony down there so small in the
>tall, blue-white cold of glass and steel. "Reeee-bop!" The lips stretch
>to thin membranes hissing the vibrant kiss of bluest breath to the
>coronet making it glaringly clear in brass: Soooooo what. So, Miles
>rarely smiles through his horn, as it pours forth moans of cold gold
>over the city, talking slow and smooth, in cool blue muted tones all
>about it.
Arrghh! Don't do that! Don't write paragraphs like the one above.
The whole scene, which was flowing along nicely through the dialoge,
shuddered to a halt while you, Jervis the beat poet,
intruded on the character's dialogue. Let them talk!
Resist the urge to write things like "not quite bop because it's way too
cool." Very, very few people appreciate that sort of thing. And the ones
who do are all dressed in black, playing bongo drums, and smoking
reefer-sticks.
The dialogue is good. It reads like play--I can imagine these lines being
spoken aloud. It has a dated feel to it, somehow. Something about the
city being a place of aspiration and culture. I don't see much of that
in contemporary writing. It's kind of refreshing. I think you should play
the drama between the two characters in the present, (dramatic present,
not present-tense) and cut the flashback of the train--I can't see what it
adds that couldn't be better done through present action. And *definately*
cut the beat-rhapsodising. It adds absolutely nothing to the story. I know it
will pain you to read this, but all your rhapsodising reads like pretentious
waffle. I'm being harsh, but ultimately kind, to say so.
Andy
TrinityApp
-- > Now, now, now! Let's have no more of that. Just please don't be taking
> your shame out on the name of the greatest artist of the 20th Century.
> It only makes your error all the worse.
He's not the greatest. He may have made more money while alive but he's not
the greatest.
It is not a "damn thing". It
> is a work of art worth millions that Picasso just opened his hand and
> gave gratis, freely to the people of Chicago, to a city in a nation he
> never once visited in his life
It's not only a damn thing, its a major ugly damn thing. Good thing it was
free I wouldn't have paid a dime to put the thing in my backyard, although I
suppose I could have hung the horse blankets from it.
. Shame on you. And do forego the stupid
> joke you're starting to think of about how maybe giving it away was the
> only way he was going to get rid of it. Let's not be so predictable as
> that; especially considering that they came to him to commission the
> work to start out with. When it turned out that the city of Chicago
> did not have the funds to pay the price that appraisers from the art
> world had placed on it, then Picasso decided to donate it por nada. So,
> have a little goddam respect for your betters.
>
You're grasping. Many artists of merit donate sculptures. Michelangelo's art
soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal. For a
true piece of work go view the Crazy Horse sculpture that is cut right out
of living rock and towers above the earth.
Picasso did sculpture in
> every medium known to the art of scupture and then some, including
> wood, clay and marble. You are simply trying to wiggle out of your
> error, and I think you ought not be allowed to do that. You're still
> trying to kid yourself into thinking that you weren't really flat
> wrong.
As I said, I should have gotten the book. I will note that I toured the
Picasso exhibit at the Dallas Museum of Art and most of his exhibited work
are pictures. He did have several clay "things" but not what I'd call
sculpture, they were along the lines of what a demented child with some
play-doh would create.
And why wouldn't a towering structure weighing over a hundred
> tons be left outside? I doubt you were thinking of theft, but of
> weather and rain. And why would rain bother marble?
Rain and weather can severely damaged marble, particularly rain with a high
percentage of pollutants in it. This, unfortunately, is what is damaging the
full size statues that Bernini made for Louis XVI and the Pope. I would
imagine that a city as polluted as Chicago would wreak havoc on a fine
marble carving. When Dallas erected their herd of longhorn cattle they did
so with the view of ease of casting and durability, hence a wonderful herd
of bronze longhorns coming over a rise into downtown Dallas.
Rain and weather
> would only be thought to bother metal. I think you _were_ thinking of
> metal. As it happens however, the steel in the Chicago Picasso, was a
> special alloy that would develop a nonrusting matte patina, for the
> last finishing touch to the work
Nope, I was thinking marble. To me metal work is welding not sculpture and
bronze work is casting. So sculpture, in my opinion, is marble or clay, not
metal. It's a good thing they took such care because the acids and
pollutants would make short work of it otherwise.
> Help! Great gods in heaven, there babycakes. Your kind of help I don't
> need. What? For you to come around here wrongly accusing a person who
> has his facts dead straight as if he were some know nothing poseur? Get
> out, eh?
Nope, you are getting upset and projecting other's attacks onto me. I was
trying to help, just as I did with the cows, however, this time I didn't
research it before typing. No big deal, I apologized.
Thought you really had me in
> the dunce's cap there didn't ya? You were out to get me 'cause you had
> some axe to grind, some hard-on against the story, or who knows what
You are projecting again. I grind no axes, nor to I possess a hard on. If
you will note the sculpture was the only thing I commented on and after
researching it I immediately retracted what I said. Don't get paranoid by an
innocent comment.
> What? Maybe you saw something of yourself in the mirror-face of Marcie
> that ballbusting little tyrant; yeah you saw something of Tracie in
> Marcie that was just too hard to look at? Face it, kid. Not all women
> are like, "goddesses" ya know.
Actually no. Marcie is much too plebian and useless for my taste. I like
people with a purpose beyond fucking over other people
Ever meet PButler? Ever get a load of
> yourself? You may thnk you're a regular of divinities you broads, yeah
> and that just may be the problem. That just may be the whole trouble.
> If that's what all this jive feminist dreck is doing to your heads,
> it's high time y'all got pulled back down to earth here with the rest
> of us poopers and pissers. Yeah, time you jive feminist bags were
> trotted off the the dunking stool. Yeah, set that sucker up in the
> Civic Center right next to the Chicago Picasso there, get dunkin'; I
> got dibs on the donut concession.
Did you get a testosterone rush or something? Come on Jervis, you're ranting
in a completely ridiculous manner. I have no truck whatsoever with a bunch
of hairy legged bull dyke feminists. I like men and I like watching men. I
don't, however, like watching men who think any time a woman expresses an
opinion they are waving the ERA banner. Lighten up.
> You should have done a hell of a lot more than that, sister! You
> needed to apologize for your false accusation.
>
>
I already did. I said I was sorry for the post. I'm not sorry for thinking
that is one ugly ass sculpture though.
> I'm glad to hear that. Now I feel a lot better seeing your opinion of
> my work. I'll consider the source.
>
How funny. I was complimenting your story and you get offended. How odd.
> Yeah. Sure. You bet, kid. Like I say, I'm really glad to know YOU see
> it that way. I can rest assured on that score that someone who does
> know enough about art and literature to recognize it when they see it,
> well they would stand a good chance of holding an opinion quite in
> contrast with yours.
Are you saying the steel sculpture doesn't fit the tone of your story? Then
why include it? I thought the hardness and coldness of the sculpture went
along with the theme and that its image was the inner feelings of the
characters. Are you trying to make the characters warm and fuzzy?
> It shouldn't be hard to find someone a bit more qualified to offer a
> critique than Cow Sculpture Girl here, so in that event, here's the
> link to the story in question:
Tsk Tsk Jervis. Calm a nerve you are being completely irrational, moreso
because you're fighting a battle against yourself and no one else.
Tracy Meisenbach
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Reinhold, ever the hypocrite, wrote:
>
> > Why don't you stick with your horsies, you embarrassingly ignorant
> > slut. Picasso's sculpture in Chicago is very well known, and photos of
> > it have appeared in practically every newspaper and magazine in the
> > world. (I've passed by it many times.)
> Truly, Reinhold, you do run on.
It's time to change your boooring stock phrases used in your replies to
everyone. If anything runs on, it's your diarrhetic foul mouth.
> I've never been to Chicago and Picasso isn't to my taste.
What an utterly *stupid* and typical Trashy Traci excuse! Most people
in the world haven't visited Chicago or care for Picasso, but many of
them *do* know his famous sculpture there.
Sooooo, based on your criterion, you have never heard of the Taj Mahal
(because you have never been to India) or of the Sphinx (because you
have never been to Egypt) or of Machu Picchu (because you have never
been to Peru)? What an *insane* excuse, but so typical of you ignorant
trailer-trash slut who tries to find excuses whenever I expose your
depressing ignorance.
> But then I doubt you know much about Georges De la Tour or
> Boucher.
This is rich. You ignorant cunt looked in your art book and picked out
two names to impress me (and every moron in this group). First, you
asshole, get the spelling right when you copy names: it's Georges de La
Tour (full name: Georges du Mesnil La Tour). Second, I happen to have
earned a minor in Art History and can tell you more about these two
French painters than you'll find in your art book. (For example,
Boucher's famous nude resting on her bed is a masterpiece of erotic
art.) So shut your fuckin' stupid snout, Trashy, and don't try your
usual tactics of bluffing with me.
> Just how much time do you have on your hands that you read every
> magazine and newspaper in the world.
What a fuckin' stupid cunt you are, Trashy, to expose your ignorance and
lack of logic with such an idiotic question (which should end with a
"?").
> Just how do you make a living?
> Let me guess, the government and my tax dollars
> support your lazy no working ass.
That's the *totally irrational* and *insane* Traci we all know by now.
No one in his/her right mind would drift from Picasso's scupture to such
an *absolutely irrelevant* and *stupid* line of argument. But that's so
typical and predictable of Trashy Meisenbach: whenever she's defeated
with facts, she switches to foul-mouthed personal attacks.
> As for ignorance, well you're the expert on that, tell us more.
"Tell us more" is another of your idiotic stock phrases used in replies
to the three or four people in this NG who bother with a sick fuck like
you. Trashy, you are the *epitome* of ignorance and have proved it in
every of your posts.
> > You know shit about art, English, writing, editing, foreign languages,
> > and virtually everything else you brag about, you psychotic bitch from
> > hell. Fact is, your knowledge is limited to horsies and how to be a
> > foul-mouthed, vulgar, ignorant trailer-trash slut.
> Foul mouthed? This from you? RFLMAO! Vulger? From the self proclaimed
> dictator of verbal aggression. What an ape you are. HINT: They are called
> horses by anyone with an education above third grade level.
That's sub-second-grade-level arguing by AW's resident infantile bitch
and not worth my bother. (Her grammatical errors ignored; she looks bad
enough without pointing them out.)
> For the record, your opinion of me matters not a whit to
> anyone but you.
... and to everyone else with brains in this group. I know what they
think of you, asshole, and it's not pretty.
> Your inability to form coherent sentences and your ranting and
> raving give truth to the fact that you are the consummate rug muncher
> and complete waste of flesh, and a lot of flesh it is.
The *totally irrational* and *insane* Trashy again switches to her
predictable _modus operandi_: whenever this ignorant slut is defeated
with facts, she reverts to foul-mouthed, *totally irrational* and
*insane* personal attacks.
My sentences are fine, asshole, and my *calm* discussion of your
ignorance and vulgarity is anything but "ranting and raving." Get a
dictionary and look up these words, moron.
Well, I'll leave this insane bitch Traci to others to play with. This
psychotic aging hag is so desperate for attention that she spends hours
upon hours bullying a 15-year-old female. That should tell you all you
need to know about this fading trailer-trash beauty queen.
Of course, you will soon see this hysterical and truly insane bitch
screech how she's "defeated" me and that she's "kicked my ass." Poor
fucked-in-the-head Meisenbrain! I'll let her hallucinate all she wants
to.
Adam Fulford
>I have no truck whatsoever with a bunch
>of hairy legged bull dyke feminists. I like men and I like watching men. I
>don't, however, like watching men who think any time a woman expresses an
>opinion they are waving the ERA banner. Lighten up.
>
Thank you both of you for a humorously rude and entertaining exchange.
The Appreciative Eavesdropper
Adam Fulford
my dinner guests, but well worth the effort.
TrinityApp wrote in message ...
>Reinhold, ever the hypocrite and demented ass, wrote:
>
>-- > It's time to change your boooring stock phrases used in your replies
to
>> everyone. If anything runs on, it's your diarrhetic foul mouth.
>
>This from the wattle-bearing ass who uses slut and insane in every posts.
>How droll.
>
>
>> What an utterly *stupid* and typical Trashy Traci excuse! Most people
>> in the world haven't visited Chicago or care for Picasso, but many of
>> them *do* know his famous sculpture there.
>>
>
>And the relevance of this to the fact you're a complete and total idiot? So
>what? Do you think anyone but you gives a flying rat's ass if I know about
>an ugly piece of art. So great informed one tell us all what very famous
and
>well known piece of art resides down the street from the police station in
>Dallas. Tell us what unique and much photoraphed artifact is currently
>residing in the Virginia Heritage Museum. If you've never been there it
>doesn't matter, it has been in the newspaper.
>
>> Sooooo, based on your criterion, you have never heard of the Taj Mahal
>> (because you have never been to India) or of the Sphinx (because you
>> have never been to Egypt) or of Machu Picchu (because you have never
>> been to Peru)? What an *insane* excuse, but so typical of you ignorant
>> trailer-trash slut who tries to find excuses whenever I expose your
>> depressing ignorance.
>
>RFLMAO. You are so limited. A dip in Lago Titicaca would cure your ills.
>Perhaps a jaunt to La Ferrassie where you could visit the pictures of your
>parents. Maybe you should plumb the depths of Reseau de Foillis, it's
almost
>as deep as your stupidity. As for being trailer trash. How funny. I'm not
>the one renting a falling down house and living off of Uncle Sam.
>
>> This is rich. You ignorant cunt looked in your art book and picked out
>> two names to impress me (and every moron in this group). First, you
>> asshole, get the spelling right when you copy names: it's Georges de La
>> Tour (full name: Georges du Mesnil La Tour). Second, I happen to have
>> earned a minor in Art History and can tell you more about these two
>> French painters than you'll find in your art book
>
>HAHAHAHA A minor in art. Typical, you've never been a major anything but a
>pain in the ass. So tell us more. Tell us all about Boucher and de La Tour.
>I'm waiting, as I sit looking at my original Boucher that hangs in my
>office, small but pretty.( Which has been in my family for the last 100
>years, but then your family had nothing to pass down but SS uniforms and a
>tendency to be fat.) Describe de La Tours methods and what the majority of
>his paintings are. What are the two key elements La Tour is noted for and
>what is the composition break down of over half his paintings? This should
>be good.
>
>. (For example,
>> Boucher's famous nude resting on her bed is a masterpiece of erotic
>> art.) So shut your fuckin' stupid snout, Trashy, and don't try your
>> usual tactics of bluffing with me.
>
>Which Boucher nude? There are several, most of aristocratic women and
>several of mistresses. It's not erotic, you idiot, it's a plump woman
>without clothes on a bed. Only a hard up hand jacker like you would get off
>looking at art, Mapplethorpe sending you into paroxysms of delight
>
>
>
>> What a fuckin' stupid cunt you are, Trashy, to expose your ignorance and
>> lack of logic with such an idiotic question (which should end with a
>> "?").
>
>This from the rugmucher. I notice you have to hide behind people like
Jervis
>and Glen and pray they back you up once you pick fights you can't handle.
>Typical of a whining Nazi tub of guts.
>
>> > Just how do you make a living?
>> > Let me guess, the government and my tax dollars
>> > support your lazy no working ass.
>>
>> That's the *totally irrational* and *insane* Traci we all know by now.
>> No one in his/her right mind would drift from Picasso's scupture to such
>> an *absolutely irrelevant* and *stupid* line of argument. But that's so
>> typical and predictable of Trashy Meisenbach: whenever she's defeated
>> with facts, she switches to foul-mouthed personal attacks.
>
>Answer the question. What do you do to earn money? As for launching a
>personal foul mouthed attack, well read your own paragraph. Every time you
>bitch about someone being foul mouth or vulgar you are revealing what a
>wimpy pathetic whiner you are. You're so two faced you could meet yourself
>walking down the street. If you can't handle what you dish out then stay
off
>of the play ground. Take your tear-smeared fat cheeks and sit on the
>sidelines with the rest of the whiners.
>
>> "Tell us more" is another of your idiotic stock phrases used in replies
>> to the three or four people in this NG who bother with a sick fuck like
>> you. Trashy, you are the *epitome* of ignorance and have proved it in
>> every of your posts.
>>
>
>Oh to be sure. This from the captain of repetitive phrasing and the king of
>seven words. You're such a joke and such a wimp. And now I have to wonder
>how much of my money is supporting your fat ass while you lope the mule and
>type tripe.
>
>> That's sub-second-grade-level arguing by AW's resident infantile bitch
>> and not worth my bother. (Her grammatical errors ignored; she looks bad
>> enough without pointing them out.)
>
>Typical wimpy Reinhold. Every time someone points out how hypocritical and
>whiney you are you say it's not worth your time to answer, but it seems to
>be worth your time to say it's not worth your time. If you could reply,
>which you can't, you could have done so in the time it took you to say it
>wasn't worth your time to answer. Of course, you're so dumb you can't even
>get your shit riddled grey matter around that concept.
>
>> ... and to everyone else with brains in this group. I know what they
>> think of you, asshole, and it's not pretty.
>
>They think I'm cute and have said so numerous times. There's an entire
>thread admiring me and calling you a complete asshole. Oh and lest we
>forget, there isn't a group of people ready to get together and make a net
>tribute to me, like you have about you. Does that clarify it, fiber teeth?
>
>> The *totally irrational* and *insane* Trashy again switches to her
>> predictable _modus operandi_: whenever this ignorant slut is defeated
>> with facts, she reverts to foul-mouthed, *totally irrational* and
>> *insane* personal attacks.
>
>Whining again because someone got too hot for the dictator of verbal
>aggression. You are such a milquetoast. I bet the guys on cellblock C had
>you bent over before you even hit the door to the mess hall. You yielded
>before they even dropped their drawers.
>
>> My sentences are fine, asshole, and my *calm* discussion of your
>> ignorance and vulgarity is anything but "ranting and raving." Get a
>> dictionary and look up these words, moron.
>
>Sure wimp. You're such the artist. That's why Metaxu and Bob and Asbestos
>regularly pointed out what a wheezing whining sack of shit you are.
>
>> Well, I'll leave this insane bitch Traci to others to play with. This
>> psychotic aging hag is so desperate for attention that she spends hours
>> upon hours bullying a 15-year-old female. That should tell you all you
>> need to know about this fading trailer-trash beauty queen.
>>
>
>Poor Reinhold. His sad existence makes him jealous of everyone else. I've
>never lived in a trailer, or a rented place for that matter. I make enough
>to OWN things. Like art and antiques: just bought a 16th century rectory
>table, solid mahogany, weighs ton and gorgeous to boot. Of course, you'll
>deny this and I'll whip up a photo on my web site to prove you wrong,
again.
>And then you'll try to save face like you did last time, which is
>impossible, because the only way to save your fat cheeked pop-eyed visage
>would be to bag it permanently.
>
>As for bullying Reinnette, well she seems to enjoy it. Let the little shit
>play.
>
>> Of course, you will soon see this hysterical and truly insane bitch
>> screech how she's "defeated" me and that she's "kicked my ass." Poor
>> fucked-in-the-head Meisenbrain! I'll let her hallucinate all she wants
>> to.
>
>Actually you're the only one, besides Reinnette, who screeches about
>anything. No one else cares who does what. Poor Reinhold, can't get any
>attention and cries when people talk dirty to him. Poor fat sad baby. No
>wonder you suck dick so well, you've had all those years of practice on
your
>thumb. (Which is about the same size as your dick)
>
>Tracy Meisenbach
>
>
>
dadd...@yahoo.com
"TrinityApp" <trini...@lynchburg.net> wrote:
> He's not the greatest. He may have made more money while alive but
> he's not the greatest.
My dear, it is as impossible for you to disprove it as for me to prove
it. But, what artist of this century would you place above the Great
Picasso? I confess that his works have always adorned my walls ever
since I had money enough to afford the prints. And who would you have?
Klee? Miro? Matisse? Fine, I will not argue your taste or mine. But
who would you have, Grant Wood ferthechrissake? Wyeth? Hopper?
While I have nothing against square art, I prefer the Cubist. There are
so many more sides to the question, to reality than immediately or
merely meets the eye. Indeed, when I had not the means to justify the
expenditure to my meager accounts, I nevertheless was driven beyond my
means and all consideration of thrift, to order from a campus bookstore
an expensive lithograph of a well known Blue Period masterwork, "The Old
Guitarist" which, as you see, I could not humanly resist the impulse to
have.
In matters so subjective, so objectively difficult to justify as taste,
nevertheless, greatness is to be measured, and in no more than this:
that without possesion of this Picasso, I would have shrivelled and
ceased to exist as a being whose life must become the complete
expression of that for which its own desire is reaching. Ah! but there
are many things for which we might in mere caprice, or wanton lust have
a petty infatuation; things which are nothing of greatness or true
beauty, things our better judgment, or at least a sense of shame rather
recognizes as purely expendable?
Consider two ideas; "fate", and "destiny". And now observe the
proposition that occurred to me the other night, that one should never
allow that one's fate should become ruinous against the promise of one's
destiny. One life is worked out entirely according to fate when such a
life's fate is to miss its destiny. When by all outward appearances I
was fated not to own that Picasso print, upon a glimpse of Destiny, I
hazarded fate to have it!
This Blue Period print was destined to be mine because I could not
against all odds of fate, justify to myself, my not having it. You see?
I could not excuse myself for not having it, and so long as I didn't
have it, I was in sin, a prisoner of fate. This cannot be the case with
the things of caprice which we must justify for ourselves the whim to
have them, and when we do, we merely receive our fate and not our
destiny.
Even more, by a greater necessity we know the great for the great: that
we should suffer for its sake. Say! I am yet thrilled, even now to
think that Pablo Picasso was yet alive at the time I brought from my own
poor pocket the money for his print, for you see? It went into his
pocket; as even, perhaps, he had a glass of absynthe or Pernod on me.
Yes! at a little table in Montmartre.
> It's not only a damn thing, its a major ugly damn thing. Good thing it
>was
> free I wouldn't have paid a dime to put the thing in my backyard,
>although I
> suppose I could have hung the horse blankets from it.
Mon dieu! Cette jeune fille est incurable!
> You're grasping. Many artists of merit donate sculptures.
> Michelangelo's art
> soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal.
Incurable!
>
> Nope, you are getting upset and projecting other's attacks onto me. I
> was
> trying to help, just as I did with the cows, however, this time I
> didn't
> research it before typing. No big deal, I apologized.
Blessed art thou amongst women. Go and sin no more.
> You are projecting again. I grind no axes, nor to I possess a hard on.
Madame! I'll let your husband be the judge of that.
> If
> you will note the sculpture was the only thing I commented on and
> after
> researching it I immediately retracted what I said. Don't get paranoid
> by an
> innocent comment.
Well....okay.
> Actually no. Marcie is much too plebian and useless for my taste. I
> like
> people with a purpose beyond fucking over other people.
Hmm. Had you read the latest revision?
http://members.tripod.com/daddio45/swinger.htm
I'm hoping that I've managed to provide her with a bit more dimension
than just her hard side such that despite her marvelous ability for, as
you say, "fucking over other people", I should like for her to be seen
as a person possessed of a sort of Parkeresque wit and taste, and even a
bit of good sense...until it comes to men, that is.
>You may thnk you're a regular bunch of divinities, you broads, yeah and
>that just may be the problem. That just may be the whole trouble.
> Did you get a testosterone rush or something? Come on Jervis, you're
> ranting
> in a completely ridiculous manner. I have no truck whatsoever with a
> bunch
> of hairy legged bull dyke feminists.
Hoo doggies! Yow. After a statement like that, Tracy, when all the world
has forsaken you; yet, you can count on me always to be your friend.
Look at me here...no, no! Up here on the cliff like "Wind In His Hair".
Yeah. See me waving my spear to you? To you, Tracy, who shall
henceforth be known as "Stands With a Fist", from up here I call to you:
"Look! I will always be your friend!"
> I like men and I like watching men.
I will always be your friend!
> I
> don't, however, like watching men who think any time a woman expresses
> an
> opinion they are waving the ERA banner. Lighten up.
I will always be your friend.
>
> > You should have done a hell of a lot more than that, sister! You
> > needed to apologize for your false accusation.
> >
> >
>
> I already did. I said I was sorry for the post.
I will always be your friend.
> How funny. I was complimenting your story and you get offended. How
> odd.
You were? Well, you coulda fooled me. I was certain you hated it.
> Tracy Meisenbach
>
>
--
--==--
Jervis http://members.tripod.com/daddio45/index-1.html
--==--
--
--==--
Jervis http://www.dejanews.com/~espresso
TrinityApp
dadd...@yahoo.com
aphi...@aol.com (APhi77ips) wrote:
> In article <82at12$ojb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dadd...@yahoo.com writes:
>
> Hi, Jervis. I read your story with care, and have made a few
> suggestions.
>
> (...)
>
the
> >seat beside me came available, at which point, having motioned across
> >the aisle to show her the vacancy, she
>
> it reads as though "she" had. I think you need to
> clean it up and make the stimulus and response clear, for example: "I
> motioned across the aisle to show her the vacancy..." Even that is
too
> vague. What motion? Did he pat the seat, or beckon with his hand?
Hmm. Doesn't it seem to you that the phrase, "having motioned across
the aisle TO SHOW HER the vacancy..." makes it quite clear who is doing
the motioning and to whom it is being directed? While I appreciate your
concern in this matter, and thank you for it, when it comes to altering
a final draft, it involves breaking a promise I made to myself, an act
for which I need reasons deadly enough to warrant it.
>
> turned her glance to the fellow
> >seated next her, then back to me to say, "No, John, I'm just fine
right
> >here."
>
> >
> >And now, wouldn't anyone on earth wonder why I didn't immediately
jump
> >up, jerk the emergency cord and hijack the train, or at least again
> >simply lean over to insist she come join me?
>
> I'd make this clearer, more direct: "I was so humiliated that I had
> the urge to jump up and jerk the emergency cord..."
But, you, the reader do understand that this _is_ an expression of his
humiliation. In this my purpose is accomplished which is to have a way
for my protagonist to describe his humiliation without forcing him to
confess it directly; just so long as YOU know, and you do, therefore my
end is accomplished. Besides, one humiliation of such a dire nature is
enough lest it should have to be compounded in outright confession to
the reader? It would be too much. I must not endanger whatever pittance
of respect the reader may have left for my protagonist, you see.
This brings to the fore something about the way I write, as I remain
unalterably influenced by the tradition of modernist literary fiction.
Symbolism, metaphor, allegory, parable, all these techniques are active
within my work as tools of expression, and once a writer has made use of
them, has discovered the power in them, he can never forsake them.
In other words, it is such great fun to appeal to the intellect of the
reader, even to his irrational sensibilities, his emotions, that he may
see something unspoken, something merely indicated, actually, by saying
something else. When it works, why it's a feeling like no other. It's
like the thrill Alexander Graham Bell must have experienced in hearing
for the first time, the voice of his partner over the medium of the
telephone wire. It came through! You, Andy knew it was his humiliation
of which he in narration spoke. I didn't have to tell you that in so
many words. Indeed, I say to you that the irrational expression in the
image of his leaping to his feet to pull "the emergency cord" speaks to
the depth of his humiliation more than the mere word "humiliation" could
ever do. More of this in response to another of your points below...
>
> Actually, I didn't wonder
> >anything of the kind. No, I was yet too much of a sufferer for any of
> >that sort of thing.
>
> (...)
>
> Snip good, clear dialogue. "Dig" and the Brownie suggest we're in the
> Chicago of a few decades ago. Am I right?
Quite.
>
> >
> >Soooo what. Not quite bop because it's way too cool, gone real close
to
> >frozen, like in the sound of a police siren's wail against the back
beat
> >of the big city. Drop dead. "Sooo what." Shattered dreams. Bug off.
> >Sudden screams. "So what?" Ghost images stealing by in glass; two
people
> >walking together, alone; orphans of estranged desire, two escaped
> >mamikins paired in mutually inflicted irony down there so small in
the
> >tall, blue-white cold of glass and steel. "Reeee-bop!" The lips
stretch
> >to thin membranes hissing the vibrant kiss of bluest breath to the
> >coronet making it glaringly clear in brass: Soooooo what. So, Miles
> >rarely smiles through his horn, as it pours forth moans of cold gold
> >over the city, talking slow and smooth, in cool blue muted tones all
> >about it.
>
> Arrghh! Don't do that! Don't write paragraphs like the one above.
> The whole scene, which was flowing along nicely through the dialoge,
> shuddered to a halt while you, Jervis the beat poet,
> intruded on the character's dialogue. Let them talk!
Now, on this, giving a fair hearing to your impressions, I tried reading
the scene without that paragraph, and do you know what I saw without it?
I saw just another short story being carried forward by force of mere
literalism. There is a purpose to this paragraph which was to
momentarily remove the POV from the characters to the City. Suddenly the
camera is rising on an elevated shot to make the reader fully aware of
where these characters are in context, of the city. Not that alone, but
something else enters here which is a score; a jazz score, a cool jazz
score. At this point, I want the reader to hear the music of Miles
Davis.
Now, you call this "beat poetry". I don't see it as such even though I
remain influenced by that tradition which remains to this day just as
viable as it ever was, as a genre of literay experiment. I cannot divest
myself of my influences. I write of an era in which those rhythms and
images were very much alive. Why should I even so much as dream of
leaving something so relevant to the time out of the picture? I really
don't understand you in this; not at all.
>
> Resist the urge to write things like "not quite bop because it's way
too
> cool." Very, very few people appreciate that sort of thing. And the
ones
> who do are all dressed in black, playing bongo drums, and smoking
> reefer-sticks.
Do you suppose I am writing with a mind toward pleasing some goddam
majority, some contemporary perception, my man? Will I deny one fad
merely to accept another? I am writing to satirize that perception, and
what is that perception? It is the view that there is something passe
about the hip, black, jazz-world manner of expression, the impression
that there is something more "up to date" and therefore more correct,
more relevant, more acceptable about submitting to some square standard
of diction. Hey, dig: millions of people _still_ express themselves
after this fashion. Did you see _Blair Witch_? If the rest of the
story is strong enough to carry itself to conclusion successfully, this
minor and momentary poetic indulgence, though it may be hated by the
many, may just as easily be preciously received by the poetic few (who
may in themselves be a multitude) as a true expression of _word jazz_
written in the tradition of that time and of the era immediately
preceding it.
No, I'm sorry that you can't groove into it, indeed I am cut to the
core over it; but I'll just have to get over it somehow, as I seek to
assure you that it's a big part of the whole zeitgeist from which this
story is drawn, and further it stands as a slap in the face to any that
may think that just because youth culture has changed in its habit of
speech, that this has anything to speak of relevance or authenticity, or
ultimate change. I say to you that any person of my age who goes
sucking up to the culture of his children to forsake his own, taking on
their manner of speech, ideals, dress, political persuasions, commits a
reprehensible abomination and a treason against his own culture. My
generation is still here in case you hadn't noticed. Not all of us have
permitted ourselves to be buried alive by you! Our culture is still
active; our ideals are still real - we are still the cool, crazy, real
gone cats and chicks we always were, still listening to Miles and miles
and miles of tape and vinyl of Bill Haley and the Comets, still cutting
a rug with our wives on a Saturday night, swinging a Lindy to the same
sides, and we haven't changed to suit you; we are still the hip hating
the square. Did you think that because your generation came along and
chose other means of expression (altogether as pretentious) that somehow
or other the absurd dictions and posings, the pretenses of your culture
have become dominant over the pretentions of ours? I got news for you
young man: I am here to see to it that does not happen. I am here to
reestablish the hip over the square. the Jitterbug and Lindy, the Stroll
and Cool Jerk, and the Mashed Potatos over the Hippety Hop, you dig? You
may consider that a declaration of Cultural War, young man.
>
> The dialogue is good. It reads like play--I can imagine these lines
being
> spoken aloud.
Thanks. Glad to hear it.
> It has a dated feel to it, somehow. Something about
> the
> city being a place of aspiration and culture. I don't see much of
>that
> in contemporary writing. It's kind of refreshing.
Hm. It's good that came through. Whereas, I'm not real sure of how,
since nothing is being said outwardly on that score. In the offending
paragraph above, the vision is all in terms of cold glass and steel,
urban alienation. So maybe there is something reflecting in the glass;
all the tall aspirations that soar above these two characters also
however, consequently produce in them an ennui which they truly suffer
down there in the urban Valley of Death, on the street of windows and
ghost images where they are self-contemplated in passing, as sheer
transluscent figures shown in dark contrast through the glass to the
stark, cold, lifeless, drop dead static, unmoving yet ever changing,
always modish manikins; two of which are, as it says, "escaped" through
the glass into the street for a short holiday in the real big city.
I think you should
play
> the drama between the two characters in the present, (dramatic
present,
> not present-tense) and cut the flashback of the train--I can't see
what it
> adds that couldn't be better done through present action. And
*definately*
> cut the beat-rhapsodising. It adds absolutely nothing to the story. I
know it
> will pain you to read this, but all your rhapsodising reads like
pretentious
> waffle. I'm being harsh, but ultimately kind, to say so.
Well, I thank you for your views, even if, at present I feel I cannot
use them. And yet again, I do thank you for your interest, even if I
could not at this time dream of parting with the train scene. But, if I
should find utterly no support for my position from anyone at all, I may
have to rethink it.
For those with an interest to line up on side or the other of this
matter, the text is under the link, "The Swinger", here...
http://daddio45.tripod.com/index-1.html
The final draft is complete up through the return to the hotel, i.e.
just after returning from the theatre.
>
> Andy
>
>
--
--==--
Jervis http://daddio45.tripod.com/index-1.html
TrinityApp
-- But, what artist of this century would you place above the Great
> Picasso? I confess that his works have always adorned my walls ever
> since I had money enough to afford the prints. And who would you have?
> Klee? Miro? Matisse? Fine, I will not argue your taste or mine. But
> who would you have, Grant Wood ferthechrissake? Wyeth? Hopper
Faberge. While he was not a painter, in his medium, he was the consummate
artist. I'm also rather partial to Lalique. I love the erotic forms and
ethereal images put out in his jewelry. But truly my heart belongs to Carl
and his winsome eggs with their finely crafted surprises.
> This Blue Period print was destined to be mine because I could not
> against all odds of fate, justify to myself, my not having it. You see?
> I could not excuse myself for not having it, and so long as I didn't
> have it, I was in sin, a prisoner of fate
I have an entire set of art books and of the Picassos I do like the blue
period the best.
However, I understand your lust. I myself fell prey to it and recently
bought several Versailles' items.
> Mon dieu! Cette jeune fille est incurable!
Tsk! Ne petez plus haut que votre cul!
> Incurable!
Oui.
> Blessed art thou amongst women. Go and sin no more.
Hey, the sinning is the fun part.
> Madame! I'll let your husband be the judge of that
Actually, I do the judging he is the model, and a damn fine one too.
> Hmm. Had you read the latest revision?
Not yet, I've been harassing this pop-eyed welfare leech.
> I will always be your friend.
How wonderful. I expect support the next time I wear a short skirt and some
hairy-legged Janet Reno-looking hound gets upset.
Tracy Meisenbach
.
.
APhi77ips
>>
>> I can tell you meant that the narrator motioned, but for a moment,
>> it reads as though "she" had. I think you need to
>> clean it up and make the stimulus and response clear, for example: "I
>> motioned across the aisle to show her the vacancy..." Even that is
>too
>> vague. What motion? Did he pat the seat, or beckon with his hand?
>
>Hmm. Doesn't it seem to you that the phrase, "having motioned across
>the aisle TO SHOW HER the vacancy..." makes it quite clear who is doing
>the motioning and to whom it is being directed?
Yes it does. It was my suggestion. Your sentence has an error of syntax.
While I appreciate your
>concern in this matter, and thank you for it, when it comes to altering
>a final draft, it involves breaking a promise I made to myself, an act
>for which I need reasons deadly enough to warrant it.
There are other errors you'll want to attend to. For instance, in the first
or second paragraph (I am paraphrasing from memory), you say some-
thing like, "It was supposed to be our honeymoon, sort of..." You should
cut either "supposed to be" or "sort of." One or the other will do. I go by
George Orwell: if a word can be cut, cut it.
The whole thing needs a good proofread.
>
>>
>> turned her glance to the fellow
>> >seated next her, then back to me to say, "No, John, I'm just fine
>right
>> >here."
>>
>> >
>> >And now, wouldn't anyone on earth wonder why I didn't immediately
>jump
>> >up, jerk the emergency cord and hijack the train, or at least again
>> >simply lean over to insist she come join me?
>>
>> I'd make this clearer, more direct: "I was so humiliated that I had
>> the urge to jump up and jerk the emergency cord..."
>
>But, you, the reader do understand that this _is_ an expression of his
>humiliation. In this my purpose is accomplished which is to have a way
>for my protagonist to describe his humiliation without forcing him to
>confess it directly; just so long as YOU know, and you do, therefore my
>end is accomplished.
But it took too many words for me to know. You, the writer should always
make the reader's task as easy as possible without compromising your
message. "Wouldn't anyone on earth wonder why I didn't..." is full of
negatives and unnecessary words. It's along the lines of "I'm not saying
I wasn't unhappy..." It it can be cleaned up and made more direct, clean
it up. The best prose is simple and direct. Let the story tell itself.
Besides, one humiliation of such a dire nature is
>enough lest it should have to be compounded in outright confession to
>the reader? It would be too much.
No! *Always* be clear about emotion.
I must not endanger whatever pittance
>of respect the reader may have left for my protagonist, you see.
>
He's a shmuck. Who's going to respect him? The reader doesn't
have to admire a character, but feel for him, care about his fate.
>This brings to the fore something about the way I write, as I remain
>unalterably influenced by the tradition of modernist literary fiction.
>Symbolism, metaphor, allegory, parable, all these techniques are active
>within my work as tools of expression, and once a writer has made use of
>them, has discovered the power in them, he can never forsake them.
I say everything in a story should be as literal as possible, like William
Carlos Williams' plums, "...so sweet and so cold." Concrete, literal
images. Focus on the literal and the metaphorical meaning will grow.
>
>In other words, it is such great fun to appeal to the intellect of the
>reader, even to his irrational sensibilities, his emotions, that he may
>see something unspoken, something merely indicated, actually, by saying
>something else. When it works, why it's a feeling like no other. It's
>like the thrill Alexander Graham Bell must have experienced in hearing
>for the first time, the voice of his partner over the medium of the
>telephone wire. It came through! You, Andy knew it was his humiliation
>of which he in narration spoke. I didn't have to tell you that in so
>many words.
But it would have helped. It would have demanded less of my precious
brain-tonic to understand your meaning.
Indeed, I say to you that the irrational expression in the
>image of his leaping to his feet to pull "the emergency cord" speaks to
>the depth of his humiliation more than the mere word "humiliation" could
>ever do.
Yes! He should have jumped up and tried to do it.
>>
>> Arrghh! Don't do that! Don't write paragraphs like the one above.
>> The whole scene, which was flowing along nicely through the dialoge,
>> shuddered to a halt while you, Jervis the beat poet,
>> intruded on the character's dialogue. Let them talk!
>
>Now, on this, giving a fair hearing to your impressions, I tried reading
>the scene without that paragraph, and do you know what I saw without it?
>I saw just another short story being carried forward by force of mere
>literalism.
That's all there is! See above. A story is like a shark. I moves forward
or it dies.
There is a purpose to this paragraph which was to
>momentarily remove the POV from the characters to the City. Suddenly the
>camera is rising on an elevated shot to make the reader fully aware of
>where these characters are in context, of the city. Not that alone, but
>something else enters here which is a score; a jazz score, a cool jazz
>score. At this point, I want the reader to hear the music of Miles
>Davis.
Then have him play. Mention Miles Davis. Write it as a screenplay and have
Miles play on the soundtrack.
>
>Now, you call this "beat poetry". I don't see it as such even though I
>remain influenced by that tradition which remains to this day just as
>viable as it ever was, as a genre of literay experiment. I cannot divest
>myself of my influences. I write of an era in which those rhythms and
>images were very much alive. Why should I even so much as dream of
>leaving something so relevant to the time out of the picture? I really
>don't understand you in this; not at all.
Trust me. It doesn't work. It stops the story, and a story is like a shark...
>
>
>>
>> Resist the urge to write things like "not quite bop because it's way
>too
>> cool." Very, very few people appreciate that sort of thing. And the
>ones
>> who do are all dressed in black, playing bongo drums, and smoking
>> reefer-sticks.
>
>Do you suppose I am writing with a mind toward pleasing some goddam
>majority, some contemporary perception, my man? Will I deny one fad
>merely to accept another? I am writing to satirize that perception, and
>what is that perception? It is the view that there is something passe
>about the hip, black, jazz-world manner of expression, the impression
>that there is something more "up to date" and therefore more correct,
>more relevant, more acceptable about submitting to some square standard
>of diction.
Have you read "Sonny's Blues," by James Baldwin?
Hey, dig: millions of people _still_ express themselves
>after this fashion. Did you see _Blair Witch_? If the rest of the
>story is strong enough to carry itself to conclusion successfully, this
>minor and momentary poetic indulgence, though it may be hated by the
>many, may just as easily be preciously received by the poetic few (who
>may in themselves be a multitude) as a true expression of _word jazz_
>written in the tradition of that time and of the era immediately
>preceding it.
I seriously doubt it. At any rate, the paragraph does not work in your
story. The shift from realism to reverie is too abrubt, and it comes just
as the scene is building, just when it starts to get interesting.
It's purple prose, Jervis. Every writer does it, and is embarrassed later
by it.
>
>No, I'm sorry that you can't groove into it,
I tried, but the needle stuck.
but I'll just have to get over it somehow, as I seek to
>assure you that it's a big part of the whole zeitgeist from which this
>story is drawn, and further it stands as a slap in the face to any that
>may think that just because youth culture has changed in its habit of
>speech, that this has anything to speak of relevance or authenticity, or
>ultimate change. I say to you that any person of my age who goes
>sucking up to the culture of his children to forsake his own, taking on
>their manner of speech, ideals, dress, political persuasions, commits a
>reprehensible abomination and a treason against his own culture.
If you say so.
My
>generation is still here in case you hadn't noticed. Not all of us have
>permitted ourselves to be buried alive by you! Our culture is still
>active; our ideals are still real - we are still the cool, crazy, real
>gone cats and chicks we always were, still listening to Miles and miles
>and miles of tape and vinyl of Bill Haley and the Comets, still cutting
>a rug with our wives on a Saturday night, swinging a Lindy to the same
>sides, and we haven't changed to suit you; we are still the hip hating
>the square. Did you think that because your generation came along and
>chose other means of expression (altogether as pretentious) that somehow
>or other the absurd dictions and posings, the pretenses of your culture
>have become dominant over the pretentions of ours?
I'm not talking about my generation; I'm talking about story-telling.
I got news for you
>young man: I am here to see to it that does not happen. I am here to
>reestablish the hip over the square. the Jitterbug and Lindy, the Stroll
>and Cool Jerk, and the Mashed Potatos over the Hippety Hop, you dig?
I um, grock your vibe, man. I have no wish to be a herbert.
You
>may consider that a declaration of Cultural War, young man.
Then let a hundred flowers blossom. You go first.
>
>
>>
>> The dialogue is good. It reads like play--I can imagine these lines
>being
>> spoken aloud.
>
>Thanks. Glad to hear it.
>
>
>> It has a dated feel to it, somehow. Something about
>> the
>> city being a place of aspiration and culture. I don't see much of
>>that
>> in contemporary writing. It's kind of refreshing.
>
>Hm. It's good that came through. Whereas, I'm not real sure of how,
>since nothing is being said outwardly on that score.
The POV character goes off about art and the el and the city excitement.
In the offending
>paragraph above, the vision is all in terms of cold glass and steel,
>urban alienation. So maybe there is something reflecting in the glass;
>all the tall aspirations that soar above these two characters also
>however, consequently produce in them an ennui which they truly suffer
>down there in the urban Valley of Death, on the street of windows and
>ghost images
Now don't start that again!
Andy
Jabelson1
>> I could be wrong, since I don't have my art book handy,
>> but... Picasso was a painter, not a sculptor
he created sculpture, paintings, drawings, etchings and I hear he made a great
peanut butter and banana sandwich...
Joyseymour
>he created sculpture, paintings, drawings, etchings and I hear he made a
>great
>peanut butter and banana sandwich...
>
>
I thought that was Elvis?
joy
Bah, humbug.
Jabelson1
>>peanut butter and banana sandwich...
>>
>>
>
>I thought that was Elvis?
him too!
RCHERIN
he created sculpture, paintings, drawings, etchings and I hear he made a great
<
Not banana, he made peanut butter and poon sandwiches. How else could he make
it into his 90s w/o being bored to death?
daddio
aphi...@aol.com (APhi77ips) wrote:
> >>
> >> Arrghh! Don't do that! Don't write paragraphs like the one
> above.
> It's purple prose, Jervis. Every writer does it, and is
> embarrassed later
> by it.
Okay. You're right. Damn I hate to have to agree. But shitfeathers,
Andy, my man, before you put in your two cents, I was perfectly
satisfied with it. Afterward I could only see it through your eyes. I
hope you're satisfied, I hope you're just real pleased with yourself.
Here's what it looks like now, pared down to the bare essentials, or so
it seems to me....
---------
"Now you tell me! Jesus, Marcie, this is Chicago, the big town. Can't
you dig being in it?"
"Oh, 'dig' fig! What's the big deal? Big town, big deal. So what."
So, we walked on, through the rushing, rumbling canyon of Randolf
Street, passing beneath the electric arbors of neon, the mega-bulbed
RKO and Pantages movie arcades. As sheer ghost images we went stealing
by the still waters of department store windows below the tall
blue-white cold of glass and steel; two orphans of estranged desire
together yet alone and lost among the steeps and the fastnesses in the
man-made mountains of the big city.
"So what, Marcie? Just 'so what'?"
"So what if I said 'so what'?"
------
Now, if I may thank you, I'd be much obliged. But, more cutting of that
paragraph than this, I simply cannot afford. I can't afford it, I tell
you! And as to the scene in the Burlington Zepher? What on earth can
you possibly have against that? I'll thank you to explain yourself,
sir. Hmm..well let me just ask you this: Are you judging it from the
standpoint of having seen the original draft in which the train scene
was not included?
Jervis http://daddio45.tripod.com/index-1.html
Alan Hope
Joyseymour <joyse...@aol.comspamfree> wrote in article
<19991207101433...@ng-ft1.aol.com>...
> jeff etched:
> >he created sculpture, paintings, drawings, etchings and I hear
he made a
> >great
> >peanut butter and banana sandwich...
> I thought that was Elvis?
Elvis was never a sculptor, and he was a lousy painter. Drips all
over the baseboards.
AH
daddio
<trini...@lynchburg.net> wrote:
> How wonderful. I expect support the next time I wear a short skirt
> and some
> hairy-legged Janet Reno-looking hound gets upset.
> Tracy Meisenbach
> ..
Heh-heh. Listen Sister. Were you and I not both very happily married,
I'd tell you about the kind of "support" I'd give you the next time you
wore that short skirt.
--
Jervis
Paul Martin
It looks to me like he has failed to strike anything, let alone a nerve. Once
again he relies on tired cliches and gormless insults. Do us all a favor,
Reinhy- go study how to think for a while before you come in here blathering the
same old shit, okay? I mean, if you're going to attack an idea, that's fine- but
to attack the woman expressing the idea by calling her a trailer-park slut is
just embarrassing to watch. This is just like Dan Ackroyd and Jane Curtin on
"Weekend Update" in the late '70s. Ad hominem attacks only show that the
attacker is completely clueless regarding the matter actually being discussed.
Go get a life, will ya?
Paul
--
If you can't say anything good about someone, sit right here by me. [Alice
Roosevelt Longworth]
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Ad hominem attacks only show that the attacker is completely
> clueless regarding the matter actually being discussed.
Paul, you clueless asshole, you addressed your drool to me by mistake.
You should have sent it to that vulgar, foulmouthed trailer-trash slut
Traci Meisenbrain.
Fartin' Martin, just why are you such an incredible asshole?
Paul Martin
"Reinhold "El Chupacabra" Aman" <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
> Paul "The Asshole" Martin wrote:
>
> > Ad hominem attacks only show that the attacker is completely
> > clueless regarding the matter actually being discussed.
>
> Paul, you clueless asshole, you addressed your drool to me by mistake.
> You should have sent it to that vulgar, foulmouthed trailer-trash slut
> Traci Meisenbrain.
>
> Fartin' Martin, just why are you such an incredible asshole?
I could ask you the same question, but the answer is self-evident in
your case. Take yourself back to your Third-World country, Goatsucker.
Paul
TrinityApp
> Paul, you clueless asshole, you addressed your drool to me by mistake.
> You should have sent it to that vulgar, foulmouthed trailer-trash slut
> Traci Meisenbrain.
Hey dingleberry. Once you get off the high produced by the free diet cokes
you get from food club, you'll realize that for the self describe dictator
of vulgar language to call me foul mouthed is a compliment. It means I'm
much too tough for your whiny welfare living ass. I've already pointed out I
have never lived in a trailer ( aspartame, found in diet drinks, is a major
cause of memory loss) and the picture of my house on my website is anything
but trashy. As for spelling my name like Reinnette does, well not a big
surprise. You've always taken other people's methods because you're too
limited to come up with your own insults. What a joke. When you cash that
next check Reinhold be thinking of us.
Tracy Meisenbach, never having been on the dole.
nickle
>cause of memory loss)
Oh, I hope you're joking here:-| If not it explains a lot.
--
Horroresq-Online Horror Fiction
http://members.dencity.com/horroresq
TrinityApp
-- > >( aspartame, found in diet drinks, is a major
> >cause of memory loss)
>
> Oh, I hope you're joking here:-| If not it explains a lot.
Actually I'm not. Do a web search on aspartame and there are a number of
articles and studies that say it's related to memory loss. It's also bad for
children during developmental years, which is why my daughter is not allowed
anything with nutra sweet in it.
Tracy Meisenbach
PButler111
>you get from food club
Free Diet Cokes? Wow! If I had back all the money I've spent on Diet Coke in
the last two years alone I'd be able to afford a big house by the lake by now.
Free Diet Cokes! Just the thought of it!
TrinityApp
-- > Free Diet Cokes? Wow! If I had back all the money I've spent on Diet
Coke in
> the last two years alone I'd be able to afford a big house by the lake by
now.
> Free Diet Cokes! Just the thought of it!
>
Therein lies the road to hell Patricia. The stuff is poison! I figure if
you're going to die from drinking carbonated drinks at least enjoy the full
sugar content. The fake stuff will rot your brain.
http://www.eagleswings.com.au/aspartame.htm
Run, save yourselves!
Tracy Meisenbach
PButler111
>Coke in
>> the last two years alone I'd be able to afford a big house by the lake by
>now.
>> Free Diet Cokes! Just the thought of it!
>>
>
>Therein lies the road to hell Patricia. The stuff is poison! I figure if
>you're going to die from drinking carbonated drinks at least enjoy the full
>sugar content. The fake stuff will rot your brain.
But I don't like the sugary stuff! I like Diet Coke. I suck it down like soda
pop (gee!). And Mensa still claims me as one of their own, so I guess my
brain hasn't rotted too much. But how are your teeth? The real stuff will rot
those quickly enough.
Keith Snyder
PButler111 wrote:
>
> And Mensa still claims me as one of their own, so I guess my
> brain hasn't rotted too much.
Mensa doesn't do re-tests, as far as I know, so you really don't know
what kind of damage you may (or may not) continue to do to yourself.
Aspartame seems to be dangerous stuff, but it takes a long time to build
up to where you'd notice symptoms. After a scary diagnosis two months
ago that might or might not be partially attributable to aspartame use,
I no longer use it at all. I'd sooner drink sugarwater and then brush
than put any more of that chemical into my head.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
RCHERIN
I found this.
NEWS ITEM
In order to get Ronald Reagan into MENSA, the intellectual society was forced
to lower the entry standards. Beginning in 1983 MENSA will consider anyone
registering a score of 85 on an I.Q. test. ...Reagan said it wasn't in the
stars, so he declined membership.
TrinityApp
> But I don't like the sugary stuff! I like Diet Coke. I suck it down like
soda
> pop (gee!). And Mensa still claims me as one of their own, so I guess my
> brain hasn't rotted too much. But how are your teeth? The real stuff
will rot
> those quickly enough.
>
EWWWW diet coke is like 2% milk, just nasty. Come-on surely you don't think
the Mensa people have any credibility, after all I've been a member since
1982, not that I ever attend meetings or get togethers. I brush three times
a day like a good girl and have great teeth. However, I will point out that
the diet stuff will strip the enamel just as bad as the real stuff.
--
Tracy Meisenbach
Joyseymour
by the header.
Keith said:
>Aspartame seems to be dangerous stuff, but it takes a long time to build
>up to where you'd notice symptoms. After a scary diagnosis two months
>ago that might or might not be partially attributable to aspartame use,
>I no longer use it at all. I'd sooner drink sugarwater and then brush
>than put any more of that chemical into my head.
>
>
>Keith
>
>--
Seizures, right? Double vision, perhaps? I won't let that stuff in my house,
much less eat it. My brother in law (who happens to be an MD) offered sugar
free jello to my kids once and I pitched a fit. (I never said I was subtle.)
He had no clue. I've been following the bad news about this stuff since it
came out. It causes brain lesions in baby mice.
MSG is horrible as well, and I won't let my kids eat that either. I have
asthma attacks if I eat it by accident. Anyone who has migranes would do well
to eliminate MSG from their diets.
joy
Bah, humbug.
Keith Snyder
Joyseymour wrote:
> I'd sooner drink sugarwater and then brush
> >than put any more of that chemical into my head.
> >
> >
> >Keith
> >
> >--
>
> Seizures, right? Double vision, perhaps?
Multiple sclerosis.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
RDeschene
wrote:
>Gee, I missed this thread, you'd never know there was anything sensible in here
>by the header.
>
>Keith said:
>
>>Aspartame seems to be dangerous stuff, but it takes a long time to build
>>up to where you'd notice symptoms. After a scary diagnosis two months
>>ago that might or might not be partially attributable to aspartame use,
>>I no longer use it at all. I'd sooner drink sugarwater and then brush
>>than put any more of that chemical into my head.
>>
>>
>>Keith
>>
>>--
>
>Seizures, right? Double vision, perhaps? I won't let that stuff in my house,
>much less eat it. My brother in law (who happens to be an MD) offered sugar
>free jello to my kids once and I pitched a fit. (I never said I was subtle.)
>He had no clue. I've been following the bad news about this stuff since it
>came out. It causes brain lesions in baby mice.
>MSG is horrible as well, and I won't let my kids eat that either. I have
>asthma attacks if I eat it by accident. Anyone who has migranes would do well
>to eliminate MSG from their diets.
>
Whole lotta urban legends associated with aspartame:
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartam.htm
Sue
TrinityApp
-- > Gee, I missed this thread, you'd never know there was anything sensible
in here
> by the header.
>
True. I must remember to change it.
Did you get the URL on aspartame? I'd be happy to repost it.
Tracy Meisenbach
.
Keith Snyder
RDeschene wrote:
> Whole lotta urban legends associated with aspartame:
As well as a whole lotta people whose symptoms disappeared when they
discontinued its use.
Why wait for substantial double-blind testing? It's easier just to give
the stuff up now. Anecdotal evidence isn't the same thing as nonsense.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
Ejucaided Redneck
>
>Anyone who has migranes would do wellto eliminate MSG from their
>diets.
I got someone to whom I'll pass that along. Seems like she's tried
everything to no avail, but I've never heard her mention getting rid of
MSG. She's a serious cook too.
--
Looking for something to read?
Try http://www.netbasix.com/~rlsloan/
(Now includes all the "Notes From the Top of the Hill,"
plus some funny stuff.)
PLEASE SIGN THE GUEST BOOK
RDeschene
wrote:
>
>
>RDeschene wrote:
>
>> Whole lotta urban legends associated with aspartame:
>
>As well as a whole lotta people whose symptoms disappeared when they
>discontinued its use.
>
>Why wait for substantial double-blind testing? It's easier just to give
>the stuff up now. Anecdotal evidence isn't the same thing as nonsense.
>
I would tend to agree with that, if one has suspicious symptoms and
wants to try getting rid of various substances in his/her diet just to
see if that works. If it does, great.
Part of the problem, as I see it, is based on what I read in a
diabetics' newsgroup during the short period of time we followed that
newsgroup (we were trying to find out information on a different
sweetener). Many of the posters were very upset that unsubstantiated
rumors were causing hysteria over a substance that was potentially a
life-saver for them . . . or, at the very least, something that
enhanced their quality of life. They had enough to worry about, they
said, without needlessly (in their opinion) worrying about aspartame
causing every ailment known to humankind. Which, if you look at some
of the stuff that's been circulated about aspartame, it *has* been
associated with just about everything known to humankind. It's at
least good to separate the urban legends from some of the more
legitimate concerns.
Sue
Keith Snyder
RDeschene wrote:
> Many of the posters were very upset that unsubstantiated
> rumors were causing hysteria over a substance that was potentially a
> life-saver for them . . . or, at the very least, something that
> enhanced their quality of life. They had enough to worry about, they
> said, without needlessly (in their opinion) worrying about aspartame
> causing every ailment known to humankind. Which, if you look at some
> of the stuff that's been circulated about aspartame, it *has* been
> associated with just about everything known to humankind. It's at
> least good to separate the urban legends from some of the more
> legitimate concerns.
I agree. I also agree that there is no clear substantiation for
aspartame as a toxin.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
PButler111
>the Mensa people have any credibility, after all I've been a member since
>1982
Well, I don't now.
PButler111
>what kind of damage you may (or may not) continue to do to yourself.
>
Actually, hon, I took the SATs again a couple of years ago, just for fun. My
intellect hasn't deteriorated a bit, thank you very much.
PButler111
>>MSG is horrible as well, and I won't let my kids eat that either. I have
>well
>>to eliminate MSG from their diets.
>>
>
>
>Sue
>
No kidding. I say don't feed it to baby mice, and shut the fuck up about what
I drink.
Keith Snyder
PButler111 wrote:
> Actually, hon, I took the SATs again a couple of years ago, just for fun. My
> intellect hasn't deteriorated a bit, thank you very much.
I don't doubt it. Still, hon, I suspect I'd score the same now on the
Mensa exam as I did before. The point isn't necessarily damage to the
intellect -- it's physical damage to the brain, which can manifest in
any of a number of ways. Some of them are cognitive but not
intellectual, so they may not be reflected in IQ or SAT test scores.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
TrinityApp
-- > >Come-on surely you don't think
> >the Mensa people have any credibility, after all I've been a member since
> >1982
>
> Well, I don't now
I felt the same way about diet coke. I used to think diet drinks helped, but
I've never actually seen or met a skinny person who drinks diet drinks. So
diet drinks lost their creditability, just like mensa has.
Tracy Meisenbach
PButler111
>Mensa exam as I did before. The point isn't necessarily damage to the
>intellect -- it's physical damage to the brain, which can manifest in
>any of a number of ways. Some of them are cognitive but not
>intellectual, so they may not be reflected in IQ or SAT test scores.
>
>
>Keith
Keith, are you this big a drag in real life, or is it only online that you
become humorless and dull? The person who brought up Diet Coke did so
lightheartedly. I replied to her in the same manner, she back to me, I to her.
You, then, have to wade in with dire medical warnings and corrections of
things that were only meant to be humorous in the first place. My brain is
fine, Keith. Yours, however, seems to be missing the entire hemisphere in
charge of lightening the fuck up already. Guess you stopped that aspartame
consumption just a wee bit too late.
Joyseymour
>No kidding. I say don't feed it to baby mice, and shut the fuck up about
>what
>I drink.
I never even remotely suggested that you not be allowed to drink whatever you
want. I will not drink the stuff, nor will I allow my kids to drink it, but I
would never try to stop anyone else from drinking it. Or eating it, or
whatever.
Does that mean I'm not allowed to discuss it?
joy
Bah, humbug.
Thinggfish
>intellect hasn't deteriorated a bit, thank you very much.
>
Indeed. The fat one is every bit as smart now as she was in eleventh grade
Keith Snyder
PButler111 wrote:
> Keith, are you this big a drag in real life, or is it only online that you
> become humorless and dull?
I'm a drag everywhere.
Keith
--
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
TrinityApp
--> I never even remotely suggested that you not be allowed to drink
whatever you
> want. I will not drink the stuff, nor will I allow my kids to drink it,
but I
> would never try to stop anyone else from drinking it. Or eating it, or
> whatever.
>
> Does that mean I'm not allowed to discuss it?
>
Not unless you ask your husband's *permission*. <SEG>
Tracy Meisenbach
Anopheles
Ejucaided Redneck
> Joyseymour wrote:
> >
> >Anyone who has migranes would do wellto eliminate MSG from their
> >diets.
>
> I got someone to whom I'll pass that along. Seems like she's tried
> everything to no avail, but I've never heard her mention getting rid of
> MSG. She's a serious cook too.
Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food stuffs
these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
Anopheles
Anopheles
RDeschene wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:14:31 +0000, Keith Snyder <guk...@pan.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >RDeschene wrote:
> >
> >
> >discontinued its use.
> >
> >Why wait for substantial double-blind testing? It's easier just to give
> >the stuff up now. Anecdotal evidence isn't the same thing as nonsense.
> >
> I would tend to agree with that, if one has suspicious symptoms and
> wants to try getting rid of various substances in his/her diet just to
> see if that works. If it does, great.
>
> Part of the problem, as I see it, is based on what I read in a
> diabetics' newsgroup during the short period of time we followed that
> newsgroup (we were trying to find out information on a different
> rumors were causing hysteria over a substance that was potentially a
> life-saver for them . . . or, at the very least, something that
> enhanced their quality of life. They had enough to worry about, they
> said, without needlessly (in their opinion) worrying about aspartame
> causing every ailment known to humankind. Which, if you look at some
> of the stuff that's been circulated about aspartame, it *has* been
> associated with just about everything known to humankind. It's at
> least good to separate the urban legends from some of the more
> legitimate concerns.
As a diabetic, I agree. I find it difficult to break that "sugar" taste
habit but sugar is off-limits.
This is a little like the fads that sweep the diet scene. Curently, it's all
low fat food, carbohydrate rich and less protein but now experts are turning
that theory on its head.
In Melbourne, we have one of the purest water sources in the world, kept
that way by keeping the watershed area pristine. Yet, people by bottled
water by the mega tonne, fooled by all the ads that they should not drink
the water. The ridiculous point is that the tap water is often better
quality than the water they buy at about 1000 times the cost.
The trouble with many scientific reports is that the results come from much
heavier dosage than one would ever take in normal usage. Often the results
are a farce. That is not to say one should not be wary of artificial food
additives though, just a more considered attitude towards then.
Resume regular programs now.
Anopheles
Rev. Karin Conover-Lewis
sold under the "Accent!" brand name, but also sold in bulk as plain-old MSG.
Great stuff. Derived from vegetable proteins, as I understand it. I
recommend the FDA's website on the subject:
http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/msg.txt
--
Rev. Karin Conover-Lewis
(revk...@flash.net) DSL didn't work out!
ICQ# 7725589
http://members.xoom.com/revkarin/
Remove spamkiller on email replies
Anopheles wrote in message <38522f92@tyson>...
PButler111
>
>> Keith, are you this big a drag in real life, or is it only online that you
>> become humorless and dull?
>
>I'm a drag everywhere.
>
>
>Keith
Well okay then. As long as you're consistent.
Joyseymour
>these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
>
>
>Anopheles
>
Actually sir, MSG is in a lot of stuff in this country, from Tomato soup to
roasted peanuts. If it is banned in Australia, I salute the intelligence of
your government. MSG actually used to be very common in baby food here, until
fairly recently. Baby food was seasoned for the taste of the mother, not the
taste of the child. Thankfully, not anymore.
While we're on the subject of food additives, nitrates; as in hot dogs, ham,
sausages and so on; cause leukemia in children.
joy
(forever reading labels)
Bah, humbug.
PButler111
>sausages and so on; cause leukemia in children.
>
As does pretty much everything else.
Glen Wall
Anopheles <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message news:38522f92@tyson...
> Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food stuffs
> these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> Anopheles
Thus the sagacious Annie takes time out from plagiarising the works of
others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that confronts
mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
Glen.
Anopheles
Joyseymour wrote:
> >Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food
stuffs
> >these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> >
> >
> >Anopheles
> >
>
to
> roasted peanuts. If it is banned in Australia, I salute the intelligence
of
> your government. MSG actually used to be very common in baby food here,
until
> fairly recently. Baby food was seasoned for the taste of the mother, not
the
> taste of the child. Thankfully, not anymore.
ham,
> sausages and so on; cause leukemia in children.
Well, can't say for sure but I do believe it is banned here. I will check it
out. I can recall a big brouhaha some years back and thought it hit the dust
back then,
Anopheles
Anopheles
Joyseymour wrote:
.
> >Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food
stuffs
> >these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> >
> >
> >Anopheles
> >
>
> Actually sir, MSG is in a lot of stuff in this country, from Tomato soup
to
> roasted peanuts. If it is banned in Australia, I salute the intelligence
of
> your government. MSG actually used to be very common in baby food here,
until
> fairly recently. Baby food was seasoned for the taste of the mother, not
the
> taste of the child. Thankfully, not anymore.
> While we're on the subject of food additives, nitrates; as in hot dogs,
ham,
> sausages and so on; cause leukemia in children.
Well, just ran a check and found I was wrong. First site I found seemed like
the mouth of the manufacturer and it was crowing how safe and useful MSG
was.
Anopheles
Anopheles
stuffs
> > these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> > Anopheles
>
> others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that confronts
> mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
>
> I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
I sometimes enjoy flaming, if it is clever and intelligent. You offer
neither. I have better things to do that carry this on. My daughter has just
announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to continue
this nonsense.
It is at an end.
Anopheles
Amos Keppler
>
> >Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food stuffs
> >these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> >
> >
> >Anopheles
> >
>
> roasted peanuts. If it is banned in Australia, I salute the intelligence of
> your government. MSG actually used to be very common in baby food here, until
> fairly recently. Baby food was seasoned for the taste of the mother, not the
> taste of the child. Thankfully, not anymore.
> While we're on the subject of food additives, nitrates; as in hot dogs, ham,
> sausages and so on; cause leukemia in children.
Not only in children. Adult may be less aflicted, if they start using
it later in life, bu tit is cancer inducing, period!
Amos
--
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Feel the heat of Firewind - stories by Amos Keppler - Storyteller
http://w1.2561.telia.com/~u256100087/firewind.html
«We are here to laugh at the odds and live our lives so well
that Death will tremble to take us»!
Charles Bukowski
Amos Keppler
>
> Gee, I missed this thread, you'd never know there was anything sensible in here
> by the header.
>
> Keith said:
>
> >Aspartame seems to be dangerous stuff, but it takes a long time to build
> >up to where you'd notice symptoms. After a scary diagnosis two months
> >ago that might or might not be partially attributable to aspartame use,
> >I no longer use it at all. I'd sooner drink sugarwater and then brush
> >than put any more of that chemical into my head.
> >
> >
> >Keith
> >
> >--
>
> Seizures, right? Double vision, perhaps? I won't let that stuff in my house,
> much less eat it. My brother in law (who happens to be an MD) offered sugar
> free jello to my kids once and I pitched a fit. (I never said I was subtle.)
> He had no clue. I've been following the bad news about this stuff since it
> came out. It causes brain lesions in baby mice.
> MSG is horrible as well, and I won't let my kids eat that either. I have
> to eliminate MSG from their diets.
>
>
> Bah, humbug.
Anyone who would want to avoid malignant cellular growth, genetic
damage and so on. The list is endless. Among the lot of chemical
cocktails in our society, this shit stands out!
Amos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Feel the heat of Firewind. Poems, images, art and stories
Prince Richard Kaminski
Anopheles wrote:
> Glen Wall wrote:
> >
> > Anopheles <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message news:38522f92@tyson...
> >
> > > Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food
> stuffs
> > > these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> > > Anopheles
> >
> > Thus the sagacious Annie takes time out from plagiarising the works of
> > others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that confronts
> > mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
> >
> > I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
>
> I sometimes enjoy flaming, if it is clever and intelligent. You offer
> neither. I have better things to do that carry this on. My daughter has just
> announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to continue
> this nonsense.
Congratulations, Nophy! I wish you all the happiness in the world ... until you
find out that your future son-in-law posts to Usenet under the name of ...
I didn't want to break it to you, but you were bound to find out sooner or
later.
Glen Wall
Anopheles <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message news:385268fc@tyson...
>
> Glen Wall wrote:
> >
> > Anopheles <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message news:38522f92@tyson...
> >
> > > Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food
> stuffs
> > > these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> > > Anopheles
> >
> > Thus the sagacious Annie takes time out from plagiarising the works of
> > others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that
confronts
> > mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
> >
> > I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
>
> I sometimes enjoy flaming, if it is clever and intelligent. You offer
> neither. I have better things to do that carry this on. My daughter has
just
> announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to continue
> this nonsense.
>
>
> Anopheles
Congratulations!
http://www.netins.net/showcase/alsmusic/jokes/.index.html
Glen.
Ejucaided Redneck
>I have better things to do that carry this on. My daughter has just
> announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to
> continue this nonsense.
> It is at an end.
My son got married a bit more than three years ago, and I dreaded the
whole experience.
Turned out to be one of the better parties I've ever been to.\
Hope yours goes as well.
Congratulations.
Is it the custom down there --as it is here-- for the bride's family to
pick up the bulk of the expense of these things? If so, some sympathy
comes with the congratulations.
--
Looking for something to read?
Try http://www.netbasix.com/~rlsloan/
(Now includes all the "Notes From the Top of the Hill,"
plus some funny stuff.)
PLEASE SIGN THE GUEST BOOK
Anopheles
Prince Richard Kaminski
>
>
> Anopheles wrote:
>
> > Glen Wall wrote:
> > >
> > > Anopheles <hi...@jeack.com.au> wrote in message news:38522f92@tyson...
> > >
> > > > Apart from Chinese cooks adding it, I'm not sure MSG gets into food
> > stuffs
> > > > these days. Is it not banned as an additive?
> > > > Anopheles
> > >
> > > Thus the sagacious Annie takes time out from plagiarising the works of
> > > others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that
confronts
> > > mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
> > >
> > > I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
> >
> > I sometimes enjoy flaming, if it is clever and intelligent. You offer
just
> > announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to
continue
> > this nonsense.
>
until you
> find out that your future son-in-law posts to Usenet under the name of ...
>
> I didn't want to break it to you, but you were bound to find out sooner or
> later.
Thanks Dick, the wedding is now off.
Anopheles
Anopheles
Ejucaided Redneck wrote:
> Anopheles wrote:
>
> >I have better things to do that carry this on. My daughter has just
> > announced she is getting married and I am too happy about that to
> > continue this nonsense.
>
> My son got married a bit more than three years ago, and I dreaded the
> whole experience.
>
> Turned out to be one of the better parties I've ever been to.\
>
> Hope yours goes as well.
>
> Congratulations.
Thank you.
>
> Is it the custom down there --as it is here-- for the bride's family to
> pick up the bulk of the expense of these things? If so, some sympathy
> comes with the congratulations.
Same custom, although in this case, there is a book behind it if I ever
dared write it.
Anopheles
PButler111
>others to ponder one of the most urgent and vital questions that confronts
>mankind in the last year of the twentieth century.
>
>I think I prefer reading the stuff he steals from Internet joke pages!
>
>
I've noticed that "plagiarist" seems to be the "fag" of alt.writing. On the
Doors newsgroup, and other groups and chat romos peopled by similar
intellectually and emotionally stunted individuals, when they can't think of
anything else to nasty to say about some total stranger posting to the same
group, they throw out "fag," or some variation thereon (because we all know
that being accused of being gay is simply a fate worse than death). The IQs
might be slightly higher on alt.writing, but the methods are about the same.
Can't think of anything really nasty to say about one of the total strangers
inhabiting the group with you? Well, then -- call them a plagiarist! What the
fuck? It's not like you're going to be called on to prove your claims. And
it's not like there are real people with feelings and careers attached to those
silly screen names. Just fly by in the Enola Gay and drop those baseless
accusations -- that's your job. Let someeone else worry about the fallout.
Grow the fuck up already, people. Ask yourself this: could I prove my claims
of plagiarism in a court of law? If the answer is "no," then just keep them to
yourself. Who do you think you're impressing? Or convincing?
Edwin J. Noonan
> PButler111 wrote:
> >
> > And Mensa still claims me as one of their own, so I guess my
> > brain hasn't rotted too much.
Dem Mensa folk, dey can't be too bright. Dey claim De Pat as one of dey own?
Whew!
EJN
B. Callaghan
Edwin J. Noonan <ejnoon...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<82tnrq$f4q$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Mensa want to claim me too! Dey say I prize for go to see Holiday Condo
Package. I tell dem "Hey! Go get cheap camra for prize, not me." Dat work.
Everyone know I no prize.
- bettina
Ejucaided Redneck
>
> > PButler111 wrote:
> > >
> > > And Mensa still claims me as one of their own, so I guess my
> > > brain hasn't rotted too much.
>
> Dem Mensa folk, dey can't be too bright. Dey claim De Pat as one of dey own?
Anyone interested in checking out how entirely meaningless a claim of
Mensa membership is might consider reading "The Smartest Man in America"
in November's "Esquire." He's a biker and a bar bouncer.
One of the reasons I never bothered to get my name on Mensa's rolls is
it's full of people who think IQ signifies something.
Rhiannon
news:S9y24.763$Ye.5...@monger.newsread.com...
> You're grasping. Many artists of merit donate sculptures. Michelangelo's
> art soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal.
Whoa...<no pun intended>...I usually agree with you on most points but I
take exception to this one. I have never been fond of Picassos work, or
abstract art in general, although it should be noted that he did not
restrict himself to the abstract
alone, and in fact, did a series of still life and live model sketches that
are wonderful, but simply because abstract is not to my tastes, does not
make it bad art. I am going to assume your statement "Picassos reminds
everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal" was tongue-in-cheek, and not
seriously disapproving, but if you did intend deliberate maliciousness, then
your comment is unreasonable. His work may remind YOU why pot smoking
shouldn't be legal but thousands of people, even non-pot smokers, would
disagree, and you can't speak for all of them.
> As I said, I should have gotten the book. I will note that I toured the
> Picasso exhibit at the Dallas Museum of Art and most of his exhibited work
> are pictures. He did have several clay "things" but not what I'd call
> sculpture, they were along the lines of what a demented child with some
> play-doh would create.
Tsk...tsk...there you go again with that judgmental wagging finger..."clay
things...they were along the lines of what a demented child with some
play-doh would create"...you just managed to insult Picasso, his followers,
and demented children all in one line, shame on you.
> Rain and weather can severely damaged marble, particularly rain with a
high percentage of pollutants in it. This,
> unfortunately, is what is damaging the full size statues that Bernini made
for Louis XVI and the Pope.
This is an interesting observation. Especially if you stop to consider that
marble is a stone, extracted in sheets off of mountain faces by marble
mining crews. I would imagine those mountains are rained and weathered on a
lot. Perhaps it is the polishing process that weakens the stone, making it
vulnerable to outside forces. I suspect raising this issue has less to do
with art, and more to do searching for excuses instead of simply admitting,
in this case, you were wrong. How hard can it be?
I respect your right to dislike Picasso but the other side of that coin is
the reasonable expectation of respect for those who do like him.
Rhiannon
Anopheles
Marble is quarried not mined. It is cut from the rock to expose a surface
that has never previously been exposed then worked and polished. In previous
ages, it could tolerate weathering but, in this century, industry has added
sulphurs to the air which, with the addition of moisture, turns to acid.
This causes rapid deterioration of the polished surface. Hence, works in
marble that may have weathered well for two thousand years, are seriously
damaged in decades of this century's air.
Anopheles
TrinityApp
-- I have never been fond of Picassos work, or
> abstract art in general, although it should be noted that he did not
> restrict himself to the abstract
> alone, and in fact, did a series of still life and live model sketches
that
> are wonderful, but simply because abstract is not to my tastes, does not
> make it bad art.
The discussion was abstract. However I should have noted that in my reply.
. I am going to assume your statement "Picassos reminds
> everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal" was tongue-in-cheek, and not
> seriously disapproving, but if you did intend deliberate maliciousness,
then
> your comment is unreasonable.
Not a bit. There is no maliciousness in expressing an opinion.
His work may remind YOU why pot smoking
> shouldn't be legal but thousands of people, even non-pot smokers, would
> disagree, and you can't speak for all of them.
I only ever speak for myself. If I spoke for others rap music and caviar
would not exist.
> Tsk...tsk...there you go again with that judgmental wagging finger..."clay
> things...they were along the lines of what a demented child with some
> play-doh would create"...you just managed to insult Picasso, his
followers,
> and demented children all in one line, shame on you.
Hmm I was going for descriptive. I thought it pegged it quite nicely.
> This is an interesting observation. Especially if you stop to consider
that
> marble is a stone, extracted in sheets off of mountain faces by marble
> mining crews. I would imagine those mountains are rained and weathered on
a
> lot. Perhaps it is the polishing process that weakens the stone, making
it
> vulnerable to outside forces
The polishing and sculpting process produces minute fissures in the rock.
Worked marble is significantly more porous than native marble. Add in the
pollution that surrounds most worked marble, since you're not going to take
the trouble to carve a piece and leave it on the mountain, and you can have
severe deterioration. Even Mt. Rushmore, which is granite and far from
pollution has to undergo routine restoration to protect the images, since
the worked stone is extremely porous.
. I suspect raising this issue has less to do
> with art, and more to do searching for excuses instead of simply
admitting,
> in this case, you were wrong. How hard can it be?
>
Nope. I was thinking a big marble statue and off the big marble statue on
the side of the mountain in Tucson that was gradually pitted and eaten by
the acidic atmosphere.
> I respect your right to dislike Picasso but the other side of that coin is
> the reasonable expectation of respect for those who do like him.
True. But I can also express my opinion on him and be reasonably assured its
not against the law. Nor do I require anyone else to accept my opinion nor
react to it.
Tracy Meisenbach
Ejucaided Redneck
> This causes rapid deterioration of the polished surface. Hence, works in
> marble that may have weathered well for two thousand years, are seriously
> damaged in decades of this century's air.
Boy that makes me wanna go right out and take a deep breath.
Didn't know this.
Thanks.
Adonis2000
Glen Wall wrote in message <3852f...@news2.cluster1.telinco.net>...
>> > > You're grasping. Many artists of merit donate sculptures.
>Michelangelo's
>> > > art soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be
>> legal.
>> >
>> > Whoa...<no pun intended>...I usually agree with you on most points but
I
or
>> > abstract art in general, although it should be noted that he did not
>> > restrict himself to the abstract
>> > alone, and in fact, did a series of still life and live model sketches
>> that
>> > are wonderful, but simply because abstract is not to my tastes, does
not
>> > everyone why pot smoking shouldn't be legal" was tongue-in-cheek, and
>not
>> > seriously disapproving, but if you did intend deliberate maliciousness,
>> then
>> > shouldn't be legal but thousands of people, even non-pot smokers, would
>> > disagree, and you can't speak for all of them.
I haven't been following this thread too closely, and I don't know who wrote
this line: "You're grasping. Many artists of merit donate sculptures.
Michelangelo's art soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking
shouldn't be legal."
Great line! The straight-laced poster who responded was mildly offended
because they failed to understand that the original writer was making a
joke--and a damn good one too.
My congratulations to whomever it was who wrote it. I admire good humor.
--Geno<who reads all of Picasso's stuff as soon as it comes off the
press>Royer
PRONO
> high percentage of pollutants in it. This,
> > unfortunately, is what is damaging the full size statues that Bernini made
> for Louis XVI and the Pope.
>
> marble is a stone, extracted in sheets off of mountain faces by marble
> mining crews. I would imagine those mountains are rained and weathered on a
> lot. Perhaps it is the polishing process that weakens the stone, making it
Oh fer god sakes.
How much does a piece of marble in the middle of a mountain get rained
on in comparison to a piece of marble standing outdoors. It's the fact
that the marble gets rained on that damages it. Try this: Next time it
rains sit indoors for five minutes. Then go outdoors for five minutes.
Which one made you wetter? See? Science has an answer for everything.
Except that God stuff.
Brick Rage
Excuse me, but how did the goddess of the wind and all you others
manage to keep cross posting on misc.screenwriting? It's that fucking
Jervis right?
Brick
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Brick Rage
wrote:
Ahem, I mentioned it before and I'll scream it this time STOP THIS
CROSS POSTING TO M.W.S.
I don't care about marble statuary, and I imagine most of the other
screenwriters in this newsgroup don't either.
Okay?
Rhiannon
> Marble is quarried not mined. It is cut from the rock to expose a surface
> that has never previously been exposed then worked and polished. In
previous
> ages, it could tolerate weathering but, in this century, industry has
added
> sulphurs to the air which, with the addition of moisture, turns to acid.
> This causes rapid deterioration of the polished surface. Hence, works in
> marble that may have weathered well for two thousand years, are seriously
> damaged in decades of this century's air.
>
> Anopheles
Semantics. But you do appear to be correct sir, in that you are closer to
the literal translation than I was. I'm going to have a heart to heart with
those Thesaurus people.
Mine (HOLE) <noun> a deep artificial hole in the ground made for the
removal of coal and other substances by digging.
Mining -The industry or activity of removing coal and other substances from
the earth.
Thesaurus - dig, excavate, exhume, extract, quarry, tunnel
Quarry (PLACE) <noun> a large artificial hole in the ground where stone,
sand, etc. is dug out of the ground for use as
building material.
Thesaurus - dig, excavate, exhume, extract, mine, tunnel
Rhiannon
Glen Wall
Rhiannon <rhia...@idirect.com> wrote in message
news:lNB44.104382$PF1.4...@quark.idirect.com...
Rhiannon - thick, stupid, moronic, dim, cretinous, ignorant, foolish,
paranoid.
Glen.
Rhiannon
news:3852f...@news2.cluster1.telinco.net...
> Rhiannon - thick, stupid, moronic, dim, cretinous, ignorant, foolish,
> paranoid.
>
> Glen
Oh my...you are a clever boy. How many brain cells did you kill coming up
with this witty retort? Or did you, once again, consult your big book of
insults for losers with the personality of dryer lint? Poor Glen. I might
be all of those things, but worse, despite it, you are so goddamn obsessed
and fixated on me you never pass up an opportunity to get my attention. I
am flattered. Thank you...:)
Rhiannon
Rhiannon
news:3852f...@news2.cluster1.telinco.net...
> Thus Rhiannon shows her ignorance and makes a complete fool of herself for
> the second time in as many days. Serves her right for daring to contradict
> the sublimely gorgeous Tracy.
Thesaurus - Mine - dig, excavate, exhume, extract, quarry, tunnel
Thesaurus - Quarry - dig, excavate, exhume, extract, mine, tunnel
Read it slowly Glen or I will be forced to draw pictures.
Rhiannon
Rhiannon
news:82ut5q$ise$1...@nntp5.atl.mindspring.net...
> I haven't been following this thread too closely,
That much is obvious.
> and I don't know who wrote this line: "You're grasping. Many artists of
merit donate sculptures.
> Michelangelo's art soars, Picasso's reminds everyone why pot smoking
shouldn't be legal."
Trinity did. Perhaps you should pay attention and then comment.
> Great line! The straight-laced poster who responded was mildly offended
Read it again. It began with...Whoa...<no pun intended>...I usually agree
with you on most points but I
take exception to this one. I have never been fond of Picassos work, or
abstract art in general...
I DON'T like Picasso...how could I be mildly offended by her comments on
Picasso?
THEN...
> because they failed to understand that the original writer was making a
joke--and a damn good one too.
I suppose if you knew the people involved better, the history, and what this
post was about you would have a better grasp of what I was saying. Anyone
who comes into a discussion mid-way, admits to not following the thread or
knowing who said what, then proceeds to comment anyway is not at the top of
my list of credible.
Rhiannon
Rhiannon
news:19991211092951...@ng-bd1.aol.com...
> Grow the fuck up already, people. Ask yourself this: could I prove my
claims
> of plagiarism in a court of law? If the answer is "no," then just keep
them to
> yourself. Who do you think you're impressing? Or convincing?
>
> http://www.AngelsDance-AngelsDie.com
In Glen's case? Himself only.
Rhiannon
Rhiannon
news:38528299...@yall.com...
> Anyone interested in checking out how entirely meaningless a claim of
> Mensa membership is might consider reading "The Smartest Man in America"
> in November's "Esquire." He's a biker and a bar bouncer.
Read the article and saw him interviewed in a documentary. Wonderful man!
And the way he breaks with convention is the most beautiful thing to happen
in a long time. Amazing.
Rhiannon
Glen Wall
Er, that's credibility Rhiannon, not "credible" - since you've taken it upon
yourself to correct the grammar of other posters I'm sure you'll welcome the
same attention.
As for the rest - how much of the thread does the guy have to read to know a
"straight-laced" prize asshole when he sees one? Well spotted Sir!
Glen.
>
Rhiannon
news:38528F...@subgenius.com...
> Which one made you wetter?
Excuse me? That's a personal question.
Rhiannon
<Rain...marble...mountain...was suppose to be funny...so sorry it zoomed
over your head>
Glen Wall
I'm reading at top speed Popeye - here's some bright crayons and a drawing
pad. Now I want you to draw a house with a cat in the garden and let nurse
have the computer back. No arguments now!
Glen.
Rhiannon
> Er, that's credibility Rhiannon, not "credible" - since you've taken it
upon
> yourself to correct the grammar of other posters I'm sure you'll welcome
the
> same attention.
>
> As for the rest - how much of the thread does the guy have to read to know
a
> "straight-laced" prize asshole when he sees one? Well spotted Sir!
>
> Glen.
Wrong but thank you for illustrating my other point for me so
effectively...:)
Rhiannon
Glen Wall
If a joke needs explaining......................................
Glen.
Rhiannon
> >
> > Thesaurus - Quarry - dig, excavate, exhume, extract, mine, tunnel
> >
> > Read it slowly Glen or I will be forced to draw pictures.
> >
> > Rhiannon
>
> I'm reading at top speed Popeye - here's some bright crayons and a drawing
> pad. Now I want you to draw a house with a cat in the garden and let nurse
> have the computer back. No arguments now!
>
> Glen.
Much as I appreciate you sharing your crayons, what's your point?