whimper for allen ginsberg
galathaea
i have seen the worst minds of my generation
decrepid, decaying
laying in the nuclear afterglow of four thousand years of oppresion
laughing to themselves
joined in communion with the freakminded corpses
swimming in the industrial waste of a world gone slightly sane
while the buddhamachinery short-circuits
in ways we did not intend
sat on the edge of conformity and cut myself
bled on the papaver soul of the immortal burroughs
and smothered the screams of the innocent
licked the vaginal offerings of the cocksucker godladies
hating the broken and limp motherfuckers
with their speed and their catnip-padded joints
and their blank sheets of paper sold as acid
puked a resin of syrian rue down my chest
and rolled in the trails of saliva
which my love angry-hearted tried to clean
twisted the huxleyblake mind of infinity
arguing paradigms with kuhn
as illuminati stalkers chanted crowley in the restrooms
killed the ethical ego squirting junk
up the nose of the hourglass vistas
where prostitutes kneeled shivering
with 45s to their heads
and their hands to their crotches
and pondered the sweet paranoid
as his stomach trembled in time
to the childhood memories of oceanlost traumas
which came prematurely in latex
tried not to listen when the vagrant and lost
whimpered entreats for the trumpeter
to play the music i have hidden
in the heating ducts of my stale apartment
shaken hands with the golden apple factories
of mutant biochemistries
splicing the cheap adrenochrome memories of my ancestors
to the higher transfinite ordinals of love
mocking rimbaud and gide
choken on combustion faulty reaction chambers
where there is no reaction
no matter how hard she shakes him
losing myself once again
i have listened to the wind blowing over the desert floor
day after day
to see if an answer would come
and nothing came
there once was a dark rain
forests of deep glowing amber
rivers awash in the bloodsemen fantasies of lepers
contemplating the end of the world
einstein was a rock star
running through the thousand year redwoods
to the synthesised euphoria of charge black holes
there are pages of the necronomicon which have not been found
chaldean songs remembered by children
playing with the insect people of dawn
but never voiced
do we scream with the schizos in their bellevue haze
howling for the dead god to rise and stop
for just one moment
this slaughtering reality?
or do we whimper with the white trash
single mother trailer park hussies
lose ourselves in routine?
forget the dreams?
and cry?
the curanderos await
cougar-eyes in the trees
my ancestors iboga
hide from me
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Immortalist
Still "Howl-ing"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wXswwStIQEI
http://www.rooknet.com/beatpage/writers/ginsberg.html
http://www.kerouac.com/
http://www.connectotel.com/beat/index.html
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NgGFYBOiR9A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=T6LZLZ4Rryw
Will Dockery
> On May 17, 10:02 pm, galathaea <galath...@veawb.coop> wrote:
>
> Still "Howl-ing"http://youtube.com/watch?v=wXswwStIQEIhttp://www.rooknet.com/beatpage/writers/ginsberg.htmlhttp://www.kerouac.com/http://www.connectotel.com/beat/index.html
>
Wow, some of the best poetry around these newgroups in quite a
while... makes me think of the great American poets Anne Waldmann and
Patti Smith.
Ginsberg would no doubt dig this greatly.
--
"The Shadowville All-Stars provide the musical canvas for the word
paintings of Will Dockery, the Poet Laureate of Shadowville. The group
represents a vision for a multi-faceted arts ensemble..."
-Dennis Beck
"The Ride (Combat Zone)" by Dockery-Mallard-Beck:
http://www.myspace.com/shadowvilleallstars
"Wobble" by Dockery-Conley:
http://www.myspace.com/willdockery
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
says...
really? how so? what is it about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig," huh,
dockery?
see, you post these vapid comments that don't really mean anything. you know,
people would take you seriously if you actually had the ability to explain
yourself, even a little bit.
but you post these meaningless comments because of your sad and desperate desire
to look knowledgeable, and all you end up doing is looking pathetic and
ignorant.
so, do tell us what it is about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig?" why don't
you actually make an effort for once.
most sincerely,
GodBuilt
--
-----------------------------------------------
"I like to drink, I like to drive, I like to think all of the Jews got out of
the Holocaust alive, my name is Mel, and can't you tell, I like Tequila!"
Denis Leary
the messenjah
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <1179582452.739847.178...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Will Dockery
> says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 18, 12:57 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On May 17, 10:02 pm, galathaea <galath...@veawb.coop> wrote:
>
> >>Still
>
> >>http://youtube.com/watch?v=NgGFYBOiR9Ahttp://youtube.com/watch?v=T6LZ...> i
>
> - Show quoted text -
You'll never change, j r... You're still an asshole... No shortage of
those in San Fransicko...
ggamble
<theguyo...@email.com> wrote:
>asshole... No shortage of
>those
Keep it in your blaargh, cowardpussy.
No one cares about your personal life.
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
"Will Dockery" <will.d...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1179582452.7...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Ginsberg would no doubt dig this greatly.
>
"Dig?"
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
"the messenjah" <theguyo...@email.com> wrote in message
news:1179593212.7...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> You'll never change
Will Dockery
"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote:
>Will Dockery says...
> >>galathaea wrote:
>
> >>Still
> >>"Howl-ing"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NgGFYBOiR9A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=T6LZLZ4Rryw
----
from http://wasweissich.twoday.net/stories/1739869/
Fast Speaking Woman
I'm an automobile woman
I'm a mobile woman
I'm an elastic woman
I'm a necklace woman
I'm a silk scarf woman
I'm a know nothing woman
I'm a know it all woman
I'm a day woman
I'm a doll woman
I'm a sun woman
I'm a late afternoon woman
I'm a clock woman
I'm a wind woman
I'm a white woman
I'M A SILVER LIGHT WOMAN
I'M AN AMBER LIGHT WOMAN
I'M AN EMERALD LIGHT WOMAN
I'm an abalone woman
I'm the abandoned woman
I'm the woman abashed, the gibberish woman
The aborigine woman, the woman absconding
The Nubian woman
The andeluvian woman
The absent woman
The transparent woman
The absinthe woman
The woman absorbed, the woman under tyranny
The contemporary woman, the shocking woman
The artist dreaming inside her house
I'm the gadget woman
I'm the druid woman
I'm the Ibo woman
I'm the Yoruba woman
I'm the vibrato woman
I'm the rippling woman
I'm the gutted woman
I'm the woman with wounds
I'm the woman with shins
I'm the bruised woman
I'm the croding woman
I'm the suspended woman
I'm the woman alluring
I'm the architect woman
I'm the trout woman
I'm the tungsten woman
I'm the woman with the keys
I'm the woman with the glue
I'm a fast speaking woman
water that cleans
flowers that clean
water that cleans as I go
I'm a twilight woman
I'm a trumpet woman
I'm the raffia woman
I'm a volatile woman
I'm the prodding woman
I'm the vagabond woman
I'm the defiant woman
I'm the demented woman
I'm the demi-monde woman
I'm the woman deracinated, the woman destroyed
The detonating woman, the demon woman
I'm the lady of the acacias
I'm the lady with the rugs
I'm the accomplished woman
I'm the woman who drives
I'm the alabaster woman
I'm the egregious woman
I'm the embryo woman
I'm the girl under an old-fashioned duress
I'm a thought woman
I'm a creator woman
I'm a waiting woman
I'm a ready woman
I'm an atmosphere woman
I'm the morning star woman
I'm the heaven woman
that's how it looks when you go to heaven
they say it's like softness there
they say it's like day
they say it's like dew
I'm a lush woman
I'm a solo woman
I'm a sapphire woman
I'm a stay at home woman
I'm a butterfly woman
I'm a traveling woman
I'm a hitchhike woman
I'm a hitching post woman
I'm a sun woman
I'm the coyote woman
I won't be home
I'll be back
I'm a justice woman
it's not sadness
no, it's not a lie
I'm the souther cross woman
I'm a moon woman
I'm a day woman
I'm a doll woman
I'm a dew woman
I'm a lone star woman
I'm a loose ends woman
I'm a pale coast woman
I'm a mainstay woman
I'm a rock woman
I'm a horse woman
I'm a monkey woman
I'm a chipmunk woman
I'm a mountain woman
I'm a blue mountain woman
I'm a marsh woman
I'm a jungle woman
I'm a tundra woman
I'm the lady in the lake
I'm the lady in the sand
water that cleans
flowers that clean
water that cleans as I go
I'm a bird woman
I'm a book woman
I'm a devilish clown woman
I'm a holy clown woman
I'm a whirling dervish woman
I'm a whirling foam woman
I'm a playful light woman
I'm a tidal pool woman
I'm a fast speaking woman
I'm a witch woman
I'm a beggar woman
I'm a shade woman
I'm a shadow woman
I'm a leaf woman
I'm a leaping woman
I'M A GREEN PLANT WOMAN
I'M A GREEN ROCK WOMAN
I'm a rest stop woman
I'm a city woman
I long for the country
I get on the airplanes and fly away
I know how to work the machines!
I'm a sighing woman
I'm a singing woman
I'm a sleeping woman
I'm a muscle woman
I'm a music woman
I'm a mystic woman
I'm a cactus woman
it's not strange
no, it's not a lie
I'm the diaphanous woman
I'm the diamond light woman
I'm the adamant woman
I'm the headstrong woman
I'm the tunnel woman
I'm the terrible woman
I'm the tree woman
I'm the trembling woman
I'm the treacherous woman
I'm the touchy woman
flowers that clean
water that cleans
flowers that clean as I go
I'm an impatient woman
I've got the right of way
I'm the baby woman, I'll cry
I'm the wireless woman
I'm the nervous woman
I'm the wired woman
I'm the imperious woman
I'm the purple sky woman
I'M THE PURPLE LIGHT WOMAN
I'M THE SPECKLED LIGHT WOMAN
I'M THE SUGAR LIGHT WOMAN
I'm the breathless woman
I'm the hurried woman
I'm the girl with the unquenchable thirst
flowers that clean
water that cleans
flowers that clean as I go
hey you there
hey you there, boss
I'm talking
I'm a jive ass woman
I'm the callous woman
I'm the callow woman
I'm the clustered woman
I'm the dulcimer woman
I'm the dainty woman
-Anne Walman
----
and
> >Patti Smith.
> >Ginsberg would no doubt dig this greatly.
>
> really? how so? what is it about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig,"
huh,
> dockery?
>
> see, you post these vapid comments that don't really mean anything. you
know,
> people would take you seriously if you actually had the ability to explain
> yourself, even a little bit.
>
> but you post these meaningless comments because of your sad and desperate
desire
> to look knowledgeable, and all you end up doing is looking pathetic and
> ignorant.
>
> so, do tell us what it is about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig?" why
don't
> you actually make an effort for once.
So, you've spent several paragraphs giving your opinion of "Will Dockery",
and absolutely nothing about the poem, vapid or otherwise.
This really /is/ all you're capable of, sniffing behind my posts with your
repetitive whine, isn't it?
Now reply with the same old idiodic jeer... you know you can't help
yourself.
--
"Mirror Twins" by W. Dockery-B. Fowler:
http://www.myspace.com/shadowvilleallstars
"Hasty Pudding" by W. Dockery-H. Conley:
http://www.myspace.com/willdockery
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
"Will Dockery" <will.d...@knology.net> wrote in message
news:e27f5$4650936e$18d62320$18...@KNOLOGY.NET...
>
= snip =
wow. way to fill cyberspace with crap.
Sammybaby
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <1179582452.739847.178...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Will Dockery
> says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 18, 12:57 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On May 17, 10:02 pm, galathaea <galath...@veawb.coop> wrote:
>
> >>Still
>
> >>http://youtube.com/watch?v=NgGFYBOiR9Ahttp://youtube.com/watch?v=T6LZ...> i
>
> - Visa citerad text -
Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
i am amused by your complete lack of knowledge on anything. you make this
insipid comment on the piece, with no idea what you're talking about. "Ginsberg
would really dig this.." blah-blah-blah, trying to look like you might actually
know what Ginsberg would think. i like to point out what an ignorant monkey-
cracker you are. you can't blame me for that.
>This really /is/ all you're capable of, sniffing behind my posts with your
>repetitive whine, isn't it?
because it's funny to you see how you completely evade ANY question that
requires some critical analysis. you say something (usually stupid) and when
anyone asks what you mean by that statement, you become laughably defensive and
attempt (badly) to change the subject, so that you don't have to answer a
question you are incapable of answering. it's fun to make you look this stupid,
and you can't blame me for that.
>Now reply with the same old idiodic jeer... you know you can't help
>yourself.
not at all. tell me, in your own words why Ginsberg would dig the piece in
question. cutting and paste the comments from others means nothing.
but you are the king of meaningless posts.
but why not actually answer a question with intelligence for once. you can't, of
course, but it should be fun to watch you try.
Will Dockery
> On 19 Maj, 18:32, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
> >Will Dockery says...
> > >> On May 17, 10:02 pm, galathaea wrote:
>
> > >>Still
> > >>"Howl-ing"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wXswwStIQEIhttp://www.rooknet.com/beatpage...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NgGFYBOiR9Ahttp://youtube.com/watch?v=T6LZ...
> i
> > >Wow, some of the best poetry around these newgroups in quite a
> > >while... makes me think of the great American poets Anne Waldman and
> > >Patti Smith.
> > >Ginsberg would no doubt dig this greatly.
>
> > really? how so? what is it about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig,"
huh,
> > dockery?
>
> > see, you post these vapid comments that don't really mean anything. you
know,
> > people would take you seriously if you actually had the ability to
explain
> > yourself, even a little bit.
>
> > but you post these meaningless comments because of your sad and
desperate desire
> > to look knowledgeable, and all you end up doing is looking pathetic and
> > ignorant.
>
> > so, do tell us what it is about this piece that Ginsberg would "dig?"
why don't
> > you actually make an effort for once.
>
> > most sincerely,
>
> > GodBuilt
>
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------
> > "I like to drink, I like to drive, I like to think all of the Jews got
out of
> > the Holocaust alive, my name is Mel, and can't you tell, I like
Tequila!"
>
> > Denis Leary- Dölj citerad text -
>
> > - Visa citerad text -
>
> Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
He never does... his only purpose is to sniff along behind me, jeering.
A fact he proves true every day.
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
says...
>Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
>are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
obviously you are in error. i asked dockery if he could explain how would
Ginsberg "dig," like, appreciate the poem in question. i asked him to explain
himself, and he could not.
which only proves my point that dockery is more interested in posing as if he
were actually knowledgeable, when clearly he is not, just a rather empty, and
rather filthy, shirt.
of course the stupid cracker is free to prove me wrong. so far he hasn't, and
it's been a number of years.
Most sincerely,
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>
>> Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
>> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>
>The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
>posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
not at all. i merely wish to point out how ignorant you are.
and you are. you are free to point out your reasons why you think that Ginsberg
would like the poem in question, but each time i ask you to explain what you
mean by one of your laughably insipid comments, you seem to dodge the question
completely. i must assume that you don't even know how to begin answering such a
question.
but here's your chance, please do explain, why would Ginsberg like the poem in
question? you made the statement, are you now backing down an on explaining your
own words?
i thought so.
Most sincerely,
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
> I drink because I hate Jews.
>
Uhm....okay. Whatever.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>
Even if you are a like toedully philosophical anarchistic punk, that
which God Built is /not/ the being to try to take on with your
altar-boy whinings about propriety.
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
I do not "negotiate" for half my baby back, Solomon.
http://scrawlmark.org
BOBOBOnoBO®
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> monkey-cracker
Are these monkey crackers made with real monkey, because that'd be
really gross. Chicken in a Biscuit crackers are made with real
chicken, and they're not very good, but they're not gross like if they
were made with monkey.
>
> Denis Leary
--Bryan
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
=?iso-8859-1?B?Qk9CT0JPbm9CT64=?= says...
>
>On May 21, 8:43 am, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
><GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> monkey-cracker
>
>Are these monkey crackers made with real monkey,
i feel bad. by saying monkey-cracker in reference to dockery, i've insulted
monkeys everywhere. that was mean of me. i apologize to all monkeys. everywhere.
most sincerely,
Barbara's Cat
> On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
>
> > BOBOBOnoBO® says...
> >
> >> On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
> >>
> >>> monkey-cracker
> >>
> >> Are these monkey crackers made with real monkey,
> >
> > i feel bad. by saying monkey-cracker in reference to dockery, i've insulted
> > monkeys everywhere. that was mean of me. i apologize to all monkeys. everywhere.
>
> What were you thinking? Monkeys are very entertaining. People will watch
> them for hours on end. What part of that compares to dockery's drunken
> stumble/mumble?
Feces flinging?
--
Cm~
Beau Blue
>On Tue, 22 May 2007 08:00:13 -0700, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>wrote:
>
>> In article <1179831930.5...@u36g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>> =?iso-8859-1?B?Qk9CT0JPbm9CT64=?= says...
>>>
>>>On May 21, 8:43 am, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>>><GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> monkey-cracker
>>>
>>>Are these monkey crackers made with real monkey,
>>
>> i feel bad. by saying monkey-cracker in reference to dockery, i've insulted
>> monkeys everywhere. that was mean of me. i apologize to all monkeys. everywhere.
>
>What were you thinking? Monkeys are very entertaining. People will watch
>them for hours on end. What part of that compares to dockery's drunken
>stumble/mumble?
Well, when a monkey's hindquarters quiver they do somewhat resemble
Bill's demeanor on stage and the monkey's rectum COULD be mistaken for
Twitch's mouth. I mean, monkey shit pours from both openings, right?
But no one wants to WATCH for hours. Even nanoseconds are out of the
question. And that's just, just so
sad
you know.
-blue
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
Bill Minor * Robert Sward <> Internet Broadsides
Morton Marcus * Renay <> Contemporary American Poetry
~ Blue's Cruzio Cafe ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~cafe
Will Dockery
"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote
>Will Dockery says...
>
> >> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
> >> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
> >
> >The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
> >posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
>
> not at all.
No surprise.
> >In my opinion one of the better ones posted around here in a while, being
> >influenced by the Beat style, and doing it well for modern times.
>
> what's the beat style? what in the poem says its been done in a "beat"
style?
The poem points to "Howl", which pretty much set the "beat" style:
and nothing came
the curanderos await
cougar-eyes in the trees
my ancestors iboga
hide from me
--
BOBOBOnoBO®
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <1179831930.526379.315...@u36g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> =?iso-8859-1?B?Qk9CT0JPbm9CT64=?= says...
>
>
>
> >On May 21, 8:43 am, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
> ><GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> monkey-cracker
>
> >Are these monkey crackers made with real monkey,
>
> i feel bad. by saying monkey-cracker in reference to dockery, i've insulted
> monkeys everywhere. that was mean of me. i apologize to all monkeys.
> everywhere.
I'm just relieved that they're not being used to flavor snack
crackers.
>
> most sincerely,
>
> GodBuilt
--Bryan
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>
>
>"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote
>>Will Dockery says...
>> >On May 21, 5:42 am, Sammybaby wrote:
>>
>> >> Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
>> >> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>> >> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>> >
>> >The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
>> >posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
>>
>> not at all.
>
>No surprise.
>
>> >In my opinion one of the better ones posted around here in a while, being
>> >influenced by the Beat style, and doing it well for modern times.
>>
>> what's the beat style? what in the poem says its been done in a "beat"
>style?
>
>The poem points to "Howl", which pretty much set the "beat" style:
really? how did Howl set the "beat" style, dockery? in what way did it do this?
there are scholars who feel that Ginsberg merely synthesized the elements of
other writers around and produced one piece that felt some notoriety, but the
piece couldn't be said to "set" the beat style.
if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat movement traces it's
roots all the way back to 1944. the "beat" movement had produced many poems
before Ginsberg's Howl.
how did Howl "set" the beat style, dockery? because if we follow your laughable
cracker-ignorance, what you are saying is that the beat movement in poetry
really didn't begin until 1956 when Howl was published.
care to explain yourself or remain a posing illiterate?
i'm betting posing illiterate. big.
most sincerely,
galathaea
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <3ae19$46533c71$18d62320$5...@KNOLOGY.NET>, Will Dockery says...
personally
i see howl as a poem of awakening
the beat movement was in a process of becoming
and howl captured the beat esprit
just as it was realising it might become real
it is a very confident poem
and definitely nailed ginsberg's reputation
Will Dockery
Sure it did.
Besides Holmes' Go, years earlier, and Ferlinghetti's Coney Island Of The
Mind, Howl was pretty much the first piece of Beat writing to hit
internationally, and thus /set/ the Beat style for the public, and
influenced those that came later.
> if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat movement
traces it's
> roots all the way back to 1944.
I didn't write when it all began, and Town & The City is hardly an example
of Beat writing... and in fact before Howl Ginsberg himself wrote in a much
more "traditional" style.
Sure, there was plenty of Beat writing, but even Kerouac's books remained
unpublished until /after/ Howl broke big.
>the "beat" movement had produced many poems
> before Ginsberg's Howl.
But Howl kicked the doors open.
> what you are saying is that the beat movement in poetry
> really didn't begin until 1956 when Howl was published.
Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
was the first Beat writing.
Dennis M. Hammes
Pissing on the audience?
Dennis M. Hammes
> In article <3ae19$46533c71$18d62320$59...@KNOLOGY.NET>, Will Dockery says...
>
>>
>>"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote
>>
>>>Will Dockery says...
>>>
>>>>On May 21, 5:42 am, Sammybaby wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
>>>>>are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>>>>>at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>>>>
>>>>The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
>>>>posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
>>>
>>>not at all.
>>
>>No surprise.
>>
>>
>>>>In my opinion one of the better ones posted around here in a while, being
>>>>influenced by the Beat style, and doing it well for modern times.
>>>
>>>what's the beat style? what in the poem says its been done in a "beat"
>>
>>style?
>>
>>The poem points to "Howl", which pretty much set the "beat" style:
>
>
> really? how did Howl set the "beat" style, dockery? in what way did it do this?
> there are scholars who feel that Ginsberg merely synthesized the elements of
> other writers around and produced one piece that felt some notoriety, but the
> piece couldn't be said to "set" the beat style.
>
> if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat movement traces it's
> roots all the way back to 1944. the "beat" movement had produced many poems
> before Ginsberg's Howl.
The "Beat Movement" started producing pop prose -- both essay and
fiction -- as a direct response to the onset of the Depression, and
has its roots in the amplified disparities of the Have-Nots even
before that.
The "Beat" attitude is the direct result of the fact that the
Anarchists resulted only in WWI, and the Wobblies resulted only in
the Depression.
Beat Poetry was a little late to recognise or accept the Movement,
because most practising poets were already safely tenured from those
world-wide nasties behind the Walls of Ivy.
The Modern or PO-wetic or Second Generation Beat attitude is the
driect result of the fact that WWII resulted only in the Fuken Bomb
and the Cold War.
Not oddly, certain poets /did/ respond to these events, but so
specifically that they weren't called "Beat Poets" -- whose hallmark
seems always to have been only that they couldn't say /why/ they were
whining -- but Poets of Other Stuff: Owen and Sassoon "against the
war," Bishop, Ruckeyeser, Lowell, etc. "against war" and "against the
Depression," etc., or Auden against the next generation's war (and
stupidty).
But jesusfuck, Dockery, you want antiwar poetry, read Suckling,
read Herrick, read Kipling, read Whitman. You want antideath poetry,
read Donne, read Dickinson, read Housman. You want anti-stupid
poetry, read Pope, read Dryden, read Browning, read Frost, read Eliot.
And I hereby defy /you/ to trace any sort of Beat Origins in them,
let alone call them Beat Poets, because they were literate and you
and your goddamned "Beats" are not.
Because those masters wrote their stuff facing a /blank/ sheet of
paper, alone in an empty room with the door shut, while you and your
"Beats" rip a little from here, a little from there, paste it
together with your own shit, and /never/ have your lips free of the
warmth of your overrated friends.
Which is why any one of the masters was far more depressed and
depressive -- "Beat" to you, monkey -- than all of their "Beat"
successors put together in a cocksucking bunch.
One of the finest summations of either Beat Generation was put by
a writer probably better (he sure made more money) than all of us:
"All they had to worry about was wood alcohol in bootleg liquor."
Which, by God in a God-Built nutshell, makes you a Beat if ever there
was one.
>
> how did Howl "set" the beat style, dockery? because if we follow your laughable
> cracker-ignorance, what you are saying is that the beat movement in poetry
> really didn't begin until 1956 when Howl was published.
Builtdammit, I did it again, dint I.
>
> care to explain yourself or remain a posing illiterate?
>
> i'm betting posing illiterate. big.
>
> most sincerely,
>
> GodBuilt
>
>
--
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> personally
> i see howl as a poem of awakening
Funny how a baby seems /always/ to do that on awakening, innit.
>
> the beat movement was in a process of becoming
> and howl captured the beat esprit
> just as it was realising it might become real
Now, /there's/ a reason for the baby to howl, hunh.
Jesusfuck, /anything/ but real!
Sumbitch, it might hafta pay for its own booze.
>
> it is a very confident poem
I never met a baby whose howling didn't get more confident as it went on.
Why, it usually becomes confident that it has destroyed the whole
nasty universe with its howling.
> and definitely nailed ginsberg's reputation
Of course, WWII pretty much nailed Goebbels' reputation, too...
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
>
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
> was the first Beat writing.
>
If by "set the style," you mean that "Howl" finally gave the babies
something that they could actaully pretend to copy, as they couldn't
copy the earlier masters even in part...
Will Dockery
Nice essay, Uncle... sending it over to the "Beat Generation" thread for
feedback.
--
"...there are five native American art forms that we've given to the world:
Jazz, of course. Musical comedy as we know it today. The detective story as
crafted by Poe. The banjo. And comic books."
-Harlan Ellison
Amadeus Jinn
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:HKWdnYI3WMggn8nb...@onvoy.com...
> a writer probably better (he sure made more money)
--
-------------------------------------------
AJ - http://ClitIns.Com e In.
(800 folders. -- kiddie-filtered -- FREE,
Usenet Porn.)
Barbara's Cat
> On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
>
> > Goober Duck Will "Crybaby" Dockery quacked:
> >
> > > "On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote:
> > >
> > >> Goober Duck Will "Bad Talent Hack" Dockery quacked:
Ginsberg was a bought-and-paid-for hack
much like Boys II Men and Menudo were.
"If we build him they will cum."
--
Cm~
Stuart Leichter
scraw...@arvig.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:16 AM:
> galathaea wrote:
>
>>
>> personally
>> i see howl as a poem of awakening
>
>
> Funny how a baby seems /always/ to do that on awakening, innit.
>
>>
>> the beat movement was in a process of becoming
>> and howl captured the beat esprit
>> just as it was realising it might become real
>
>
> Now, /there's/ a reason for the baby to howl, hunh.
> Jesusfuck, /anything/ but real!
> Sumbitch, it might hafta pay for its own booze.
>
>>
>> it is a very confident poem
>
>
> I never met a baby whose howling didn't get more confident as it went on.
> Why, it usually becomes confident that it has destroyed the whole
> nasty universe with its howling.
>
>
>> and definitely nailed ginsberg's reputation
>
>
> Of course, WWII pretty much nailed Goebbels' reputation, too...
>
Did you happen to see the Dick Cavett Show when Ginsberg connected dots of
the SE Asia opium 'trade', based on an article from the Journal of Foreign
Affairs? The CIA picked up the raw stuff, mounds of which were guarded by US
Military at the air fields, flown on the planes owned by the foreign
national woman who contributed $$$ to the Nixon re-election campaign, then
collected (bought) by French nationals and processed into heroin offshore on
ships for distribution primarily in the US.
Did you ever read the Yale U sociology study from 1960, which described, or
'profiled', the types who had a very strong predisposition for becoming
either an alcoholic or a heroin addict? Have you ever wondered why the US
Welfare program required that no able-bodied man be part of a recipient's
household? Didn't you think George Wallace pronounced 'bussing' like it
meant taking it up the ass? Do you remember when Nixon 'closed' the
Mexican-US border ("Operation Intercept", 1969), when every vehicle was
stopped and searched, and virtually no pot was around to be had? Only heroin
(and speed junk)? When it was available, the price doubled. Do you remember
(mid-1970s) when the marijuana plants were sprayed with poison, not to kill
the plants, but to damage the smoker's lungs? Well, really it was intended
to degrade the pot market. "Folow the poetry" -- All the President's Men
(Woodward/Bernstein).
Stuart Leichter
scraw...@arvig.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:00 AM:
Tsk squared. You mention Whitman, a fave of Ginsberg, but you sound like
Whitman's 'Learn'd Astronomer". You don't mention William Carlos Williams,
Ginsberg's absolute fave, and mine too, but it doesn't matter what I think
cos I don't post much.
Barbara's Cat
[ bunch of stuff snipped ]
> ... it doesn't matter what I think
> cos I don't post much.
You should post more. I, in spite of
the nasty appearances of my replies,
enjoy your ever-so-informative posts.
--
Cm~
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
what do you mean hit internationally? there was some billboard chart that showed
this??" where are the scholars that say Howl is the definitive beat poem? that
it set a style that had aready been around for several years.
>> if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat movement
>traces it's
>> roots all the way back to 1944.
>
>I didn't write when it all began, and Town & The City is hardly an example
>of Beat writing... and in fact before Howl Ginsberg himself wrote in a much
>more "traditional" style.
>
>Sure, there was plenty of Beat writing, but even Kerouac's books remained
>unpublished until /after/ Howl broke big.
so please find me a scholar, other than your illiterate self, that says howl set
the beat style.
>>the "beat" movement had produced many poems
>> before Ginsberg's Howl.
>
>But Howl kicked the doors open.
in what way? what doors are you speaking of? i see a lot of poetry that attempts
to copy Howl, but i see little good poetry that copies it's style.
you use this idiot cliche of "kicked the doors open." but you show no examples
of where and how.
you don't know what you're taking about, dockery, you never do. you mouth these
meaningless cliches to try and cover up the fact that you're ignorant.
>> what you are saying is that the beat movement in poetry
>> really didn't begin until 1956 when Howl was published.
>
>Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
>was the first Beat writing.
and i've asked you to prove this. and all you give us is meaningless cliches
that clearly display your ignorance and the fact that you don't know what you're
talking about.
the only reason you say Howl "set" the beat style is because you honestly don't
have any clue what so ever of what came before it.
clearly you're a posing illiterate.
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
says...
>
>Will Dockery wrote:
>
>>
>> Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
>> was the first Beat writing.
>>
>
>If by "set the style," you mean that "Howl" finally gave the babies
>something that they could actaully pretend to copy, as they couldn't
>copy the earlier masters even in part...
Ginsberg was a better ad man for himself. he was very good at self-promotion.
i've always thought Warhol, being Warhol, was just mocking the entire NY IN
crowd (including Ginsberg, until he become one of them, of course. Capote always
thought Ginsberg was too busy being Ginsberg to really stretch out his writing,
but in more lucid moments, Capote said that about himself as well.
the only reason idiot dockery makes these comments is because in his cracker
southern provincialism Howl is the only poem of the beats that's he's ever heard
of.
with dockery, it's all about the pose.
Will Dockery
"Stuart Leichter" wrote:
>Dennis M. Hammes wrote on 5/23/07 5:00 AM:
>
> > The "Beat Movement" started producing pop prose -- both essay and
> > fiction -- as a direct response to the onset of the Depression, and
> > has its roots in the amplified disparities of the Have-Nots even
> > before that.
> > The "Beat" attitude is the direct result of the fact that the
> > Anarchists resulted only in WWI, and the Wobblies resulted only in
> > the Depression.
> > Beat Poetry was a little late to recognise or accept the Movement,
> > because most practising poets were already safely tenured from those
> > world-wide nasties behind the Walls of Ivy.
> > The Modern or PO-wetic or Second Generation Beat attitude is the
> > driect result of the fact that WWII resulted only in the Fuken Bomb
> > and the Cold War.
> >
> > Not oddly, certain poets /did/ respond to these events, but so
> > specifically that they weren't called "Beat Poets" -- whose hallmark
Well most of that "protest" stuff easily becomes dated, and like the Beats I
tend to that, going for something that'll last... as Ginsberg and Kerouac
have (and yours hasn't and won't, but for other reasons, one of which is
you're and imitator and locked into form rather than content).
Gregory Corso (who is/was a better poet than you) did write about "the
bomb", and did it with a sense of humor, even:
http://www.litkicks.com/BeatPages/page.jsp?what=Bomb
Bomb
Budger of history Brake of time You Bomb
Toy of universe Grandest of all snatched sky I cannot hate you
Do I hate the mischievous thunderbolt the jawbone of an ass
The bumpy club of One Million B.C. the mace the flail the axe
Catapult Da Vinci tomahawk Cochise flintlock Kidd dagger Rathbone
Ah and the sad desparate gun of Verlaine Pushkin Dillinger Bogart
And hath not St. Michael a burning sword St. George a lance David a
sling
Bomb you are as cruel as man makes you and you're no crueller than
cancer
All Man hates you they'd rather die by car-crash lightning drowning
Falling off a roof electric-chair heart-attack old age old age O
Bomb
They'd rather die by anything but you Death's finger is free-lance
Not up to man whether you boom or not Death has long since distributed
its
categorical blue I sing thee Bomb Death's extravagance Death's
jubilee
Gem of Death's supremest blue The flyer will crash his death will
differ
with the climbor who'll fall to die by cobra is not to die by bad pork
Some die by swamp some by sea and some by the bushy-haired man in the
night
O there are deaths like witches of Arc Scarey deaths like Boris Karloff
No-feeling deaths like birth-death sadless deaths like old pain Bowery
Abandoned deaths like Capital Punishment stately deaths like senators
And unthinkable deaths like Harpo Marx girls on Vogue covers my own
I do not know just how horrible Bombdeath is I can only imagine
Yet no other death I know has so laughable a preview I scope
a city New York City streaming starkeyed subway shelter
Scores and scores A fumble of humanity High heels bend
Hats whelming away Youth forgetting their combs
Ladies not knowing what to do with their shopping bags
Unperturbed gum machines Yet dangerous 3rd rail
Ritz Brothers from the Bronx caught in the A train
The smiling Schenley poster will always smile
Impish death Satyr Bomb Bombdeath
Turtles exploding over Istanbul
The jaguar's flying foot
soon to sink in arctic snow
Penguins plunged against the Sphinx
The top of the Empire state
arrowed in a broccoli field in Sicily
Eiffel shaped like a C in Magnolia Gardens
St. Sophia peeling over Sudan
O athletic Death Sportive Bomb
the temples of ancient times
their grand ruin ceased
Electrons Protons Neutrons
gathering Hersperean hair
walking the dolorous gulf of Arcady
joining marble helmsmen
entering the final ampitheater
with a hymnody feeling of all Troys
heralding cypressean torches
racing plumes and banners
and yet knowing Homer with a step of grace
Lo the visiting team of Present
the home team of Past
Lyre and tube together joined
Hark the hotdog soda olive grape
gala galaxy robed and uniformed
commissary O the happy stands
Ethereal root and cheer and boo
The billioned all-time attendance
The Zeusian pandemonium
Hermes racing Owens
The Spitball of Buddha
Christ striking out
Luther stealing third
Planeterium Death Hosannah Bomb
Gush the final rose O Spring Bomb
Come with thy gown of dynamite green
unmenace Nature's inviolate eye
Before you the wimpled Past
behind you the hallooing Future O Bomb
Bound in the grassy clarion air
like the fox of the tally-ho
thy field the universe thy hedge the geo
Leap Bomb bound Bomb frolic zig and zag
The stars a swarm of bees in thy binging bag
Stick angels on your jubilee feet
wheels of rainlight on your bunky seat
You are due and behold you are due
and the heavens are with you
hosanna incalescent glorious liaison
BOMB O havoc antiphony molten cleft BOOM
Bomb mark infinity a sudden furnace
spread thy multitudinous encompassed Sweep
set forth awful agenda
Carrion stars charnel planets carcass elements
Corpse the universe tee-hee finger-in-the-mouth hop
over its long long dead Nor
From thy nimbled matted spastic eye
exhaust deluges of celestial ghouls
From thy appellational womb
spew birth-gusts of of great worms
Rip open your belly Bomb
from your belly outflock vulturic salutations
Battle forth your spangled hyena finger stumps
along the brink of Paradise
O Bomb O final Pied Piper
both sun and firefly behind your shock waltz
God abandoned mock-nude
beneath His thin false-talc's apocalypse
He cannot hear thy flute's
happy-the-day profanations
He is spilled deaf into the Silencer's warty ear
His Kingdom an eternity of crude wax
Clogged clarions untrumpet Him
Sealed angels unsing Him
A thunderless God A dead God
O Bomb thy BOOM His tomb
That I lean forward on a desk of science
an astrologer dabbling in dragon prose
half-smart about wars bombs especially bombs
That I am unable to hate what is necessary to love
That I can't exist in a world that consents
a child in a park a man dying in an electric-chair
That I am able to laugh at all things
all that I know and do not know thus to conceal my pain
That I say I am a poet and therefore love all man
knowing my words to be the acquainted prophecy of all men
and my unwords no less an acquaintanceship
That I am manifold
a man pursuing the big lies of gold
or a poet roaming in bright ashes
or that which I imagine myself to be
a shark-toothed sleep a man-eater of dreams
I need not then be all-smart about bombs
Happily so for if I felt bombs were caterpillars
I'd doubt not they'd become butterflies
There is a hell for bombs
They're there I see them there
They sit in bits and sing songs
mostly German songs
And two very long American songs
and they wish there were more songs
especially Russian and Chinese songs
and some more very long American songs
Poor little Bomb that'll never be
an Eskimo song I love thee
I want to put a lollipop
in thy furcal mouth
A wig of Goldilocks on thy baldy bean
and have you skip with me Hansel and Gretel
along the Hollywoodian screen
O Bomb in which all lovely things
moral and physical anxiously participate
O fairylike plucked from the
grandest universe tree
O piece of heaven which gives
both mountain and anthill a sun
I am standing before your fantastic lily door
I bring you Midgardian roses Arcadian musk
Reputed cosmetics from the girls of heaven
Welcome me fear not thy opened door
nor thy cold ghost's grey memory
nor the pimps of indefinite weather
their cruel terrestial thaw
Oppenheimer is seated
in the dark pocket of Light
Fermi is dry in Death's Mozambique
Einstein his mythmouth
a barnacled wreath on the moon-squid's head
Let me in Bomb rise from that pregnant-rat corner
nor fear the raised-broom nations of the world
O Bomb I love you
I want to kiss your clank eat your boom
You are a paean an acme of scream
a lyric hat of Mister Thunder
O resound thy tanky knees
BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM
BOOM ye skies and BOOM ye suns
BOOM BOOM ye moons ye stars BOOM
nights ye BOOM ye days ye BOOM
BOOM BOOM ye winds ye clouds ye rains
go BANG ye lakes ye oceans BING
Barracuda BOOM and cougar BOOM
Ubangi BOOM orangutang
BING BANG BONG BOOM bee bear baboon
ye BANG ye BONG ye BING
the tail the fin the wing
Yes Yes into our midst a bomb will fall
Flowers will leap in joy their roots aching
Fields will kneel proud beneath the halleluyahs of the wind
Pinkbombs will blossom Elkbombs will perk their ears
Ah many a bomb that day will awe the bird a gentle look
Yet not enough to say a bomb will fall
or even contend celestial fire goes out
Know that the earth will madonna the Bomb
that in the hearts of men to come more bombs will be born
magisterial bombs wrapped in ermine all beautiful
and they'll sit plunk on earth's grumpy empires
fierce with moustaches of gold
-Gregory Corso
> > seems always to have been only that they couldn't say /why/ they were
> > whining -- but Poets of Other Stuff: Owen and Sassoon "against the
> > war," Bishop, Ruckeyeser, Lowell, etc. "against war" and "against the
> > Depression," etc., or Auden against the next generation's war (and
> > stupidty).
> > But jesusfuck, Dockery, you want antiwar poetry, read Suckling,
> > read Herrick, read Kipling, read Whitman. You want antideath poetry,
> > read Donne, read Dickinson, read Housman. You want anti-stupid
> > poetry, read Pope, read Dryden, read Browning, read Frost, read Eliot.
> > And I hereby defy /you/ to trace any sort of Beat Origins in them,
> > let alone call them Beat Poets, because they were literate and you
> > and your goddamned "Beats" are not.
> > Because those masters wrote their stuff facing a /blank/ sheet of
> > paper, alone in an empty room with the door shut, while you and your
> > "Beats" rip a little from here, a little from there, paste it
> > together with your own shit, and /never/ have your lips free of the
> > warmth of your overrated friends.
> >
> > Which is why any one of the masters was far more depressed and
> > depressive -- "Beat" to you, monkey -- than all of their "Beat"
> > successors put together in a cocksucking bunch.
> > One of the finest summations of either Beat Generation was put by
> > a writer probably better (he sure made more money) than all of us:
> > "All they had to worry about was wood alcohol in bootleg liquor."
> >
> > Which, makes you a Beat if ever there
> > was one.
>
> Tsk squared. You mention Whitman, a fave of Ginsberg, but you sound like
> Whitman's 'Learn'd Astronomer". You don't mention William Carlos Williams,
> Ginsberg's absolute fave, and mine too, but it doesn't matter what I think
> cos I don't post much.
Hammes is angry because Ginsberg and Williams (not to mention Whitman, which
is a given) are/were better poets than he is.
And are and will be remembered when he is/will be never known/forgotten.
--
"...there are five native American art forms that we've given to the world:
Jazz, of course. Musical comedy as we know it today. The detective story as
crafted by Poe. The banjo. And comic books."
-Harlan Ellison
"Mirror Twins" by W. Dockery-B. Fowler:
baloney
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <da7aa$4653df4c$18d62320$7...@KNOLOGY.NET>, Will Dockery says...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4950578
Birth of the Beat Generation: 50 Years of 'Howl'
by Robert Siegel
All Things Considered, October 7, 2005
Fifty years ago, poet Allen Ginsberg gave the first public reading of
"Howl" at a gathering in San Francisco. It was a literary milestone:
Many consider that night the birth of the Beat Generation.
and here's more:
http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html
birth of the Beat generation: 45th anniversary of "Howl" read at Six
Gallery
A `Howl' That Still Echoes Ginsberg poem recalled
Paul Iorio, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle - Saturday, October 28, 2000
If the birth of the Beat generation could be traced back to one event,
it would probably be the first public reading of Allen Ginsberg's poem
``Howl'' 45 years ago this month at the now-defunct Six Gallery in San
Francisco.
Of course, you will argue that I supplied this information and not
Will. However, it does show that Will is not the only person who has
this opinion, since I've cited two journalists whom I doubt are ill
informed.
baloney
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
baloney
<GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
galathaea
" american scream: allen ginsberg's howl and the making of the beat
generation "
by jonah raskin
that touches on some of this debate
elaborately detailing influence and exposure
there are many other scholarly investigations
however
it is not like ginsberg did not acknowledge influences
the title of the poem is
" howl for carl solomon "
which i emulated in my own work
just because he wasn't then a writer himself
and possibly not considered " beat "
( i hate such artistic labels
but every movement has one )
carl was a major influence on the scene
and was instrumental in getting " junky " published
..
despite all of that
anyone is free to like or dislike howl
or my own piece as well
everyone has their own beat to follow
galathaea
galathaea
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
says...
indeed, which proves i am correct in my assessment that dockery doesn't know
anything, because it took someone else to point this out. he didn't, you did,
because he is incapable of explaining himself. dockery's knowledge of anything
is about as deep as a thimble. he cannot explain or communicate anything on his
own. i have proven that thousands of times. he is a dishonest poseur who doesn't
know what he's talking about.
he made a claim he did not have the intellectual ability to support. nothing new
there.
Will Dockery
"baloney" wrote:
>
> Here's some corroboration, not that I necessarily agree.
>
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4950578
>
> Birth of the Beat Generation: 50 Years of 'Howl'
> by Robert Siegel
>
> All Things Considered, October 7, 2005
>
> Fifty years ago, poet Allen Ginsberg gave the first public reading of
> "Howl" at a gathering in San Francisco. It was a literary milestone:
> Many consider that night the birth of the Beat Generation.
>
> and here's more:
> http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html
>
> birth of the Beat generation: 45th anniversary of "Howl" read at Six
> Gallery
> A `Howl' That Still Echoes Ginsberg poem recalled
>
> Paul Iorio, Chronicle Staff Writer
>
> San Francisco Chronicle - Saturday, October 28, 2000
>
> If the birth of the Beat generation could be traced back to one event,
> it would probably be the first public reading of Allen Ginsberg's poem
> ``Howl'' 45 years ago this month at the now-defunct Six Gallery in San
> Francisco.
>
> Of course, you will argue that I supplied this information and not
> Will. However, it does show that Will is not the only person who has
> this opinion, since I've cited two journalists whom I doubt are ill
> informed.
GB wants to argue whether the "Beat Generation" began when Kerouac met
Ginsberg, Cassady, Burroughs et al in the 1940s, or whether it began when
Howl was published, and suddenly the world was aware of "beatniks" (a term
that came even later).
Before Howl there was a (relatively) small group of people who knew of
"Beat", and most of the writing was unpublished (John C Holmes' Go,
Burroughs' Junkie and Kerouac's The Town And The City were years earlier but
none of these came close to the attention Howl recieved, and none of these
"set the beat style" like Howl did).
Howl "kicked the doors open" /and/ "set the style" of Beat writing and
behavior for thousands, maybe millions of people that followed... which is
more of a /generation/ than the small group of people that were Beat before
Howl was published and was pronounced "obscene".
I'm not arguing that there weren't Beats before Howl, but that Howl did "set
the style" of Beat writing for the flood that followed.
"The Beat Generation, that was a vision that we had, John Clellon Holmes and
I, and Allen Ginsberg in an even wilder way, in the late Forties, of a
generation of crazy illuminated hipsters suddenly rising and roaming
America, serious, curious, bumming and hitchhiking everywhere, ragged,
beatific, beautiful in an ugly graceful new way ..." -Jack Kerouac
and
"Beat goes back much further than 1948 when John Clellon Holmes (author of
Go and The Horn) and I were sitting around trying to think up the meaning of
the Lost Generation and the subsequent Existentialism and I said "You know,
this is really a beat generation" and he leapt up and said "That's it,
that's right!"." -Jack Kerouac
But, again, that isn't what I wrote... I never wrote that the Beat
generation /began/ with Howl, but that Howl set the style for Beat
writing... made it /publishable/, which it wasn't (JK had a dozen
manuscripts no publisher would touch, for example) before the success of
Howl.
On The Road was published in 1957, a year after Howl, and Ginsberg's success
seems to have made the publication of OTR finally possible.
--
Will Dockery videos:
Ozone Stigmata- Dockery/Conley:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxfl_7KvFcc
The Ride (Combat Zone)- Dockery/Beck/Mallard:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lZ3VAmNTWc
Greybeard Cavalier- Dockery/0x0000/Fowler:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6BGlXmtzE8
baloney
> ..
>
> despite all of that
> anyone is free to like or dislike howl
> or my own piece as well
>
> everyone has their own beat to follow
>
I agree in triplicate.
I had my my own howl in 1955; by October, it was passing loud
according to my mother.
Stuart Leichter
will.d...@knology.net wrote on 5/23/07 2:50 PM:
Ann Charters is a scholar -- I recall you mentioning that you were
conversant with her editions of Kerouac's letters.
But the Beat 'tradition', and Ginsberg's Howl as the agreed-upon prime mover
in time are part of common knowledge now -- at least it ought to be among
anyone who reads and posts here. I'm surprised y'all ain't arguing about
whether or not Ginsberg sucked off Bob Dylan. I mean, neither of them poemed
the event the way Leonard did about Janis. But that was back when blowjobs
weren't common or knowledgeable.
Stuart Leichter
leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
> at least it ought to be among
> anyone who reads and posts here
Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
all...' would be.
Beau Blue
No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
-blue
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
Bill Minor * Robert Sward <> Internet Broadsides
Morton Marcus * Renay <> Contemporary American Poetry
~ Blue's Cruzio Cafe ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~cafe
Stuart Leichter
Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>
>>> at least it ought to be among
>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>
>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>> all...' would be.
>
>
> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>
> -blue
You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'? Is it because you had a bad, sad
education? Yes? No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
make it 'common'. Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
but you'd still lie in wait. Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>
>in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>
>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>
>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>
>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>> all...' would be.
>>
>>
>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>
>> -blue
>
>You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'? Is it because you had a bad, sad
>education? Yes?
where were you educated?
>No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>make it 'common'.
maybe it's not common where you are?
>Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>but you'd still lie in wait.
you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
ok, that was really uncalled for, comparing JJ to Max. you really owe him an
apology now. don't make me have to turn this newsgroup over to the side of road.
Stuart Leichter
Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/23/07 6:53 PM:
> In article <C27A3B94.50D42%leic...@bellsouth.net>, Stuart Leichter says...
>>
>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>
>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>
>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>> all...' would be.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>
>>> -blue
>>
>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'? Is it because you had a bad, sad
>> education? Yes?
>
> where were you educated?
It doesn't matter where. I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
card makers, comic books, and the movies.
>
>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>> make it 'common'.
>
> maybe it's not common where you are?
Hi, again. I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
tasteful at the time. I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means. Live
and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me. That reminds me,
cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
art back then. In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
(post-1970s) girls. I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see the
expression on my face, like, did I get it. Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried tomatoes
weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
"cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
>
>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>> 'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>
> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
Uh-oh. I'm just bad. I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
It's not like we're alone. You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
-- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked. You
trolling, or is it your feelthy mind? That reminds me, did you read Roth's
The Human Stain? His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap. Do you think Joe Franklin really
raped Sarah Silverman?
>
>> Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>> writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>> like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
>
> ok, that was really uncalled for, comparing JJ to Max. you really owe him an
> apology now. don't make me have to turn this newsgroup over to the side of
> road.
But I said there's no hard feelings, and I gave high praise for his
remarkable restraint. I'll abide by you and will owe him an apology. It's a
promise.
>
> most sincerely,
>
> GodBuilt
>
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>
>in article f32gk...@drn.newsguy.com, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God
>Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/23/07 6:53 PM:
>
>> In article <C27A3B94.50D42%leic...@bellsouth.net>, Stuart Leichter says...
>>>
>>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>>
>>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>>
>>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>>> all...' would be.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>>
>>>> -blue
>>>
>>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'? Is it because you had a bad, sad
>>> education? Yes?
>>
>> where were you educated?
>
>It doesn't matter where.
maybe.
>I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
>card makers, comic books, and the movies.
who hasn't? but i don't know if you can say JJ had a bad education.
>>
>>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>>> make it 'common'.
>>
>> maybe it's not common where you are?
>
>Hi, again.
well, i knew it was you, Stuart.
>I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
>and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
>tasteful at the time.
not according to the cheap porn novels from that time. but like i said, perhaps
where ever you were at that time it wasn't common?
>I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
>everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
>lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means.
i don't know. i've seen Mr. Webb type for going on a decade. i honestly do
believe that JJ knows what "common" means.
you have not made your case, Stu.
>Live
>and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me.
my grandmother said this to me long before she died.
>That reminds me,
>cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
>art back then.
i think you can say that oral sex experts have always been knowledgeable
concerning their art.
>In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
>Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
>1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
>(post-1970s) girls.
well, that's sorta one guy's opinion. maybe, like you, he was living in a place
where it was not common, and all the girls he knew were Protestants?
>I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
>Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
>reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
>and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see the
>expression on my face, like, did I get it.
when you get old you don't have to sound this way.
>Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
>wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
>wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried tomatoes
>weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
>"cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't mean
that oral sex wasn't common.
again, i mention, perhaps you were living in a more boring region of the
Eisenhower era?
>>
>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>>> 'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>
>> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>
>Uh-oh. I'm just bad.
and creepy.
>I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
so do mine, and strangely enough even in the wild and free San Francisco bay
area that's not a subject i've ever brought with them, nor think is appropriate
to do.
>It's not like we're alone.
there's more than one pre-teen girl involved in these discussions?
>You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
>on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
>granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
>-- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked.
with preteen girls? like 12-to-1?
>You trolling, or is it your feelthy mind?
no, i just think it might not be the most appropriate action one can think of to
talk to pre-teen girls about the details of oral sex, especially when i'm not a
parent of said kids. perhaps you believe in some
hippy-voodoo-summer-of-love-let's-have-a-be-in-where-there-is-no-boundries-man-cause-we're-like-gonna-stick-it-to-your-outdated-middle-class-ideas
philosophy about such things, but i think there is a propriety to certain
subjects, especially with pre-teens who aren't my own kids.
i guess i'm just old-fashioned.
>That reminds me, did you read Roth's
>The Human Stain?
not yet i haven't.
>His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
>over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap.
as was i. but i don't know if you can make the sudden leap from that idea to
feeling absolutely free in discussing the details of oral sex with a little girl
who has not started to menstruate yet.
>Do you think Joe Franklin really
>raped Sarah Silverman?
whatever that means.
>>
>>> Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>>> writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>>> like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
>>
>> ok, that was really uncalled for, comparing JJ to Max. you really owe him an
>> apology now. don't make me have to turn this newsgroup over to the side of
>> road.
>
>But I said there's no hard feelings, and I gave high praise for his
>remarkable restraint. I'll abide by you and will owe him an apology. It's a
>promise.
sure.
BOBOBOnoBO®
So, your mother referred to giving birth to you as "passing," eh?
Like feces, or a gallstone.
--Bryan
Stuart Leichter
Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/23/07 9:34 PM:
> In article <C27A557D.50D4B%leic...@bellsouth.net>, Stuart Leichter says...
>>
>> in article f32gk...@drn.newsguy.com, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God
>> Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/23/07 6:53 PM:
>>
>>> In article <C27A3B94.50D42%leic...@bellsouth.net>, Stuart Leichter says...
>>>>
>>>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>>>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>>>> all...' would be.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>>>
>>>>> -blue
>>>>
>>>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>>>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'? Is it because you had a bad,
>>>> sad
>>>> education? Yes?
>>>
>>> where were you educated?
>>
>> It doesn't matter where.
>
> maybe.
'When' matters more now than where. 'What' matters more than 'where',
whether private or public, for instance. Nixon removed $200 million from
higher ed, so his tormentors couldn't migrate horizontally or vertically,
leaving the teaching to TA's and tenure thieves, forever.
>
>> I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
>> card makers, comic books, and the movies.
>
> who hasn't? but i don't know if you can say JJ had a bad education.
Can you tell if a movie is good or bad from watching it?
>
>>>
>>>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time,
>>>> doesn't
>>>> make it 'common'.
>>>
>>> maybe it's not common where you are?
>>
>> Hi, again.
>
> well, i knew it was you, Stuart.
>
>> I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
>> and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
>> tasteful at the time.
>
> not according to the cheap porn novels from that time. but like i said,
> perhaps where ever you were at that time it wasn't common?
My classmate in grad school was a kid named McTaggart, he was a co-author
(as 'Taggart') of What Really Happens [or Goes On] in Fort Lauderdale, 1967
or thereabouts. Henry Miller got published here in the early 1960s. Jennie
Denton's champagne blowjobs in The Carpetbaggers were published in 1960 or
1961. Her character was based on Jane Russell was the word then. Like
Whizzer, you don't know what 'common' means.
>
>> I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
>> everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
>> lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means.
>
> i don't know. i've seen Mr. Webb type for going on a decade. i honestly do
> believe that JJ knows what "common" means.
You learned movies shit, so you're not qualified in this round.
>
> you have not made your case, Stu.
What case is that?
>
>> Live
>> and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me.
>
> my grandmother said this to me long before she died.
>
>> That reminds me,
>> cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
>> art back then.
>
> i think you can say that oral sex experts have always been knowledgeable
> concerning their art.
You have a bad habit -- it works on rubes -- of begging the question, e.g.,
putting "experts" in the subject and "knowledgeable" in the predicate as
though you've made a conclusionary statement. In that instance, it's also
tautologically inappropriate: Experts are knowledgeble about their
expertise. (No thanks expected for the lesson.)
>
>> In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
>> Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
>> 1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
>> (post-1970s) girls.
>
> well, that's sorta one guy's opinion. maybe, like you, he was living in a
> place where it was not common, and all the girls he knew were Protestants?
That's like saying Ted Williams writing on hitting is one guy's no-count
opinion, or Tiger Woods writing about golf is one guy's no-count opinion.
It's worse than like that, but I'm letting you escape again because I'm no
good at this trolling shit like you are.
>
>> I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
>> Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
>> reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
>> and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see the
>> expression on my face, like, did I get it.
>
> when you get old you don't have to sound this way.
>
>> Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
>> wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
>> wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried tomatoes
>> weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
>> "cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
>
> just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't
> mean that oral sex wasn't common.
You just make up shit, don't you?
>
> again, i mention, perhaps you were living in a more boring region of the
> Eisenhower era?
That would be Roth, again, and Updike, two of the better chroniclers of
manness before our time. Anyway, you should check out Carnal Knowledge
(1970) and viddy well the last scene, or read Jack's Playboy Interview from
around that time, or somehow get informed instead of making up shit.
>
>>>
>>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>>>> 'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>>
>>> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>>
>> Uh-oh. I'm just bad.
>
> and creepy.
Not creepy, just bad.
>
>> I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
>
> so do mine, and strangely enough even in the wild and free San Francisco bay
> area that's not a subject i've ever brought with them, nor think is
> appropriate to do.
Maybe you and they were brought up like Andre Dubus, maybe your hands were
tied down in the crib so you wouldn't touch yourself (like my much older
cousin's were). No maybe about your growing up believing Jesus is magic.
>
>> It's not like we're alone.
>
> there's more than one pre-teen girl involved in these discussions?
Older sisters, cousins, adults. Like I said, I'm bad, and I don't write
good. I didn't mean girls under 12. Honestly, though, I'd rather troll you
than be truthful.
>
>> You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
>> on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
>> granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
>> -- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked.
>
> with preteen girls? like 12-to-1?
Several were still in the womb and overheard, "No! Suck it, lick it!
'Blowjob' is a only a figure of speech!"
>
>> You trolling, or is it your feelthy mind?
>
> no, i just think it might not be the most appropriate action one can think of
> to talk to pre-teen girls about the details of oral sex, especially when i'm
> not a parent of said kids. perhaps you believe in some
> hippy-voodoo-summer-of-love-let's-have-a-be-in-where-there-is-no-boundries-man
> -cause-we're-like-gonna-stick-it-to-your-outdated-middle-class-ideas
> philosophy about such things, but i think there is a propriety to certain
> subjects, especially with pre-teens who aren't my own kids.
It's highly appropriate -- not "most" -- in the light of trash-talkers like
yourself who go on endlessly around here -- where my stepdaughter has read
-- about cocksucking and coke and skinny hookers, behaviors that kids don't
read as humor. At least tell me it's possible to have an intelligent
exchange with someone like you. Not that I'll believe it.
>
> i guess i'm just old-fashioned.
You wish.
>
>> That reminds me, did you read Roth's
>> The Human Stain?
>
> not yet i haven't.
Dear god, where's my nitroglycerin tablet!
>
>> His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
>> over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap.
>
> as was i. but i don't know if you can make the sudden leap from that idea to
> feeling absolutely free in discussing the details of oral sex with a little
> girl who has not started to menstruate yet.
Spare me and everyone else your pontifications about logic. Why do you leap
to calling it "feeling absolutely free"? I know why, you're one of those
boys from Brazil, aren't you? Aside from your nazi 'arguing' tactics, you're
also ill-informed about menstrual demographics, like most things you talk
about.
>
>> Do you think Joe Franklin really
>> raped Sarah Silverman?
>
> whatever that means.
I assumed you'd seen The Aristocrats, before I learned you're
"old-fashioned". I'm just so bad.
Beau Blue
>in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>
>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>
>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>
>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>> all...' would be.
>>
>>
>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>
>> -blue
>
>You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'?
I don't.
> Is it because you had a bad, sad
>education?
I was educated in Pittsburgh. Well, Oakland. And in Cleveland. Well,
Coventry. And in New York, Monmouth, New London, Bad Tolz, Berkeley,
and Palo Alto. Wait, there's also San Jose and Santa Cruz. I won't
count the Churchill Boro education 'cause, well, they paid me.
>Yes? No one would lose money betting that you did.
Only Twitch, I suppose.
>Cleopatra's
>being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>make it 'common'.
Well, think what you will, I know I do.
>Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>friends (it's certainly why she called 911).
According to 'friends', huh? You don't think OJ just thought, 'What
the fuck, I'm rich enough to get away with ANYTHING!'
Let's blame it on blowjobs, not psychosis full of privilege? Works for
you, huh?
> Maybe I should have written
>'commonplace',
Blowjobs have never been not commonplace, baNob, you know that right?
>or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
Hmmmmmm ... should Cook [AKA god] be worried?
>but you'd still lie in wait.
In wait, huh? I usually lie at night when I've been caught at
something I'm not willing to admit I do. Oh, and in every day I feel
storytelling is important. I think that's pretty much when everybody
lies. Right? Maybe not ... there's that whole OJ thing, I forgot. So
sometimes people lie in courtrooms, too.
>Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
hehehehehehehehehe, baNob, you're a lousy golf shot, you know. They
call you Hannibal's little brother, Duffer Leichter, huh?
Stuart Leichter
Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/24/07 12:21 AM:
> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>
>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>
>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>> all...' would be.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>
>>> -blue
>>
>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'?
>
> I don't.
Good. What did you think I was saying that made you post your insult? Did
you think I meant 'new' or 'no big deal'?
>
>> Is it because you had a bad, sad
>> education?
>
> I was educated in Pittsburgh. Well, Oakland. And in Cleveland. Well,
> Coventry. And in New York, Monmouth, New London, Bad Tolz, Berkeley,
> and Palo Alto. Wait, there's also San Jose and Santa Cruz. I won't
> count the Churchill Boro education 'cause, well, they paid me.
Is that a Yes or a No? It sounds like a Yes. I went to Central Catholic for
six weeks.
Did you know August Wilson or Annie Dillard? They were educated in Oakland.
Well, the Hill District and Shadyside.
>
>> Yes? No one would lose money betting that you did.
>
> Only Twitch, I suppose.
Hey, Twitch! Look who supposes you have money to lose!
>
>> Cleopatra's
>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>> make it 'common'.
>
> Well, think what you will, I know I do.
But if Cleopatra and her faithful cohorts painted their lips to advertise
and announce their wares -- who would it be for if it was 'common'? What
would be the point?
>
>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911).
>
> According to 'friends', huh? You don't think OJ just thought, 'What
> the fuck, I'm rich enough to get away with ANYTHING!'
>
> Let's blame it on blowjobs, not psychosis full of privilege? Works for
> you, huh?
The weak prosecution tried to make a big deal out of OJ's coming home to
find Nicole in flagrante delicious, and to paint her as being part of a
niche who fancied themselves as the creme de la creme.
>
>> Maybe I should have written
>> 'commonplace',
>
> Blowjobs have never been not commonplace, baNob, you know that right?
Most of what you know I don't know. Almost all the witnesses who matter have
been dead a long time. Whatever you say about it sounds arrogant. I was
raised in a tradition with a prohibition against 'teaching' in one's own
name, and guessing is taboo.
>
>> or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>
> Hmmmmmm ... should Cook [AKA god] be worried?
Once a giggler always a giggler. So much for your nonsense about knowing the
meaning of 'common' as long as it's not in your back yard. Hey, I'm not one
of the revisionists who revile Margaret Mead.
>
>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>
> In wait, huh? I usually lie at night when I've been caught at
> something I'm not willing to admit I do. Oh, and in every day I feel
> storytelling is important. I think that's pretty much when everybody
> lies. Right? Maybe not ... there's that whole OJ thing, I forgot. So
> sometimes people lie in courtrooms, too.
You started it god knows why.
>
>> Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>> writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>> like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
>
> hehehehehehehehehe, baNob, you're a lousy golf shot, you know. They
> call you Hannibal's little brother, Duffer Leichter, huh?
It's not pronounced like that, or spelled like that, and you're knowingly
stealing the Yapster's old schtick, so you have to take an unplayable lie or
re-hit from the original spot and add a penalty stroke. Yeah, I had a bad
day on the golf course today, new irons, plus it was muggy by at least a
club and a half. Monday I banged out a few 300+ (we're in a drought, but
still) and hit all but one fairway (hardly any GIR's though cause of the new
weapons). In my draft-age days, I was a golf instructor at a summer camp and
composed the song for the Gray Team in the color war that won 1st prize! The
music was Lerner & Loewe's "Guinevere" ("O the Gray Team will win", etc.,
for "So they found Guinevere", etc.).
Amadeus Jinn
"Barbara's Cat" <c...@NOSPAMscientist.com> wrote in message news:MPG.20be0b807...@127.0.0.1...
They have that way about them, don't they.
--
-------------------------------------------
AJ - http://ClitIns.Com e In.
(800 folders. -- kiddie-filtered -- FREE,
Usenet Porn.)
>
> --
> Cm~
>
Dennis M. Hammes
> in article ndidnczPt9bkm8nb...@onvoy.com, Dennis M. Hammes at
> scraw...@arvig.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:16 AM:
>
>
>>galathaea wrote:
>>
>>
>>>personally
>>>i see howl as a poem of awakening
>>
>>
>>Funny how a baby seems /always/ to do that on awakening, innit.
>>
>>
>>>the beat movement was in a process of becoming
>>>and howl captured the beat esprit
>>>just as it was realising it might become real
>>
>>
>>Now, /there's/ a reason for the baby to howl, hunh.
>>Jesusfuck, /anything/ but real!
>>Sumbitch, it might hafta pay for its own booze.
>>
>>
>>>it is a very confident poem
>>
>>
>>I never met a baby whose howling didn't get more confident as it went on.
>>Why, it usually becomes confident that it has destroyed the whole
>>nasty universe with its howling.
>>
>>
>>
>>>and definitely nailed ginsberg's reputation
>>
>>
>>Of course, WWII pretty much nailed Goebbels' reputation, too...
>>
>
>
> Did you happen to see the Dick Cavett Show when Ginsberg connected dots of
> the SE Asia opium 'trade', based on an article from the Journal of Foreign
> Affairs? The CIA picked up the raw stuff, mounds of which were guarded by US
> Military at the air fields, flown on the planes owned by the foreign
> national woman who contributed $$$ to the Nixon re-election campaign, then
> collected (bought) by French nationals and processed into heroin offshore on
> ships for distribution primarily in the US.
>
> Did you ever read the Yale U sociology study from 1960, which described, or
> 'profiled', the types who had a very strong predisposition for becoming
> either an alcoholic or a heroin addict? Have you ever wondered why the US
> Welfare program required that no able-bodied man be part of a recipient's
> household? Didn't you think George Wallace pronounced 'bussing' like it
> meant taking it up the ass? Do you remember when Nixon 'closed' the
> Mexican-US border ("Operation Intercept", 1969), when every vehicle was
> stopped and searched, and virtually no pot was around to be had? Only heroin
> (and speed junk)? When it was available, the price doubled. Do you remember
> (mid-1970s) when the marijuana plants were sprayed with poison, not to kill
> the plants, but to damage the smoker's lungs? Well, really it was intended
> to degrade the pot market. "Folow the poetry" -- All the President's Men
> (Woodward/Bernstein).
>
Have you ever noticed that when a cat gets the scratch or the tuna it
wants, it goes back to sleep?
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
I do not "negotiate" for half my baby back, Solomon.
http://scrawlmark.org
Dennis M. Hammes
> galathaea said:
>
>
>>On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Goober Duck Will "Crybaby" Dockery quacked:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Goober Duck Will "Bad Talent Hack" Dockery quacked:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Sammybaby wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions you
>>>>>>>are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>>>>>>>at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>>>
>>>>>>The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery" had
>>>>>>posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
>>>
>>>>>not at all.
>>>
>>>>No surprise.
>>>
>>>>>>In my opinion one of the better ones posted around here in a while, being
>>>>>>influenced by the Beat style, and doing it well for modern times.
>>>
>>>>>what's the beat style? what in the poem says its been done in a "beat"
>>>>
>>>>style?
>>>
>>>>The poem points to "Howl", which pretty much set the "beat" style:
>>>
>>>really? how did Howl set the "beat" style, dockery? in what way did
>>>it do this? there are scholars who feel that Ginsberg merely
>>>synthesized the elements of other writers around and produced one
>>>piece that felt some notoriety, but the piece couldn't be said to
>>>"set" the beat style.
>>>
>>>if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat
>>>movement traces it's roots all the way back to 1944. the
>>>"beat" movement had produced many poems before Ginsberg's Howl.
>>>
>>>how did Howl "set" the beat style, dockery? because if we
>>>follow your laughable cracker-ignorance, what you are saying
>>>is that the beat movement in poetry really didn't begin until
>>>1956 when Howl was published.
>>>
>>>care to explain yourself or remain a posing illiterate?
>>
>>personally
>> i see howl as a poem of awakening
>>
>>the beat movement was in a process of becoming
>>and howl captured the beat esprit
>> just as it was realising it might become real
>>
>>it is a very confident poem
>>and definitely nailed ginsberg's reputation
>
>
>
> Ginsberg was a bought-and-paid-for hack
> much like Boys II Men and Menudo were.
>
> "If we build him they will cum."
>
But he sold paper for Hearst.
When you hire a thousand monkeys to mill around a two-block
Fourdrinier, you hafta find some way to /pay/ them, and the only
thing you've got is this bloody great pile of paper...
Kennedy solved that problem.
He printed the word "Dollar" on it.
So did the Weimar Republic.
But that, of course, was Something Completely Different.
No, really.
They printed the word "Mark."
Now, you can carry almost enough "Dollars" to the gas station to buy
enough gasoline for the trip home.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Sure, there was plenty of Beat writing, but even Kerouac's books remained
> unpublished until /after/ Howl broke big.
>
Neither Kerouac nor Ginsberg broke big until they were translated
into Dutch.
Dennis M. Hammes
> In article <L92dnZWqII75msnb...@onvoy.com>, Dennis M. Hammes
> says...
>
>>Will Dockery wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
>>>was the first Beat writing.
>>>
>>
>>If by "set the style," you mean that "Howl" finally gave the babies
>>something that they could actaully pretend to copy, as they couldn't
>>copy the earlier masters even in part...
>
>
> Ginsberg was a better ad man for himself. he was very good at self-promotion.
> i've always thought Warhol, being Warhol, was just mocking the entire NY IN
> crowd (including Ginsberg, until he become one of them, of course. Capote always
> thought Ginsberg was too busy being Ginsberg to really stretch out his writing,
> but in more lucid moments, Capote said that about himself as well.
>
> the only reason idiot dockery makes these comments is because in his cracker
> southern provincialism Howl is the only poem of the beats that's he's ever heard
> of.
>
> with dockery, it's all about the pose.
>
> most sincerely,
>
> GodBuilt
>
All fakes are necessarily about the pose, and there's more than a
little fake to that whole crowd of names.
But babies /buy/ fake -- well, they fake buying; they Demand,
Mommy "Buys," Daddy Pays (esp. incl. priests) -- because
store-boughten fake promises that they can, in their "turn," /sell/ fake.
Dockery's doing no more than demanding His Turn to sell fake.
I.e., he duggen him his very own Personal hole in the back yard,
and is crying that "we won't let him" take it into the house.
Trouble is, fake's apostles succeed /on the curve/, which always
means that, because there's no actual substance to master, there
isn't enough of a Movement left to sell in three generations.
Dockery is, as always, simply too fucken late.
The ultimate genesis of that crap was rap (not "rec.arts.poems," but
"fuken rap") -- and /all/ the SuperRappers have grabbed their swag
/and put it into something else/. There isn't a fuken thing left to
loot with but a new generation of baby pule, and the media priests
are desperately searching for the next Movement to tout or they're
all going to have collection baskets as empty as NBC's.
Dennis M. Hammes
> In article <da7aa$4653df4c$18d62320$78...@KNOLOGY.NET>, Will Dockery says...
>
>>
>>Besides Holmes' Go, years earlier, and Ferlinghetti's Coney Island Of The
>>Mind, Howl was pretty much the first piece of Beat writing to hit
>>internationally, and thus /set/ the Beat style for the public, and
>>influenced those that came later.
>
>
> what do you mean hit internationally? there was some billboard chart that showed
> this??" where are the scholars that say Howl is the definitive beat poem? that
> it set a style that had aready been around for several years.
>
He means like that great international hit, "Zorro," was published in
Western South Central Amsterdam by a publicist who was a real
International Dutchman.
A /European/, even.
Thus, when somebody dropped it into the wastebasket /over there/,
it was /international/ when it hit.
Dennis M. Hammes
> "Dennis M. Hammes" wrote:
>
>>The "Beat Movement" started producing pop prose -- both essay and
>>fiction -- as a direct response to the onset of the Depression, and
>>has its roots in the amplified disparities of the Have-Nots even
>>before that.
>> The "Beat" attitude is the direct result of the fact that the
>>Anarchists resulted only in WWI, and the Wobblies resulted only in
>>the Depression.
>> Beat Poetry was a little late to recognise or accept the Movement,
>>because most practising poets were already safely tenured from those
>>world-wide nasties behind the Walls of Ivy.
>> The Modern or PO-wetic or Second Generation Beat attitude is the
>>driect result of the fact that WWII resulted only in the Fuken Bomb
>>and the Cold War.
>>
>>Not oddly, certain poets /did/ respond to these events, but so
>>specifically that they weren't called "Beat Poets" -- whose hallmark
>>seems always to have been only that they couldn't say /why/ they were
>>whining -- but Poets of Other Stuff: Owen and Sassoon "against the
>>war," Bishop, Ruckeyeser, Lowell, etc. "against war" and "against the
>>Depression," etc., or Auden against the next generation's war (and
>>stupidty).
>> But jesusfuck, Dockery, you want antiwar poetry, read Suckling,
>>read Herrick, read Kipling, read Whitman. You want antideath poetry,
>>read Donne, read Dickinson, read Housman. You want anti-stupid
>>poetry, read Pope, read Dryden, read Browning, read Frost, read Eliot.
>> And I hereby defy /you/ to trace any sort of Beat Origins in them,
>>let alone call them Beat Poets, because they were literate and you
>>and your goddamned "Beats" are not.
>> Because those masters wrote their stuff facing a /blank/ sheet of
>>paper, alone in an empty room with the door shut, while you and your
>>"Beats" rip a little from here, a little from there, paste it
>>together with your own shit, and /never/ have your lips free of the
>>warmth of your overrated friends.
>>
>>Which is why any one of the masters was far more depressed and
>>depressive -- "Beat" to you, monkey -- than all of their "Beat"
>>successors put together in a cocksucking bunch.
>> One of the finest summations of either Beat Generation was put by
>>a writer probably better (he sure made more money) than all of us:
>>"All they had to worry about was wood alcohol in bootleg liquor."
>>
>>Which makes you a Beat if ever there was one.
>
>
> Nice essay, Uncle... sending it over to the "Beat Generation" thread for
> feedback.
>
You mean that, because you poasted your name next to it, you own half
of it?
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Tsk squared. You mention Whitman, a fave of Ginsberg, but you sound like
> Whitman's 'Learn'd Astronomer". You don't mention William Carlos Williams,
> Ginsberg's absolute fave, and mine too, but it doesn't matter what I think
> cos I don't post much.
>
Hunh. Besides the space- and suetgoogle limitations on Litses (not
to mention subsequent *agree*ment), I'm an also-product of my
libraries and priests like anybody else, and this is the lunatic
fringe of the WASP Bible Sash. The accident of that is that I've
read a lot of Whitman but rather little of Williams.
Another depressed ("Beat") "antiwar poet" (though he's actually
antityrant, antigovernment, a near anarchist) easily mentioned as
overtopping them both is e.e.cummings, whom I've read entirely at
least thrice -- thanks to PAL, as he's not in the Protestant Local --
but of whom so little sticks out uniquely beyond the typo tricks that
I don't "too much discuss, too much explain" him.
In any case, despite the other similarities, there's too much
sneer, sass, and belly-laugh in his voice for anybody (besides
myself) to dare to class him as "Beat."
Dennis M. Hammes
> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> said:
>
> [ bunch of stuff snipped ]
>
>
>>... it doesn't matter what I think
>>cos I don't post much.
>
>
> You should post more. I, in spite of
> the nasty appearances of my replies,
> enjoy your ever-so-informative posts.
>
What he seD.
Dennis M. Hammes
> "Stuart Leichter" wrote:
>
>>Dennis M. Hammes wrote on 5/23/07 5:00 AM:
>>
>>
>>>The "Beat Movement" started producing pop prose -- both essay and
>>>fiction -- as a direct response to the onset of the Depression, and
>>>has its roots in the amplified disparities of the Have-Nots even
>>>before that.
>>>The "Beat" attitude is the direct result of the fact that the
>>>Anarchists resulted only in WWI, and the Wobblies resulted only in
>>>the Depression.
>>>Beat Poetry was a little late to recognise or accept the Movement,
>>>because most practising poets were already safely tenured from those
>>>world-wide nasties behind the Walls of Ivy.
>>>The Modern or PO-wetic or Second Generation Beat attitude is the
>>>driect result of the fact that WWII resulted only in the Fuken Bomb
>>>and the Cold War.
>>>
>>>Not oddly, certain poets /did/ respond to these events, but so
>>>specifically that they weren't called "Beat Poets" -- whose hallmark
>
>
> Well most of that "protest" stuff easily becomes dated,
>
You mean like Owen, Sassoon, Housman? Or Frost?
Darling, /anybody/ could walk into Parnello's (I will /not/ recommend
that anybody try this in your gramma's basement) /tonight/, and say:
"Gas, Boys!" -- a soft plop,
an ecstacy of fumbling at the canisters...
Kid, the /only/ dam' thing around here that's "dated" is you, and you
"date" no later than four years from your own dam' cradle.
Or did your Mommy use her beanbag "chair."
>
> and like the Beats I
> tend to that, going for something that'll last... as Ginsberg and Kerouac
> have (and yours hasn't and won't, but for other reasons, one of which is
> you're and imitator and locked into form rather than content).
>
> Gregory Corso (who is/was a better poet than you)
Well, I wuZ gunna snip your pasted crap, but I see I hafta leave it
in place as a proof (I've not seen this before) of my description of
"Beat" snippage pasted together with their own shit.
I /will/ go so far as to thank you for showing us where Tommy Bishop
got his "peculiar" shit-pasting style.
Heh.
(There's another brief note down there, sri.)
did write about "the
> bomb", and did it with a sense of humor, even:
>
> http://www.litkicks.com/BeatPages/page.jsp?what=Bomb
>
> Bomb
>
> Budger of history Brake of time You Bomb
> Toy of universe Grandest of all snatched sky I cannot hate you
> Do I hate the mischievous thunderbolt the jawbone of an ass
> The bumpy club of One Million B.C. the mace the flail the axe
> Catapult Da Vinci tomahawk Cochise flintlock Kidd dagger Rathbone
> Ah and the sad desparate gun of Verlaine Pushkin Dillinger Bogart
> And hath not St. Michael a burning sword St. George a lance David a
> sling
> Bomb you are as cruel as man makes you and you're no crueller than
> cancer
> All Man hates you they'd rather die by car-crash lightning drowning
> Falling off a roof electric-chair heart-attack old age old age O
> Bomb
> They'd rather die by anything but you Death's finger is free-lance
> Not up to man whether you boom or not Death has long since distributed
> its
> categorical blue I sing thee Bomb Death's extravagance Death's
> jubilee
> Gem of Death's supremest blue The flyer will crash his death will
> differ
> with the climbor who'll fall to die by cobra is not to die by bad pork
> Some die by swamp some by sea and some by the bushy-haired man in the
> night
> O there are deaths like witches of Arc Scarey deaths like Boris Karloff
> No-feeling deaths like birth-death sadless deaths like old pain Bowery
> Abandoned deaths like Capital Punishment stately deaths like senators
> And unthinkable deaths like Harpo Marx girls on Vogue covers my own
> I do not know just how horrible Bombdeath is I can only imagine
> Yet no other death I know has so laughable a preview I scope
> a city New York City streaming starkeyed subway shelter
> Scores and scores A fumble of humanity High heels bend
> Hats whelming away Youth forgetting their combs
> Ladies not knowing what to do with their shopping bags
> Unperturbed gum machines Yet dangerous 3rd rail
> Ritz Brothers from the Bronx caught in the A train
> The smiling Schenley poster will always smile
> Impish death Satyr Bomb Bombdeath
> Turtles exploding over Istanbul
> The jaguar's flying foot
> soon to sink in arctic snow
> Penguins plunged against the Sphinx
> The top of the Empire state
> arrowed in a broccoli field in Sicily
> Eiffel shaped like a C in Magnolia Gardens
> St. Sophia peeling over Sudan
> O athletic Death Sportive Bomb
> the temples of ancient times
> their grand ruin ceased
> Electrons Protons Neutrons
> gathering Hersperean hair
> walking the dolorous gulf of Arcady
> joining marble helmsmen
> entering the final ampitheater
> with a hymnody feeling of all Troys
> heralding cypressean torches
> racing plumes and banners
> and yet knowing Homer with a step of grace
> Lo the visiting team of Present
> the home team of Past
> Lyre and tube together joined
> Hark the hotdog soda olive grape
> gala galaxy robed and uniformed
> commissary O the happy stands
> Ethereal root and cheer and boo
> The billioned all-time attendance
> The Zeusian pandemonium
> Hermes racing Owens
> The Spitball of Buddha
> Christ striking out
> Luther stealing third
> Planeterium Death Hosannah Bomb
> Gush the final rose O Spring Bomb
> Come with thy gown of dynamite green
> unmenace Nature's inviolate eye
> Before you the wimpled Past
> behind you the hallooing Future O Bomb
> Bound in the grassy clarion air
> like the fox of the tally-ho
> thy field the universe thy hedge the geo
> Leap Bomb bound Bomb frolic zig and zag
> The stars a swarm of bees in thy binging bag
> Stick angels on your jubilee feet
> wheels of rainlight on your bunky seat
> You are due and behold you are due
> and the heavens are with you
> hosanna incalescent glorious liaison
> BOMB O havoc antiphony molten cleft BOOM
> Bomb mark infinity a sudden furnace
> spread thy multitudinous encompassed Sweep
> set forth awful agenda
> Carrion stars charnel planets carcass elements
> Corpse the universe tee-hee finger-in-the-mouth hop
> over its long long dead Nor
> From thy nimbled matted spastic eye
> exhaust deluges of celestial ghouls
> From thy appellational womb
> spew birth-gusts of of great worms
> Rip open your belly Bomb
> from your belly outflock vulturic salutations
> Battle forth your spangled hyena finger stumps
> along the brink of Paradise
> O Bomb O final Pied Piper
> both sun and firefly behind your shock waltz
> God abandoned mock-nude
> beneath His thin false-talc's apocalypse
> He cannot hear thy flute's
> happy-the-day profanations
> He is spilled deaf into the Silencer's warty ear
> His Kingdom an eternity of crude wax
> Clogged clarions untrumpet Him
> Sealed angels unsing Him
> A thunderless God A dead God
> O Bomb thy BOOM His tomb
> That I lean forward on a desk of science
> an astrologer dabbling in dragon prose
> half-smart about wars bombs especially bombs
> That I am unable to hate what is necessary to love
> That I can't exist in a world that consents
> a child in a park a man dying in an electric-chair
> That I am able to laugh at all things
> all that I know and do not know thus to conceal my pain
> That I say I am a poet and therefore love all man
> knowing my words to be the acquainted prophecy of all men
> and my unwords no less an acquaintanceship
> That I am manifold
> a man pursuing the big lies of gold
> or a poet roaming in bright ashes
> or that which I imagine myself to be
> a shark-toothed sleep a man-eater of dreams
> I need not then be all-smart about bombs
> Happily so for if I felt bombs were caterpillars
> I'd doubt not they'd become butterflies
> There is a hell for bombs
> They're there I see them there
> They sit in bits and sing songs
> mostly German songs
> And two very long American songs
> and they wish there were more songs
> especially Russian and Chinese songs
> and some more very long American songs
> Poor little Bomb that'll never be
> an Eskimo song I love thee
> I want to put a lollipop
> in thy furcal mouth
> A wig of Goldilocks on thy baldy bean
> and have you skip with me Hansel and Gretel
> along the Hollywoodian screen
> O Bomb in which all lovely things
> moral and physical anxiously participate
> O fairylike plucked from the
> grandest universe tree
> O piece of heaven which gives
> both mountain and anthill a sun
> I am standing before your fantastic lily door
> I bring you Midgardian roses Arcadian musk
> Reputed cosmetics from the girls of heaven
> Welcome me fear not thy opened door
> nor thy cold ghost's grey memory
> nor the pimps of indefinite weather
> their cruel terrestial thaw
> Oppenheimer is seated
> in the dark pocket of Light
> Fermi is dry in Death's Mozambique
> Einstein his mythmouth
> a barnacled wreath on the moon-squid's head
> Let me in Bomb rise from that pregnant-rat corner
> nor fear the raised-broom nations of the world
> O Bomb I love you
> I want to kiss your clank eat your boom
> You are a paean an acme of scream
> a lyric hat of Mister Thunder
> O resound thy tanky knees
> BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM
> BOOM ye skies and BOOM ye suns
> BOOM BOOM ye moons ye stars BOOM
> nights ye BOOM ye days ye BOOM
> BOOM BOOM ye winds ye clouds ye rains
> go BANG ye lakes ye oceans BING
> Barracuda BOOM and cougar BOOM
> Ubangi BOOM orangutang
> BING BANG BONG BOOM bee bear baboon
> ye BANG ye BONG ye BING
> the tail the fin the wing
> Yes Yes into our midst a bomb will fall
> Flowers will leap in joy their roots aching
> Fields will kneel proud beneath the halleluyahs of the wind
> Pinkbombs will blossom Elkbombs will perk their ears
> Ah many a bomb that day will awe the bird a gentle look
> Yet not enough to say a bomb will fall
> or even contend celestial fire goes out
> Know that the earth will madonna the Bomb
> that in the hearts of men to come more bombs will be born
> magisterial bombs wrapped in ermine all beautiful
> and they'll sit plunk on earth's grumpy empires
> fierce with moustaches of gold
>
> -Gregory Corso
>
<sneck>
>
> Hammes is angry because Ginsberg and Williams (not to mention Whitman, which
> is a given) are/were better poets than he is.
>
> And are and will be remembered when he is/will be never known/forgotten.
>
http://scrawlmark.org/offices.html
"I'll Be Back."
Dennis M. Hammes
> In article <1179942217.3...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, baloney
> says...
>
>>On May 23, 10:46 am, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>><GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
...
The journalists both report (accurately) that some people -- fifty
years, two-and-a-half generations,(1) after the fact -- hold a
certain opinion as to what constitutes "Beat" and when it "started."
Their sample base doesn't constitute a universe of the question,
let alone of the discourse.
Almost infinitely more are of the "opinion" that it "didn't," in
that they've never even heard of the phenomenon and could give a shit
less.
Young as I was, I was there then, and that Movement was not in its
own time called "Beat," but "Beatnik." The heyday of the "Beat
Generation" was during the Great Depression, and the confusion of the
two does not seem to arise in the pop literature before the mid-'80s.
(It doesn't arise at all in the historical or critical literature.)
I'm of the opinion of Beatniks that I put forth and explain as I
put it. I'll further explain that /my/ analytical language works
/for me/. (It may blow up in your faces; it evaporates Dockery.)
The only thing interesting about Dockery's "opinion" is not that
it isn't even his, but that he can't even cite where he overheard it.
As you both note.
One continually /wants/ Dockery to succeed at his little Performance
Thingy in his little bar even despite his absolutely horrid "methods"
of scholarship and lack of artistic discipline, but then he
so-carefully explains -- at great length -- that the reason he don't
need no smug academic scholarship is that he can fling his own turds
so pretty good.
Trouble is, they so often stick /before/ he flings them.
Oh, well, it's usually funny...
__________
1. Are we gittin' fuken /old/, or what?
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> GB wants to argue whether the "Beat Generation" began when Kerouac met
> Ginsberg, Cassady, Burroughs et al in the 1940s, or whether it began when
> Howl was published, and suddenly the world was aware of "beatniks" (a term
> that came even later).
One wonders why, but "the world" became "aware" of Ginsberg when
Ferlinghetti started touting him for strictly commercial reasons.
Ginsberg's first publications were literally Vanities -- small
commercial printings -- funded and promoted by Ferlinghetti.
>
> Before Howl there was a (relatively) small group of people who knew of
> "Beat", and most of the writing was unpublished (John C Holmes' Go,
> Burroughs' Junkie and Kerouac's The Town And The City were years earlier but
> none of these came close to the attention Howl recieved, and none of these
> "set the beat style" like Howl did).
It may be too bad that you've never even heard of the League of
Decency (League of American Decency, American League of Decency, a
vague bluenose conglomerate with close ties and common membership
with the DAR, the League of Women Voters, and Joe McCarthy, and often
referred to in the '50s and '60s as "Mrs. Grundy"), but Ginsberg
would have /remained/ utterly unknown but for their bringing general
"obscenity" charges against him in Federal Court, and specifically
citing "Howl."
Again, Ferlinghetti funded the initial defenses, which were taken
over by the ACLU and wound up before the Supreme Court.
So, Mr. Dockery, was the question actually one of obscentiy, or
advertising something in the only manner that would get the Baby to
grab it?
Before you answer, let me remind you that the LoD did the same thing
for D.H. Lawrence with respect to the first U.S. publication of /Lady
Chatterley's Lover/ in 1959.
They are also the only reason that anybody over here even /heard
of/ James Joyce, thanks to their Religious Fervor over the
"blasphemy" of /Finnegan's Wake/.
>
> Howl "kicked the doors open" /and/ "set the style" of Beat writing and
> behavior for thousands, maybe millions of people that followed... which is
> more of a /generation/ than the small group of people that were Beat before
> Howl was published and was pronounced "obscene".
>
> I'm not arguing that there weren't Beats before Howl, but that Howl did "set
> the style" of Beat writing for the flood that followed.
The only thing that ever set the style for babyshit was babyshit,
i.e., the /ding an sich/.
/None/ of those crapheads had the discipline to produce it by
design, not even by copying it.
And neither do you.
You shit because you can shit, and the rest of us have to pretend
for you that you're Artisting, or you're gonna have a *feeling* at us
and prove you're Housebroken by peeing on our papers.
>
> "The Beat Generation, that was a vision that we had, John Clellon Holmes and
> I, and Allen Ginsberg in an even wilder way, in the late Forties, of a
> generation of crazy illuminated hipsters suddenly rising and roaming
> America, serious, curious, bumming and hitchhiking everywhere, ragged,
> beatific, beautiful in an ugly graceful new way ..." -Jack Kerouac
...describing what he suddenly "discovered" -- by watching somebody
else -- that he could Get Away With.
I.e., babyshit.
>
> and
>
> "Beat goes back much further than 1948 when John Clellon Holmes (author of
> Go and The Horn) and I were sitting around trying to think up the meaning of
> the Lost Generation and the subsequent Existentialism and I said "You know,
> this is really a beat generation" and he leapt up and said "That's it,
> that's right!"." -Jack Kerouac
"Round up the usual suspects."
>
> But, again, that isn't what I wrote... I never wrote that the Beat
> generation /began/ with Howl, but that Howl set the style for Beat
> writing... made it /publishable/, which it wasn't (JK had a dozen
> manuscripts no publisher would touch, for example) before the success of
> Howl.
>
> On The Road was published in 1957, a year after Howl, and Ginsberg's success
> seems to have made the publication of OTR finally possible.
>
Too bad that no dream in Heaven or Earth will make your shit
publishable, Horatio.
Dennis M. Hammes
> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>>in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>
>>
>>>at least it ought to be among
>>>anyone who reads and posts here
>>
>>Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>all...' would be.
>
>
>
> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>
> -blue
"Six"?
Fuken monk...
Dennis M. Hammes
Ah. Before "Howl," only among the Nobility, then...
"Fellatio Under Consent of the King."
BOBOBOnoBO®
> > scrawlm...@arvig.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:16 AM:
Baby back ribs are pork. Solomon says, "You can have my share too."
--Bryan
baloney
>
> One continually /wants/ Dockery to succeed at his little Performance
> Thingy in his little bar even despite his absolutely horrid "methods"
> of scholarship and lack of artistic discipline, but then he
> so-carefully explains -- at great length -- that the reason he don't
> need no smug academic scholarship is that he can fling his own turds
> so pretty good.
I think he does succeed modestly at the thingy, but I agree with you
concerning his lack of scholarship. I learned to use references to
support my assertions in high school, but then I'm a nerd.
> Trouble is, they so often stick /before/ he flings them.
> Oh, well, it's usually funny...
>
> __________
>
> 1. Are we gittin' fuken /old/, or what?
>
Yes.
Dennis M. Hammes
> in article f32q3...@drn.newsguy.com, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God
> Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/23/07 9:34 PM:
>
>>
>>just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't
>>mean that oral sex wasn't common.
>
>
> You just make up shit, don't you?
>
The only thing that might have been "made up" about the statement was
that they "did not have the porn then."
Porn predates even the Daguerrotype, let alone the
halftone-process lithograph or zinc etching, but of course it was not
"common" as the only people who could afford decent painters (let
alone, in many cases, the paint) were the nobility.
And before paint, marblecutters were affordable only to the
/upper/ nobility, because if you Did It For LUUUve, the twit woke up
and ran off with the first drunk in sight for the simple reason that
/he/ would Appreciate her Ministry.
Indeed, the only reason that "they" "didn't have the porn then" is
that it wasn't considered "porn," which consideration had to await
the likes of "Queen" Victoria, Carrie Nation, The League Of Women
Voters -- i.e., pricksuckers whose pricksucking is /infinitely/
outvoted by cocksucking (why cocksucking is "considered" to be "porn"
in the first place).
The Aphrodite of Melos, e.g., was nothing more than an uncommon
portrait of a "common" mode of dress in the time.
Today, by contrast, we "have the porn" /solely/ because "we" have
a pricksucking priest "voted" "over" us and "Anointed" with the
"Authority" to "order" an Eight-Thousand-Dollar (thus making it Art)
Rag over the Symbolic? or "Artistic"? or "Pornographic"? Tit on the
Statue of "Justice."
One may, however, even insist that the implication "that we have
no-a-days" the porn is /also/ made up, since it is self-evident that
the cocksucking "expertise" of a Paris, Brittney, or Jessica (whom we
may at least *agree* are postpubescent) can't even keep a "common"
/bum/ (i.e., one "commonly" /presumed/ not only to Appreciate the
Ministry but to be "desperate enough for the same") in the house.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> According to 'friends', huh? You don't think OJ just thought, 'What
> the fuck, I'm rich enough to get away with ANYTHING!'
>
Not the richesse, but the habituation of a Colored Shirt with a Holy
Number on it to having his Man-hood fondled every time he was
Exhibited before the "common" people.
Nicole's crime was that she was found to have been fondling the
Man-hood of a /common/ person, i.e., "one who did not have on a
[Colored Shirt] Garment."
Thus was she therefore cast into the Eternal Darkness.
And the weeping and gnashing of teeth about it Continueth, for,
lo, We Still Can Not Find The Real Killers.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> raised in a tradition with a prohibition against 'teaching' in one's own
> name,
>
"Well, He Said..."?
/Gaah/.
baloney
By "passing" I meant "very", but I suppose that passing was more like
a kidney stone.
.
Stuart Leichter
scraw...@arvig.net wrote on 5/24/07 5:25 AM:
Get out of town! You don't recall well "May I feel? said he. / I'll squeal,
said she. .../ C-c-come? said he./ Mmmm, said she./ You're divine! said he.
/You are mine! said she"?
Will Dockery
"Stuart Leichter" wrote
>Will Dockery at wrote on 5/23/07 2:50 PM:
> > "baloney" wrote:
>
> >> Here's some corroboration, not that I necessarily agree.
> >>
> >> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4950578
> >>
> >> Birth of the Beat Generation: 50 Years of 'Howl'
> >> by Robert Siegel
> >>
> >> All Things Considered, October 7, 2005
> >>
> >> Fifty years ago, poet Allen Ginsberg gave the first public reading of
> >> "Howl" at a gathering in San Francisco. It was a literary milestone:
> >> Many consider that night the birth of the Beat Generation.
> >>
> >> and here's more:
> >> http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html
> >>
> >> birth of the Beat generation: 45th anniversary of "Howl" read at Six
> >> Gallery
> >> A `Howl' That Still Echoes Ginsberg poem recalled
> >>
> >> Paul Iorio, Chronicle Staff Writer
> >>
> >> San Francisco Chronicle - Saturday, October 28, 2000
> >>
> >> If the birth of the Beat generation could be traced back to one event,
> >> it would probably be the first public reading of Allen Ginsberg's poem
> >> ``Howl'' 45 years ago this month at the now-defunct Six Gallery in San
Francisco.
> >>
> >> Of course, you will argue that I supplied this information and not
> >> Will. However, it does show that Will is not the only person who has
> >> this opinion, since I've cited two journalists whom I doubt are ill
informed.
> >
> > Ginsberg, Cassady, Burroughs et al in the 1940s, or whether it began
when
> > Howl was published, and suddenly the world was aware of "beatniks" (a
term
> > that came even later).
> >
> > "Beat", and most of the writing was unpublished (John C Holmes' Go,
> > Burroughs' Junkie and Kerouac's The Town And The City were years earlier
but
> > none of these came close to the attention Howl recieved, and none of
these
> > "set the beat style" like Howl did).
> >
> > behavior for thousands, maybe millions of people that followed... which
is
> > more of a /generation/ than the small group of people that were Beat
before
> > Howl was published and was pronounced "obscene".
> >
> > I'm not arguing that there weren't Beats before Howl, but that Howl did
"set
> > the style" of Beat writing for the flood that followed.
> >
and
> > I, and Allen Ginsberg in an even wilder way, in the late Forties, of a
> > generation of crazy illuminated hipsters suddenly rising and roaming
> > America, serious, curious, bumming and hitchhiking everywhere, ragged,
> > beatific, beautiful in an ugly graceful new way ..." -Jack Kerouac
> >
> >
> > "Beat goes back much further than 1948 when John Clellon Holmes (author
of
> > Go and The Horn) and I were sitting around trying to think up the
meaning of
> > the Lost Generation and the subsequent Existentialism and I said "You
know,
> > this is really a beat generation" and he leapt up and said "That's it,
> > that's right!"." -Jack Kerouac
> >
> > generation /began/ with Howl, but that Howl set the style for Beat
> > writing... made it /publishable/, which it wasn't (JK had a dozen
> > manuscripts no publisher would touch, for example) before the success of
> > Howl.
> >
> > On The Road was published in 1957, a year after Howl, and Ginsberg's
success
> > seems to have made the publication of OTR finally possible.
>
> conversant with her editions of Kerouac's letters.
I read her biography of JK back in the 1970s, and though the ones that came
later (such as "Memory Babe" and "Subterranean Kerouac") are more detailed,
Charters' book was a great intoduction to Kerouac and friends.
> But the Beat 'tradition', and Ginsberg's Howl as the agreed-upon prime
mover
> in time are part of common knowledge now -- at least it ought to be among
> anyone who reads and posts here.
Ginsberg and the other beat poets most likely fall in the "this is not a
poem" canard, no doubt.
> I'm surprised y'all ain't arguing about
> whether or not Ginsberg sucked off Bob Dylan.
A question I suspect Dylan will take the answer to to the grave with him!
(is "to to" acceptable in this sentence?)
As I ask when the gay question comes up repeatedly:
"Whether I am or not, what's it to you?"
Probably not, though, since it would spoil the relationship between the two
greatest poets in America at the time for them to have been anything other
than platonic... in my opinion.
There's a section in the Scudato biography of Dylan where Scudato interviews
Baez and she tells some of that story. She said something like "Ginsberg
wants to fuck you..." and Dylan, drunk, says "Wow, far out!" and passes out.
That was in 1964 or 1965... around the time Dylan was also spending a lot of
time at Warhol's Factory, and though there were plenty of gays and whatnot,
it seems he was there for the girls, such as Edie Sedgewick and Nico. There
are some lyrics that seem to hint at homosexual encounters, such as "Ballad
of a Thin Man" and pretty explicitly, "Temporary Like Achilles":
Standing on your window, honey,
Yes, I've been here before.
Feeling so harmless,
I'm lurking at your second door.
How come you don't send me no regards?
You know I want your lovin',
Honey, why are you so hard?
Kneeling 'neath your ceiling,
Yes, I guess I'll be here for a while.
I'm tryin' to read your poetry, but,
I'm helpless, like a rich man's child.
How come you send someone out to have me barred?
You know I want your lovin',
Honey, why are you so hard?
Like a poor fool in his prime,
Yes, I know you can hear me walk,
But is your heart made out of stone, or is it lime,
Or is it just solid rock?
Well, I rush into your hallway,
Lean against your velvet door.
I watch upon your scorpion
Who crawls across your circus floor.
Just what do you think you have to guard?
You know I want your lovin',
Honey, but you're so hard.
Achilles is in your alleyway,
He don't want me here,
He does brag.
He's pointing to the sky
And he's hungry, like a man in drag.
How come you get someone like him
to be your guard?
You know I want your lovin',
Honey. but you're so hard.
-Bob Dylan
When Ginsberg hooked up with Dylan again in 1975 for the Rolling Thunder
Revue, it seems less likely, since that entourage was loaded with so many
gorgeous women that even Ginsberg is seen in the Renaldo & Clara footage
acting pretty straight with Anne Waldman and others in a funny scene where
he plays David Mansfield's father taking him to a sporting house to lose his
virginity, and Ginsberg winds up shirtless and possibly naked, getting a rub
down from one of the ladies.
The scene fades out with Mansfield muttering "please don't fuck me... please
don't fuck me..."
Good film if you ever get a chance to see it.
> I mean, neither of them poemed
> the event the way Leonard did about Janis.
Did Cohen write any more about that event besides a few lines in "Chelsia
Hotel", though?
> But that was back when blowjobs
> weren't common or knowledgeable.
I had no idea blowjobs were so obscure back then.
--
Will Dockery videos:
Ozone Stigmata- Dockery/Conley:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxfl_7KvFcc
The Ride (Combat Zone)- Dockery/Beck/Mallard:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lZ3VAmNTWc
Greybeard Cavalier- Dockery/0x0000/Fowler:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6BGlXmtzE8
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
well, school is what you make of it.
>>
>>> I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
>>> card makers, comic books, and the movies.
>>
>> who hasn't? but i don't know if you can say JJ had a bad education.
>
>Can you tell if a movie is good or bad from watching it?
depends. set the laughably ignorant primate dockery down in front of it, and
then ask him questions afterwards.... the answer might be no. set someone who
knows how to read down in front of the same movie, then that person's
observations might be worth listening to.
see? depends.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>>>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time,
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> make it 'common'.
>>>>
>>>> maybe it's not common where you are?
>>>
>>> Hi, again.
>>
>> well, i knew it was you, Stuart.
>>
>>> I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
>>> and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
>>> tasteful at the time.
>>
>> not according to the cheap porn novels from that time. but like i said,
>> perhaps where ever you were at that time it wasn't common?
>
>My classmate in grad school was a kid named McTaggart, he was a co-author
>(as 'Taggart') of What Really Happens [or Goes On] in Fort Lauderdale, 1967
>or thereabouts. Henry Miller got published here in the early 1960s. Jennie
>Denton's champagne blowjobs in The Carpetbaggers were published in 1960 or
>1961. Her character was based on Jane Russell was the word then. Like
>Whizzer, you don't know what 'common' means.
too many Protestant girls for you, Stu. that's not my fault.
>>
>>> I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
>>> everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
>>> lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means.
>>
>> i don't know. i've seen Mr. Webb type for going on a decade. i honestly do
>> believe that JJ knows what "common" means.
>
>You learned movies shit, so you're not qualified in this round.
and you are? based on????
>>
>> you have not made your case, Stu.
>
>What case is that?
i see that i'm always right.
>>
>>> Live
>>> and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me.
>>
>> my grandmother said this to me long before she died.
>>
>>> That reminds me,
>>> cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
>>> art back then.
>>
>> i think you can say that oral sex experts have always been knowledgeable
>> concerning their art.
>
>You have a bad habit -- it works on rubes -- of begging the question, e.g.,
>putting "experts" in the subject and "knowledgeable" in the predicate as
>though you've made a conclusionary statement. In that instance, it's also
>tautologically inappropriate: Experts are knowledgeble about their
>expertise. (No thanks expected for the lesson.)
yeah, but getting back to the point. i think if some one is good at what they
do, then i think you can make a reasonable claim that said person possesses both
knowledge an expertise. see?
now you said, and i quote from you:
"the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their art back then."
and i was trying to say that i disagreed with that comment, see? because if
someone was good at that, even way back then, would they not possess the
knowledge of being good at that?
are you saying that people who were good at giving head in the past were idiot
savants, possessing no real knowledge of how to be good at what they were doing?
>>
>>> In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
>>> Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
>>> 1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
>>> (post-1970s) girls.
>>
>> well, that's sorta one guy's opinion. maybe, like you, he was living in a
>> place where it was not common, and all the girls he knew were Protestants?
>
>That's like saying Ted Williams writing on hitting is one guy's no-count
>opinion, or Tiger Woods writing about golf is one guy's no-count opinion.
>It's worse than like that, but I'm letting you escape again because I'm no
>good at this trolling shit like you are.
then please do explain how Phillip Roth knew exactly the level of expertise of
all women giving head back in the 50s? did he perform a reasoned and scientific
sampling of all American men and women who were performing such acts? his
finding were perhaps published somewhere? you ask me to accept the word of a
fiction writer over the law of average numbers?
we have statistics for Ted and Tiger. where's the math with Mr. Roth?
>>
>>> I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
>>> Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
>>> reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
>>> and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see the
>>> expression on my face, like, did I get it.
>>
>> when you get old you don't have to sound this way.
>>
>>> Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
>>> wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
>>> wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried tomatoes
>>> weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
>>> "cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
>>
>> just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't
>> mean that oral sex wasn't common.
>
>You just make up shit, don't you?
the only difference between you and me is that i'm better at it, and i don't
sound as pretentious when i do it.
i've noticed you don't much like people disagreeing with you, do you Stu?
>>
>> again, i mention, perhaps you were living in a more boring region of the
>> Eisenhower era?
>
>That would be Roth, again, and Updike, two of the better chroniclers of
>manness before our time. Anyway, you should check out Carnal Knowledge
>(1970) and viddy well the last scene, or read Jack's Playboy Interview from
>around that time, or somehow get informed instead of making up shit.
i'm just trying to figure out why you demand that the rest of the earth accept
your limited and unscientific views of this subject. there's quite a bit of
evidence to prove they've been doing the oral nasty for thousands of years.
again i say 2 authors and you don't make a compelling case.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>>>>>'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>>>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>>>
>>>> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>>>
>>> Uh-oh. I'm just bad.
>>
>> and creepy.
>
>Not creepy, just bad.
oh, i think i can get quite a few votes for creepy from a grand jury.
>>
>>> I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
>>
>> so do mine, and strangely enough even in the wild and free San Francisco bay
>> area that's not a subject i've ever brought with them, nor think is
>> appropriate to do.
>
>Maybe you and they were brought up like Andre Dubus, maybe your hands were
>tied down in the crib so you wouldn't touch yourself (like my much older
>cousin's were). No maybe about your growing up believing Jesus is magic.
ho-ho-ho, that's funny. no, sparky, i was raised in Catholic schools. i knew how
to french kiss before i was 9. and what ever terror tactics the Holy and Only
Universal Mother Church in Rome used on me NEVER deterred my lust, not once.
i just don't think discussing the details of oral sex with little kids is
appropriate behavior for an adult. call me crazy and repressed.
>>
>>> It's not like we're alone.
>>
>> there's more than one pre-teen girl involved in these discussions?
>
>Older sisters, cousins, adults. Like I said, I'm bad, and I don't write
>good. I didn't mean girls under 12. Honestly, though, I'd rather troll you
>than be truthful.
why am i always told i've been trolled after i've just pointed out how someone
just stepped into their own shit? heh. chanelling dockery is not your best bet.
>>
>>> You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
>>> on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
>>> granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
>>> -- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked.
>>
>> with preteen girls? like 12-to-1?
>
>Several were still in the womb and overheard, "No! Suck it, lick it!
>'Blowjob' is a only a figure of speech!"
did that idea excite you?
>>
>>> You trolling, or is it your feelthy mind?
>>
>> no, i just think it might not be the most appropriate action one can think of
>> to talk to pre-teen girls about the details of oral sex, especially when i'm
>> not a parent of said kids. perhaps you believe in some
>>hippy-voodoo-summer-of-love-let's-have-a-be-in-where-there-is-no-boundries-man
>> -cause-we're-like-gonna-stick-it-to-your-outdated-middle-class-ideas
>> philosophy about such things, but i think there is a propriety to certain
>> subjects, especially with pre-teens who aren't my own kids.
>
>It's highly appropriate -- not "most" -- in the light of trash-talkers like
>yourself who go on endlessly around here -- where my stepdaughter has read
then perhaps you should be a better stepfather and look into what it is your
stepdaughter is reading? rec.arts.poems is for adults. if i had a pre-teen
child, i don't think i would like her to read this newsgroup.
>about cocksucking and coke and skinny hookers,
i like buxom hookers who have hash as well.
>behaviors that kids don't
>read as humor. At least tell me it's possible to have an intelligent
>exchange with someone like you. Not that I'll believe it.
if you wish to have a discussion on any subject, Stu, all you have to do is ask.
but if you're asking me if it's appropriate to discuss the details of oral sex
with a pre-teen girl, i will say it's not.
>>
>> i guess i'm just old-fashioned.
>
>You wish.
about certain things.
>>
>>> That reminds me, did you read Roth's
>>> The Human Stain?
>>
>> not yet i haven't.
>
>Dear god, where's my nitroglycerin tablet!
we're not that lucky.
i only have so many awake hours in the day. sorry. time manangement is about
compromising. read this, finish that, start this project, catch something in the
paper, etc. i've never had a month at xmas and summer's off.
>>
>>> His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
>>> over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap.
>>
>> as was i. but i don't know if you can make the sudden leap from that idea to
>> feeling absolutely free in discussing the details of oral sex with a little
>> girl who has not started to menstruate yet.
>
>Spare me and everyone else your pontifications about logic.
blame the Jesuits.
>Why do you leap
>to calling it "feeling absolutely free"? I know why, you're one of those
>boys from Brazil, aren't you? Aside from your nazi 'arguing' tactics, you're
>also ill-informed about menstrual demographics, like most things you talk
>about.
Stu, it's a very simple process here. you feel it's perfectly all right to go
into details about oral sex with a pre-teen girl? how would such a conversation
go, would you describe, in detail, how she should use her lips, her tongue, do
you go into detail about swallowing? do you think this is an appropriate topic
of discussion with a girl of 12?
my point is no, it's not. ok? it's really that simple.
>>> Do you think Joe Franklin really
>>> raped Sarah Silverman?
>>
>> whatever that means.
>
>I assumed you'd seen The Aristocrats, before I learned you're
>"old-fashioned". I'm just so bad.
i've never had xmas and summer's off.
Most sincerely,
GodBuilt
--
-----------------------------------------------
"I like to drink, I like to drive, I like to think all of the Jews got out of
the Holocaust alive, my name is Mel, and can't you tell, I like Tequila!"
Denis Leary
Stuart Leichter
will.d...@knology.net wrote on 5/24/07 10:36 AM:
Thanks for the feedback, though you mean Anthony Scaduto.
>
>> I mean, neither of them poemed
>> the event the way Leonard did about Janis.
>
> Did Cohen write any more about that event besides a few lines in "Chelsia
> Hotel", though?
>
>> But that was back when blowjobs
>> weren't common or knowledgeable.
>
> I had no idea blowjobs were so obscure back then.
Far from 'obscure' and only a seasoned veteran knew how to suck cock good.
During the Woodstock week, I was staying at a friend's apartment. In the
morning he came home with a hippie chick who had watched the sun rise with
him at the reservoir in Highland Park, and they were fucking in the bed next
to me. She was 17 or 18 and bound for college in September. She wouldn't go
down on him. He tried to force her, even with both hands, but she resisted.
She hung around for a day or so and gave 4 or 5 guys the crabs. They kicked
her out after saying the worst possible things to her, all the while
scrubbing down the bathroom and kitchen with CN. A few weeks later, she came
over on a Sunday while I was the only one there. She asked me if I knew a
certain guy, I did (an ex-con), and she told me she was staying with him and
he was teaching her how to give blowjobs, and could she practice with me.
Now you have some idea. I'd repost "When Time Stopped Being Was", my poemed
take on "A Walk on the Moon", but I have to clean up the place before my
housekeeper comes over to clean.
Will Dockery
A good Ginsberg quote on this time period:
"...Well, it just seemed a very noble song, like the kind of nobility you
don't often see, the nobility of a great bard. Which is what the whole
Rolling Thunder tour was about. And also a very strange alchemical thing in
the sense that he had to take all this money and all this machinery and all
this electricity to create a ten-foot-square spot where he would be
completely free to stamp his foot in time to what he hears in his own head
as music, and create on the spot a new rhythm each time he played 'Idiot
Wind' or any other song, and play each song differently each time with all
the musicians completely there in their bodies, alert, listening, sensitive,
receptive, and respondent to his changes of time and beat, his elongation of
the vowels, so they get up on the stage and howl, in the sense of elongated
vowels, with complete self-confidence and authority and solace, solitary
loneliness, in the middle of 27,000 people and half a million dollars worth
of equipment: in a ten-foot square place where one person can totally
express himself freely and actually express a good deal of the emotion of
the crowd of people around him, speak for people in a sense, speak for
others, speak for himself and others at the same time. So 'Idiot Wind' seems
to me like an acme of that. On the Hard Rain album, even in diminished
volume, there's still the sense of slowdown of time and the slowdown of the
song and even the gaps in the song where there's a moment of silence, and
you don't know whether the song is continuing, and all of a sudden it
continues with the same logic as before. So he's stepping in and out of
time. It's noticeable in the fantasticalness of his pronunciation of
consonants. The thing that I kept thinking is that expression on his face
which looks like pain and/or disdain, or sneer, is really just a mouth
working, his face trying to pull back his teeth to pronounce his 't's
clearly enough to be heard into the microphone, to hear a single 't' or an
's' above all the roar of the other electrical instruments, to be heard as a
human syllable and be understood by the ear so that music had word, it had
word in there. That's why he's a great poet in the sense of great orator.
That's the best oratory I've heard, or the best recitation of poetry. It was
a great poetry reading ... In between the concerts we made movies, almost
every day there was a scene to act in, so that would take up half a day or
morning: we worked very hard putting on a concert and making movies
simultaneously, no chance to get up and laze around all day and not worry
about anything and then jump into another concert. Dylan actually was
working on the afternoon of a concert: like going out to Kerouac's grave in
a caravan and sitting there, and then having a concert in Lowell that night.
Singing all the night before and having to get up at 10 am or something, a
lot of energy. Since the tour, he's just disappeared from my vision. Gone
back up to heaven." -Ginsberg
> Thanks for the feedback, though you mean Anthony Scaduto.
Yeah, that's the guy... read his book when I was a kid, great stuff.
> >> I mean, neither of them poemed
The Scaduto book mentioned that in 1972 they were in the the studio,
recording an album of songs together... it didn't come out until 30 years or
so later, though... I haven't heard it.
I did come across one of the poems Ginsberg wrote for Dylan, though:
Blue Gossip
I guess he got sick of having to get up and get
scared of being shot down
Also probably he got sick of
being a methedrine clown; /* !!! around New Morning?
Also he wanted to go back explore
Macdougal Street New York town /* when left Woodstock
I guess he got sick of a Cosmic
consciousness too abstract
I guess he wanted to go back
t'his own babies' baby shit fact
Change his own children's diapers not get lost
in a transcendental Rock & Roll act.
I guess he thought maybe he had
enough gold for the world
Saw red white & blue big enough now ?* Newport?
needn't be further unfurled
I guess he felt prophet show good example,
bring himself down in the world.
I guess he took Zen Chinese vows
and became an anonymous lout
I guess he figured he better step down off stage
before he got kicked out
I guess he felt lonesome and blue
and he wanted out.
I guess he did what anyone
sens'ble would do
Otherwise like Mick Jagger go out on stage
wearing curtains of blue
And fly around the world with great big
diamonds and pearls made of glue.
I guess he felt he'd used up
'nuff of the 'lectric supply /* John Welsey
I guess he know that the Angel
of Death was nigh -
I guess he sighed his
next mortal sigh.
I guess he guessed he could
find out his own mortal face
I guess he desired to examine
his own family place
I guess he decided to act with
more modest silent grace
I guess he decided to learn
from ancient tongue
So he studied Hebrew
as before he blabbed from his lung
I guess he required to learn new
tender kind songs to be sung.
I guess he thought he was not guru
for Everyone's eyes
He must have seen Vajra Hells ??
in old visions he'd divined
He must've seen infernal assassins
stealing his garbage supplies.
I guess he decided to die
while still alive
In that way, ancient death-in-life,
saint always thrive
Above all remember his children
he already picked a good wife.
I guess he decided to Be
as well as sing the blues
I guess he decided like Prospero
to throw his white magic wand into the Ocean blue -
Burn up all is magic books,
go back to Manhattan, think something new.
I guess he decided like Prospero
World was a dream
Every third thought is grave
or so Samsara would seem -
Took Hebrew Boddhisatva's vow
and saw goden light death agleam.
I guess he decided he
did not need to be More Big
I guess he decided he was not the
Great Cosmic Thingamajig
I guess he decided to end that sweet song
and such is his Suchness I dig.
-Allen Ginsberg
23 October 1972
Well, Hell, while you're cleaning up I'll go look it up for you... haven't
read any Leichter in a while.
Beau Blue
>in article 2e2a53domlgb2qtum...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/24/07 12:21 AM:
>
>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>>
>>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>>
>>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>>> all...' would be.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>>
>>>> -blue
>>>
>>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'?
>>
>> I don't.
>
>Good. What did you think I was saying that made you post your insult?
Insult? baNob, would I insult you? So, you think a person informing a
puritan of the profligacy of blowjobs during mankind's journey to this
point in history is an insult to the puritan? How interesting.
>Did you think I meant 'new' or 'no big deal'?
>
>>
>>> Is it because you had a bad, sad
>>> education?
>>
>> I was educated in Pittsburgh. Well, Oakland. And in Cleveland. Well,
>> Coventry. And in New York, Monmouth, New London, Bad Tolz, Berkeley,
>> and Palo Alto. Wait, there's also San Jose and Santa Cruz. I won't
>> count the Churchill Boro education 'cause, well, they paid me.
>
>Is that a Yes or a No?
That's a 'decide for yourself', baNob. CMU, CWRU, CUNY, Connecticut
College (the first year they went coed), Crypto school, NCO academy,
California's UC system AND an infamous business school in Palo Alto.
There are those that come down on both sides of that yea or nay of
yours. You're a yea, then? Well, I'm not surprised.
> It sounds like a Yes. I went to Central Catholic for
>six weeks.
>
>Did you know August Wilson or Annie Dillard? They were educated in Oakland.
The Wilson I know is Robert Anton and the Dillard, Doug. Bob died just
recently. A bunch of us had a wake at the Coconut Grove on the Santa
Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Virtual World Studio did some filming. I said
nice things from the podium (as did many others, he had a ton of
friends) and the party was great. I should be able to make a few flash
vids of it for the Cruzio Cafe sometime within the year. Depending on
my schedule.
>Well, the Hill District and Shadyside.
>
>>
>>> Yes? No one would lose money betting that you did.
>>
>> Only Twitch, I suppose.
>
>Hey, Twitch! Look who supposes you have money to lose!
Last dollar tip he got from Frank Fugalug?
>
>>
>>> Cleopatra's
>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time, doesn't
>>> make it 'common'.
>>
>> Well, think what you will, I know I do.
>
>But if Cleopatra and her faithful cohorts painted their lips to advertise
>and announce their wares -- who would it be for if it was 'common'? What
>would be the point?
Money? Power? A warm place to sleep and meals on a steady basis?
Love? Hate? Girls Gone Wild videos? What?
>
>>
>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911).
>>
>> According to 'friends', huh? You don't think OJ just thought, 'What
>> the fuck, I'm rich enough to get away with ANYTHING!'
>>
>> Let's blame it on blowjobs, not psychosis full of privilege? Works for
>> you, huh?
>
>The weak prosecution tried to make a big deal out of OJ's coming home to
>find Nicole in flagrante delicious, and to paint her as being part of a
>niche who fancied themselves as the creme de la creme.
That much money always leads to feelings of being the 'creme de la
creme'. But low, middle, or high, society loves blowjobs (unless one
is repuglican, of course). Are you a Repuglican, baNob?
>
>>
>>> Maybe I should have written
>>> 'commonplace',
>>
>> Blowjobs have never been not commonplace, baNob, you know that right?
>
>Most of what you know I don't know. Almost all the witnesses who matter have
>been dead a long time.
But the wall paintings, tapestries, mosaics and carvings they left
behind might be an indication, right?
>Whatever you say about it sounds arrogant.
How so? Just because I spent some of my youth wondering how many
Kinseys there were before Kinsey and what THEY thought about
sexuality? Maybe Ovid was a therapist? Maybe not ...
>I was
>raised in a tradition with a prohibition against 'teaching' in one's own
>name, and guessing is taboo.
>
>>
>>> or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked to,
>>
>> Hmmmmmm ... should Cook [AKA god] be worried?
>
>Once a giggler always a giggler. So much for your nonsense about knowing the
>meaning of 'common' as long as it's not in your back yard. Hey, I'm not one
>of the revisionists who revile Margaret Mead.
What do those Manus Islanders know about anything?
And Freeman COULD be evidence that blowjobs were essential to Taupou
society. Remember, according to a President of the United States,
blowjobs are "NOT sexual relations with that woman."
Oh, and it was Freeman who was reviled. Well, until the late 80s.
>
>>
>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>
>> In wait, huh? I usually lie at night when I've been caught at
>> something I'm not willing to admit I do. Oh, and in every day I feel
>> storytelling is important. I think that's pretty much when everybody
>> lies. Right? Maybe not ... there's that whole OJ thing, I forgot. So
>> sometimes people lie in courtrooms, too.
>
>You started it god knows why.
You admitted to doing something BAD that wasn't really bad, baNob.
What else was left to do?
BTW, pointing out how thin your experience with BJs is was your doing,
Stu, not mine. That's where 'IT' began.
>
>>
>>> Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>>> writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't sound
>>> like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
>>
>> hehehehehehehehehe, baNob, you're a lousy golf shot, you know. They
>> call you Hannibal's little brother, Duffer Leichter, huh?
>
>It's not pronounced like that, or spelled like that, and you're knowingly
>stealing the Yapster's old schtick, so you have to take an unplayable lie or
>re-hit from the original spot and add a penalty stroke.
Which Yapster? I missed it. Sorry. But that doesn't change how badly
you shank your drives. Really. Great big banana ball on the NPD thing,
dribble off the tee on the BJ thing. Boooooo ........
>Yeah, I had a bad day on the golf course today, new irons, plus it was muggy by
>at least a club and a half.
Excuses, excuses.
>Monday I banged out a few 300+ (we're in a drought, but
>still) and hit all but one fairway (hardly any GIR's though cause of the new
>weapons).
An yet, you still brag. Typical duffer.
>In my draft-age days, I was a golf instructor at a summer camp and
>composed the song for the Gray Team in the color war that won 1st prize!
More brag, brag, brag. And the fish you catch are all humongous, huh?
-blue
>The
>music was Lerner & Loewe's "Guinevere" ("O the Gray Team will win", etc.,
>for "So they found Guinevere", etc.).
>
>
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
Bill Minor * Robert Sward <> Internet Broadsides
Morton Marcus * Renay <> Contemporary American Poetry
~ Blue's Cruzio Cafe ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~cafe
galathaea
[...]
> The Wilson I know is Robert Anton and the Dillard, Doug. Bob died just
> recently. A bunch of us had a wake at the Coconut Grove on the Santa
> Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Virtual World Studio did some filming. I said
> nice things from the podium (as did many others, he had a ton of
> friends) and the party was great. I should be able to make a few flash
> vids of it for the Cruzio Cafe sometime within the year. Depending on
> my schedule.
the inquisition has grown so powerful of late...
shit i miss bob
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Stuart Leichter
Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/24/07 11:37 AM:
The only way you got into college was cos the school needed the money. The
only reason they didn't flunk you out is cos the school needed the money
plus you cheated and had other people do a lot of your writing.
>
>>>
>>>> I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
>>>> card makers, comic books, and the movies.
>>>
>>> who hasn't? but i don't know if you can say JJ had a bad education.
>>
>> Can you tell if a movie is good or bad from watching it?
>
> depends. set the laughably ignorant primate dockery down in front of it, and
> then ask him questions afterwards.... the answer might be no. set someone who
> knows how to read down in front of the same movie, then that person's
> observations might be worth listening to.
>
> see? depends.
But can you -- you -- tell? I can tell if someone's well-educated or not
from how they write and read. A person's literacy level is still the only
subjective way of telling. It can't be faked, and you can't hide from it.
You're not well-educated, but you're likeable and smart, and that's more
important.
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>>>>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time,
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> make it 'common'.
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe it's not common where you are?
>>>>
>>>> Hi, again.
>>>
>>> well, i knew it was you, Stuart.
>>>
>>>> I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
>>>> and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
>>>> tasteful at the time.
>>>
>>> not according to the cheap porn novels from that time. but like i said,
>>> perhaps where ever you were at that time it wasn't common?
>>
>> My classmate in grad school was a kid named McTaggart, he was a co-author
>> (as 'Taggart') of What Really Happens [or Goes On] in Fort Lauderdale, 1967
>> or thereabouts. Henry Miller got published here in the early 1960s. Jennie
>> Denton's champagne blowjobs in The Carpetbaggers were published in 1960 or
>> 1961. Her character was based on Jane Russell was the word then. Like
>> Whizzer, you don't know what 'common' means.
>
> too many Protestant girls for you, Stu. that's not my fault.
Almost all were Catholic-raised, and the Protestant ones were also wonderful
and completely loving.
>
>>>
>>>> I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
>>>> everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
>>>> lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means.
>>>
>>> i don't know. i've seen Mr. Webb type for going on a decade. i honestly do
>>> believe that JJ knows what "common" means.
>>
>> You learned movies shit, so you're not qualified in this round.
>
> and you are? based on????
I figure it's based on the historical and current meanings of the word
'common'. Cocksucking has not always been common across all social classes,
groups, and ages, plus I got good grades in a dozen sociology courses, plus
I developed the film studies program where I worked, plus I talked to people
who said their mothers absolutely never sucked cock, but that's anecdotal,
like my much younger (Catholic) girlfriend who said she wondered if someone
of my generation (her father's) did/would do stuff like that, and I'm done
with discussing the subject with you until you can show that you know what
'common' means.
>
>>>
>>> you have not made your case, Stu.
>>
>> What case is that?
>
> i see that i'm always right.
About what? You're one of about 5 billion qualified experts on movies, but
you're the only Dockery scholar on the planet. Me, I'm seldom right, but
about those two facts I can't be contradicted.
>
>>>
>>>> Live
>>>> and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me.
>>>
>>> my grandmother said this to me long before she died.
>>>
>>>> That reminds me,
>>>> cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
>>>> art back then.
>>>
>>> i think you can say that oral sex experts have always been knowledgeable
>>> concerning their art.
>>
>> You have a bad habit -- it works on rubes -- of begging the question, e.g.,
>> putting "experts" in the subject and "knowledgeable" in the predicate as
>> though you've made a conclusionary statement. In that instance, it's also
>> tautologically inappropriate: Experts are knowledgeble about their
>> expertise. (No thanks expected for the lesson.)
>
> yeah, but getting back to the point. i think if some one is good at what they
> do, then i think you can make a reasonable claim that said person possesses
> both knowledge an expertise. see?
No no no no. You fucked up bad with your pinheaded point, so drop it and
save yourself from worse humiliation.
>
> now you said, and i quote from you:
>
> "the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their art back then."
"Their art" was a euphemism I used instead of the term of art for
cocksucking.
>
> and i was trying to say that i disagreed with that comment, see? because if
> someone was good at that, even way back then, would they not possess the
> knowledge of being good at that?
Obviously while you were growing up you had to trick everyone in your family
with stupid shit like that, probably Jesuit influence.
>
> are you saying that people who were good at giving head in the past were idiot
> savants, possessing no real knowledge of how to be good at what they were
> doing?
Do you know what 'secondary development' means in exposition? The Dying
Animal sentence (below) is an illustration. (This tutorial is your last.)
>
>
>>>
>>>> In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
>>>> Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
>>>> 1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
>>>> (post-1970s) girls.
>>>
>>> well, that's sorta one guy's opinion. maybe, like you, he was living in a
>>> place where it was not common, and all the girls he knew were Protestants?
>>
>> That's like saying Ted Williams writing on hitting is one guy's no-count
>> opinion, or Tiger Woods writing about golf is one guy's no-count opinion.
>> It's worse than like that, but I'm letting you escape again because I'm no
>> good at this trolling shit like you are.
>
> then please do explain how Phillip Roth knew exactly the level of expertise of
> all women giving head back in the 50s? did he perform a reasoned and
> scientific sampling of all American men and women who were performing such
> acts? his finding were perhaps published somewhere? you ask me to accept the
> word of a fiction writer over the law of average numbers?
Just as we thought: you have no comprehension of great fiction writing. I'm
seldom right, but when I am, I can't be successfully refuted.
>
> we have statistics for Ted and Tiger. where's the math with Mr. Roth?
Maybe he sampled his students at Penn or at the Iowa Writers Workshop --
hey, I was accepted there but they wouldn't give me any stipend. Jim, he won
every literary award in the US and GB -- most a few times -- except the
Nobel. You're the only person I know of who questions his experience and
telling. You're alone on an ice floe. Prove he doesn't know what he's
talking about. Make him give back his awards and honors. Do it. Show us
you're smart, sho us you're able, show us you know how to read.
>
>>>
>>>> I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
>>>> Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
>>>> reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
>>>> and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see
>>>> the
>>>> expression on my face, like, did I get it.
>>>
>>> when you get old you don't have to sound this way.
>>>
>>>> Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
>>>> wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
>>>> wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried
>>>> tomatoes
>>>> weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
>>>> "cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
>>>
>>> just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't
>>> mean that oral sex wasn't common.
>>
>> You just make up shit, don't you?
>
> the only difference between you and me is that i'm better at it, and i don't
> sound as pretentious when i do it.
That could be Dave Barry talking. No one on these groups sounds more
pretentious than you, and it's been known for a long time. It's why everyone
humors you.
>
> i've noticed you don't much like people disagreeing with you, do you Stu?
You mean Bleu Cheez Whiz and you in particular? The fuck do I care if you
don't know how to read or write? If someone misrepresents what I write here,
I'll point out their error, there's nothing emotional about it, but it's
frustrating when I'm exchanging with people who fuck up and won't admit they
fucked up.
>
>>>
>>> again, i mention, perhaps you were living in a more boring region of the
>>> Eisenhower era?
>>
>> That would be Roth, again, and Updike, two of the better chroniclers of
>> manness before our time. Anyway, you should check out Carnal Knowledge
>> (1970) and viddy well the last scene, or read Jack's Playboy Interview from
>> around that time, or somehow get informed instead of making up shit.
>
> i'm just trying to figure out why you demand that the rest of the earth accept
> your limited and unscientific views of this subject. there's quite a bit of
> evidence to prove they've been doing the oral nasty for thousands of years.
What's to figure out? You don't know what 'common' means, it doesn't mean
'always'. I'm starting to realize that you think all words are synonyms for
each other.
>
> again i say 2 authors and you don't make a compelling case.
You also say Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter, you also don't know
enough about Protestant women to say what you say about them, and you would
never have been admitted to any college when those two authors went to
college, all your own fault, no one else's.
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>>>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>>>>>> 'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked
>>>>>> to,
>>>>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>>>>
>>>>> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>>>>
>>>> Uh-oh. I'm just bad.
>>>
>>> and creepy.
>>
>> Not creepy, just bad.
>
> oh, i think i can get quite a few votes for creepy from a grand jury.
Not with your (cough) skills.
>
>>>
>>>> I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
>>>
>>> so do mine, and strangely enough even in the wild and free San Francisco bay
>>> area that's not a subject i've ever brought with them, nor think is
>>> appropriate to do.
>>
>> Maybe you and they were brought up like Andre Dubus, maybe your hands were
>> tied down in the crib so you wouldn't touch yourself (like my much older
>> cousin's were). No maybe about your growing up believing Jesus is magic.
>
> ho-ho-ho, that's funny. no, sparky, i was raised in Catholic schools. i knew
> how
> to french kiss before i was 9. and what ever terror tactics the Holy and Only
> Universal Mother Church in Rome used on me NEVER deterred my lust, not once.
You don't have to protest so much and resort to all caps if you want to be
believed, but it's too late for that.
>
> i just don't think discussing the details of oral sex with little kids is
> appropriate behavior for an adult. call me crazy and repressed.
Who said anything about "details" or "little kids" nazi boy?
>
>>>
>>>> It's not like we're alone.
>>>
>>> there's more than one pre-teen girl involved in these discussions?
>>
>> Older sisters, cousins, adults. Like I said, I'm bad, and I don't write
>> good. I didn't mean girls under 12. Honestly, though, I'd rather troll you
>> than be truthful.
>
> why am i always told i've been trolled after i've just pointed out how someone
> just stepped into their own shit? heh. chanelling dockery is not your best
> bet.
Let's see, "I'd rather troll you" is what kind of verbal construction? Is it
the past tense like you say it is? Why do you think it's past tense? Is it
your illiteracy maybe? Or Satan? It wouldn't matter except that you try to
make a point from it. One more tutorial (still gratis): If your major
premise is flawed, your following points are all flawed. Consider the term
of art 'flawed' as a kind and generous term. Then find someone to teach you
how to read English, someone with Job's patience.
>
>
>>>
>>>> You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
>>>> on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
>>>> granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
>>>> -- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked.
>>>
>>> with preteen girls? like 12-to-1?
>>
>> Several were still in the womb and overheard, "No! Suck it, lick it!
>> 'Blowjob' is a only a figure of speech!"
>
> did that idea excite you?
What idea would that be?
>
>>>
>>>> You trolling, or is it your feelthy mind?
>>>
>>> no, i just think it might not be the most appropriate action one can think
>>> of
>>> to talk to pre-teen girls about the details of oral sex, especially when i'm
>>> not a parent of said kids. perhaps you believe in some
>>> hippy-voodoo-summer-of-love-let's-have-a-be-in-where-there-is-no-boundries-m
>>> an
>>> -cause-we're-like-gonna-stick-it-to-your-outdated-middle-class-ideas
>>> philosophy about such things, but i think there is a propriety to certain
>>> subjects, especially with pre-teens who aren't my own kids.
>>
>> It's highly appropriate -- not "most" -- in the light of trash-talkers like
>> yourself who go on endlessly around here -- where my stepdaughter has read
>
> then perhaps you should be a better stepfather and look into what it is your
> stepdaughter is reading? rec.arts.poems is for adults. if i had a pre-teen
> child, i don't think i would like her to read this newsgroup.
Hey, did you know that the director of The Human Genome Project was
home-schooled? His mother says she had no idea how to teach, so she got out
the dictionary, and they took it from there.
I figure you were force-fed everything. It shows in the way you try to
force-feed here. But IRL you're a good guy, and that's what's important.
My stepdaughter read Wally Lamb's I Know This Much Is True in hardback and
deemed it "the best book I've ever read". I'm sure much of it was beyond her
ken.
>
>> about cocksucking and coke and skinny hookers,
>
> i like buxom hookers who have hash as well.
>
>> behaviors that kids don't
>> read as humor. At least tell me it's possible to have an intelligent
>> exchange with someone like you. Not that I'll believe it.
>
> if you wish to have a discussion on any subject, Stu, all you have to do is
> ask.
Do you think Sibel Edmunds is hot?
>
> but if you're asking me if it's appropriate to discuss the details of oral sex
> with a pre-teen girl, i will say it's not.
The only thing I'm asking is why do you say "details", Jim? Answer that,
please. I've had discussions -- very very few -- with only 2 or 3 young
girls, practically family -- and only in broad, general terms, because
there's a lot of shit out there, a lot of misinformation and ugliness.
>
>>>
>>> i guess i'm just old-fashioned.
>>
>> You wish.
>
> about certain things.
>
>>>
>>>> That reminds me, did you read Roth's
>>>> The Human Stain?
>>>
>>> not yet i haven't.
>>
>> Dear god, where's my nitroglycerin tablet!
>
> we're not that lucky.
>
> i only have so many awake hours in the day. sorry. time manangement is about
> compromising. read this, finish that, start this project, catch something in
> the paper, etc. i've never had a month at xmas and summer's off.
It was six weeks off for xmas, hardly enough time to develop new materials
for the next session. Including summers, I probably worked at my job 80
hours a week, the other time pretty much consumed me with what my job was
because I was never satisfied. Plus, until the IRS changed the laws, I wrote
off my cable and movie tickets.
>
>>>
>>>> His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
>>>> over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap.
>>>
>>> as was i. but i don't know if you can make the sudden leap from that idea to
>>> feeling absolutely free in discussing the details of oral sex with a little
>>> girl who has not started to menstruate yet.
>>
>> Spare me and everyone else your pontifications about logic.
>
> blame the Jesuits.
>
>> Why do you leap
>> to calling it "feeling absolutely free"? I know why, you're one of those
>> boys from Brazil, aren't you? Aside from your nazi 'arguing' tactics, you're
>> also ill-informed about menstrual demographics, like most things you talk
>> about.
>
> Stu, it's a very simple process here. you feel it's perfectly all right to go
> into details about oral sex with a pre-teen girl? how would such a
> conversation go, would you describe, in detail, how she should use her lips,
> her tongue, do you go into detail about swallowing? do you think this is an
> appropriate topic of discussion with a girl of 12?
Thanks for asking, Jim. How many times is it now that you've said "details"?
No one else has said anything that even means "details". You are one
motherfucking creepy piece of shit, Jim. No offense intended, and I hope
none is taken.
>
> my point is no, it's not. ok? it's really that simple.
You'll melt down again here if you don't quit being a slimeball with me. I
have the time to make sure of it and I couldn't care less how many of your
goombahs try to support you.
>
>>>> Do you think Joe Franklin really
>>>> raped Sarah Silverman?
>>>
>>> whatever that means.
>>
>> I assumed you'd seen The Aristocrats, before I learned you're
>> "old-fashioned". I'm just so bad.
>
> i've never had xmas and summer's off.
Not paid you should say.
>
> Most sincerely,
>
> GodBuilt
>
Stuart Leichter
Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/24/07 2:23 PM:
> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> in article 2e2a53domlgb2qtum...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/24/07 12:21 AM:
>>
>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> in article o1c953l7u7rbg9iec...@4ax.com, Beau Blue at
>>>> Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/23/07 5:25 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> Stuart Leichter <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> in article C27A1EB7.50D37%leic...@bellsouth.net, Stuart Leichter at
>>>>>> leic...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/23/07 4:39 PM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> at least it ought to be among
>>>>>>> anyone who reads and posts here
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christ is that "among anyone..." bad! I wonder if it's as bad as 'amoung
>>>>>> all...' would be.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, what's BAD is you thinking that blowjobs weren't common once upon
>>>>> a time. Blowjobs not common? When? The first six days out of Eden,
>>>>> maybe. Not since then, tho'. Believe it.
>>>>>
>>>>> -blue
>>>>
>>>> You don't know what 'common' means, do you, Cheez Whiz? Why do you think it
>>>> means something like 'novel' or 'ordinary'?
>>>
>>> I don't.
>>
>> Good. What did you think I was saying that made you post your insult?
>
> Insult? baNob, would I insult you? So, you think a person informing a
> puritan of the profligacy of blowjobs during mankind's journey to this
> point in history is an insult to the puritan? How interesting.
I took your "What's BAD is you thinking that..." as an insult because, well,
I'm accustomed to being relied on for being good at thinking. References and
credentials available for a fee.
Beau Blue
>On May 24, 11:23 am, Beau Blue <Beau_B...@comcast.net> wrote:
>[...]
>> The Wilson I know is Robert Anton and the Dillard, Doug. Bob died just
>> recently. A bunch of us had a wake at the Coconut Grove on the Santa
>> Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Virtual World Studio did some filming. I said
>> nice things from the podium (as did many others, he had a ton of
>> friends) and the party was great. I should be able to make a few flash
>> vids of it for the Cruzio Cafe sometime within the year. Depending on
>> my schedule.
>
>the inquisition has grown so powerful of late...
>
>shit i miss bob
Just reread 'cosmic trigger', it'll feel like he's in the room.
-blue
* *
*
"I miss Arlen, too. The pair together was awesome."
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
Beau Blue
>On May 23, 10:46 am, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
><GodBuilt1...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In article <da7aa$4653df4c$18d62320$7...@KNOLOGY.NET>, Will Dockery says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" wrote
>> >>Will Dockery says...
>> >>>On May 21, 5:42 am, Sammybaby wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> Your post contributes nothing nor does it live up the suggestions
>> >you
>> >> >> >> are making to dockery. It should fall to the same criticism you aim
>> >> >> >> at Dockery but oddly was not self-edited.
>>
>> >> >> >The only reason GB's on this thread is because he saw "Will Dockery"
>> >had
>> >> >> >posted here... obviously he hasn't even /read/ the poem.
>>
>> >> >> not at all.
>>
>> >> >No surprise.
>>
>> >> >> >In my opinion one of the better ones posted around here in a while,
>> >being
>> >> >> >influenced by the Beat style, and doing it well for modern times.
>>
>> >> >> what's the beat style? what in the poem says its been done in a "beat"
>> >> >style?
>>
>> >> >The poem points to "Howl", which pretty much set the "beat" style:
>>
>> >> really? how did Howl set the "beat" style, dockery? in what way did it do
>> >this?
>> >> there are scholars who feel that Ginsberg merely synthesized the elements
>> >of
>> >> other writers around and produced one piece that felt some notoriety, but
>> >the
>> >> piece couldn't be said to "set" the beat style.
>>
>> >Sure it did.
>>
>> >Besides Holmes' Go, years earlier, and Ferlinghetti's Coney Island Of The
>> >Mind, Howl was pretty much the first piece of Beat writing to hit
>> >internationally, and thus /set/ the Beat style for the public, and
>> >influenced those that came later.
>>
>> what do you mean hit internationally? there was some billboard chart that showed
>> this??" where are the scholars that say Howl is the definitive beat poem? that
>> it set a style that had aready been around for several years.
>>
>> >> if you knew anything, at all, you would know that the "beat movement
>> >traces it's
>> >> roots all the way back to 1944.
>>
>> >I didn't write when it all began, and Town & The City is hardly an example
>> >of Beat writing... and in fact before Howl Ginsberg himself wrote in a much
>> >more "traditional" style.
>>
>> >Sure, there was plenty of Beat writing, but even Kerouac's books remained
>> >unpublished until /after/ Howl broke big.
>>
>> so please find me a scholar, other than your illiterate self, that says howl set
>> the beat style.
>>
>> >>the "beat" movement had produced many poems
>> >> before Ginsberg's Howl.
>>
>> >But Howl kicked the doors open.
>>
>> in what way? what doors are you speaking of? i see a lot of poetry that attempts
>> to copy Howl, but i see little good poetry that copies it's style.
>>
>> you use this idiot cliche of "kicked the doors open." but you show no examples
>> of where and how.
>>
>> you don't know what you're taking about, dockery, you never do. you mouth these
>> meaningless cliches to try and cover up the fact that you're ignorant.
>>
>> >> what you are saying is that the beat movement in poetry
>> >> really didn't begin until 1956 when Howl was published.
>>
>> >Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
>> >was the first Beat writing.
>>
>> and i've asked you to prove this. and all you give us is meaningless cliches
>> that clearly display your ignorance and the fact that you don't know what you're
>> talking about.
>>
>Here's some corroboration, not that I necessarily agree.
>
>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4950578
>
>Birth of the Beat Generation: 50 Years of 'Howl'
>by Robert Siegel
The birth was in Manhattan in the forties. The publicity was San
Francisco, years later. Because of Kerouac and Ginsberg. But
mostly because of Ferlinghetti. Forefather with bookstore. Good
idea, huh? Then came the bandwagoneers. Or so I've been told
by people who wouldn't lie to me.
-blue
>
>All Things Considered, October 7, 2005
>
>Fifty years ago, poet Allen Ginsberg gave the first public reading of
>"Howl" at a gathering in San Francisco. It was a literary milestone:
>Many consider that night the birth of the Beat Generation.
>
>and here's more:
>
>http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html
>
>birth of the Beat generation: 45th anniversary of "Howl" read at Six
>Gallery
>A `Howl' That Still Echoes Ginsberg poem recalled
>
>Paul Iorio, Chronicle Staff Writer
>
>San Francisco Chronicle - Saturday, October 28, 2000
>
>If the birth of the Beat generation could be traced back to one event,
>it would probably be the first public reading of Allen Ginsberg's poem
>``Howl'' 45 years ago this month at the now-defunct Six Gallery in San
>Francisco.
>
>Of course, you will argue that I supplied this information and not
>Will. However, it does show that Will is not the only person who has
>this opinion, since I've cited two journalists whom I doubt are ill
>informed.
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
Stuart Leichter
Beau...@comcast.net wrote on 5/24/07 2:23 PM:
I'm impressed, and also fatigued. Hey, maybe you knew my wife at CMU.
I'm whatever you say I am, including rich beyond counting. I am Spartacus, I
am Lyndon LaRouche, I am the one who voted for Ralph Nader as a write-in
since 1976 until 2004.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Maybe I should have written
>>>> 'commonplace',
>>>
>>> Blowjobs have never been not commonplace, baNob, you know that right?
>>
>> Most of what you know I don't know. Almost all the witnesses who matter have
>> been dead a long time.
>
> But the wall paintings, tapestries, mosaics and carvings they left
> behind might be an indication, right?
Right. Like you say, I maintained that blowjobs were invented in the later
1960s, and I'm grateful for your illumination. Just so we're clear, I said
there were never blowjobs before the mid-to-late 1960s; and I want to
apologize for saying that.
You're familiar with recorded history, the written kind, including the
5,000-year-old forms of it, right? Who composed it? The maybe 5% who were
literate (or literacy's equivalence). Who did they compose it for? The 5%
who could read or decipher it. Do you think that changed before very recent
times? Most of human society didn't play any part in recorded history, so
learning was by, for, and about elite society. In our time, that omission is
being addressed and corrected (hopefully). As you know, there's a shitload
of resistance because it challenges received beliefs and even what passes
for knowledge.
You misunderstood. My point (not only mine) was that a much higher
percentage of girls and women in our society suck cock since the mid-1960s
than before (more 'common'), and because of anticensorship victories plus
greater openness, the mutual pleasures have also dramatically increased
('knowledgeable'). Your misunderstanding resulted from my compressed
phrasing. We all thought better of you, though, than for you to respond like
a petty boob critic.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Anyway, I don't regret owning up to the bad
>>>> writing mistake I made. No hard feelings, Whizzer, only cuz you didn't
>>>> sound
>>>> like you usually do: a knock-off of Texas Max King.
>>>
>>> hehehehehehehehehe, baNob, you're a lousy golf shot, you know. They
>>> call you Hannibal's little brother, Duffer Leichter, huh?
>>
>> It's not pronounced like that, or spelled like that, and you're knowingly
>> stealing the Yapster's old schtick, so you have to take an unplayable lie or
>> re-hit from the original spot and add a penalty stroke.
>
> Which Yapster? I missed it. Sorry. But that doesn't change how badly
> you shank your drives. Really. Great big banana ball on the NPD thing,
> dribble off the tee on the BJ thing. Boooooo ........
Do you want a lesson or two (only verbal, though)? The driver and the clubs
like it (woods and fairway metal clubs) don't have a shank where the hosel
joins the clubhead. With those clubs, the equivalent miss-hit would be
'heeled'. But to your point, I'm disbelieving myself about my driving. Two
years ago I finally went hi-tech because the technology makes a huge
difference. I was fitted with a 45" Ping G2 10-dgree graphite stiff shaft
driver after hitting a bunch of balls into the net that were computer
tracked. My swing speed was 96 mph, carry distance was 234 (short), but I'm
no kid. I could swing maybe at 98 mph, but I'd leave my scrotum on the mat
trying. With the new golf balls, my carry distance is probably over 250 now.
Swinging a 45" club (I'm only 5'9") is like trying to swing a broomstick.
Any long club is the hardest club to hit. Lately I can hit a fairway if it's
only 10 yards wide, I've buttoned every tee-shot whether it's the driver,
the 3-metal, 5 or 7, and I can feather it to fade slightly. But I shank my
wedges from tight lies, and I know why, but it's damn hard to correct when
you're swinging. All beginners hit banana balls, and if they don't know why,
they become over-the-top swingers who either pull or pull-slice, or hit
smother duck wormburners. Updike says you have to keep the arms close to the
body throughout the swing.
I don't get that NPD reference, but I'm sure on the golf course it applies
to everyone who can play or thinks they can play. Here on the NGs, I think
it's a load of crap. No one is remotely qualified to apply it since Elvira
left.
BTW, in Pittsburgh I was bi-polar, and severely so. One day I wanted
Mineo's, the next day I wanted Vincent's.
>
>> Yeah, I had a bad day on the golf course today, new irons, plus it was muggy
>> by
>> at least a club and a half.
>
> Excuses, excuses.
I was 198 yards from the pin, 180 from the front edge, no wind, I hit a
7-metal, and sweet, but it went 168 or so yards. It didn't feel muggy, so it
took 3 more holes till I figured it out. Golf depends on excuses much more
than skill.
>
>> Monday I banged out a few 300+ (we're in a drought, but
>> still) and hit all but one fairway (hardly any GIR's though cause of the new
>> weapons).
>
> An yet, you still brag. Typical duffer.
Golf is an ego game in the extreme. It also reveals character. The only
reason I play is because I love to hit the living shit out of the ball and
make it travel prodigious distances. But the new tech and the new golf ball
makes it harder to work the ball, and I miss that ego gratification.
>
>> In my draft-age days, I was a golf instructor at a summer camp and
>> composed the song for the Gray Team in the color war that won 1st prize!
>
> More brag, brag, brag. And the fish you catch are all humongous, huh?
I hope you read that as being self-depricating. The only time I went fishing
was when we cut school one day and went to Panther Hollow Pond and tried to
catch fish with bread for bait, waiting until the movie house opened at
11:00.
Beau Blue
Well, think what you want, I know I do.
-blue
~ Beau Blue Presents ~ <> http://members.cruzio.com/~jjwebb
OB
> Right. Like you say, I maintained that blowjobs were invented in the later
> 1960s, and I'm grateful for your illumination. Just so we're clear, I said
> there were never blowjobs before the mid-to-late 1960s; and I want to
> apologize for saying that.
Don't feel bad about it. Even Larkin, great poet though he was,
mistakenly believed that sexual intercourse was invented in 1963 (it's
in a poem somewhere). You should have seen his face when someone
showed him a wall painting proving that sexual intercourse was already
taking place (albeit only among the upper classes) at least as early
as 1920.
Hey, poets are not infallible. When I make mistakes like that, I
console myself by saying "cowls and twats, cowls and twats" a few
times. It really works.
Stuart Leichter
nevil...@yahoo.com wrote on 5/24/07 8:22 PM:
> On May 24, 5:34 pm, Stuart Leichter <leich...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Right. Like you say, I maintained that blowjobs were invented in the later
>> 1960s, and I'm grateful for your illumination. Just so we're clear, I said
>> there were never blowjobs before the mid-to-late 1960s; and I want to
>> apologize for saying that.
>
> Don't feel bad about it. Even Larkin, great poet though he was,
> mistakenly believed that sexual intercourse was invented in 1963 (it's
> in a poem somewhere). You should have seen his face when someone
> showed him a wall painting proving that sexual intercourse was already
> taking place (albeit only among the upper classes) at least as early
> as 1920.
That is very funny no matter whose.
He believed the wall painting? So it's true about his mum and dad, though
they are blameless.
Not just great, uncommonly great.
>
> Hey, poets are not infallible. When I make mistakes like that, I
> console myself by saying "cowls and twats, cowls and twats" a few
> times. It really works.
In their poetry, though, they must be infallible. I believe in the fiction
that poets, ipso facto, are infallible, or they're not poets. If they're not
the arbiters of truth as Jonson put it, then who are the unacknowledged
legislators? It's why I've turned to them and idolized them. Joni Mitchell
broke my heart when she sang "a '57 Biscayne" in 'Raised on Robbery', but
Keats's "Cortez" is a bon mot, il est le plus parfait.
On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built
>
>in article f34bf...@drn.newsguy.com, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God
>Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/24/07 11:37 AM:
>>> 'When' matters more now than where. 'What' matters more than 'where',
>>> whether private or public, for instance. Nixon removed $200 million from
>>> higher ed, so his tormentors couldn't migrate horizontally or vertically,
>>> leaving the teaching to TA's and tenure thieves, forever.
>>
>> well, school is what you make of it.
>
>The only way you got into college was cos the school needed the money.
don't be a fucking idiot. they took my pulse to see if i was alive. SF State
wasn't gonna take dead people.
>The only reason they didn't flunk you out is cos the school needed the money
of the 6 semesters i was there i was on the Dean's list 4 times. i swears on the
precious.
>plus you cheated and had other people do a lot of your writing.
i never turned in a paper that wasn't written by your very special friend me. i
quoted sources that didn't exist a couple of times, but i was hung-over.
>>>>> I have always relied on the kindness of bubble-gum
>>>>> card makers, comic books, and the movies.
>>>>
>>>> who hasn't? but i don't know if you can say JJ had a bad education.
>>>
>>> Can you tell if a movie is good or bad from watching it?
>>
>> depends. set the laughably ignorant primate dockery down in front of it, and
>> then ask him questions afterwards.... the answer might be no. set someone who
>> knows how to read down in front of the same movie, then that person's
>> observations might be worth listening to.
>>
>> see? depends.
>
>But can you -- you -- tell?
well, sure, if you're talking about me, the answer would be yes because i'm so
damned smart and insightful.
>I can tell if someone's well-educated or not
>from how they write and read. A person's literacy level is still the only
>subjective way of telling.
but shouldn't one take into the account of the agenda of the person making the
assessment?
where is your sense of empirical thought, Stu-boo?
>It can't be faked, and you can't hide from it.
>You're not well-educated, but you're likeable and smart, and that's more
>important.
like me. charming AND smart. i didn't want to mentioned handsome, but well....
>>>>>>> No one would lose money betting that you did. Cleopatra's
>>>>>>> being the popularizer of lipstick, or fellatio being as old as time,
>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>> make it 'common'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe it's not common where you are?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, again.
>>>>
>>>> well, i knew it was you, Stuart.
>>>>
>>>>> I made a reference to the middle 1960s in my post, about Ginsberg
>>>>>and Dylan, Cohen and Joplin, my point was that blowjobs weren't fashionably
>>>>> tasteful at the time.
>>>>
>>>> not according to the cheap porn novels from that time. but like i said,
>>>> perhaps where ever you were at that time it wasn't common?
>>>
>>> My classmate in grad school was a kid named McTaggart, he was a co-author
>>> (as 'Taggart') of What Really Happens [or Goes On] in Fort Lauderdale, 1967
>>> or thereabouts. Henry Miller got published here in the early 1960s. Jennie
>>> Denton's champagne blowjobs in The Carpetbaggers were published in 1960 or
>>> 1961. Her character was based on Jane Russell was the word then. Like
>>> Whizzer, you don't know what 'common' means.
>>
>> too many Protestant girls for you, Stu. that's not my fault.
>
>Almost all were Catholic-raised, and the Protestant ones were also wonderful
>and completely loving.
where you lived. and that's cool for you, Stu-booie. but i'm not going to
apologize for questioning your own subjective assessment. you didn't get blown
by every female, or male, in the America.
>>>>> I write bad, I use the wrong words a lot, I mislead
>>>>> everyone some of the time, someone, somewhere, all the time. I would have
>>>>> lost a fortune betting that Bleu Cheez Whiz knows what 'common' means.
>>>>
>>>> i don't know. i've seen Mr. Webb type for going on a decade. i honestly do
>>>> believe that JJ knows what "common" means.
>>>
>>> You learned movies shit, so you're not qualified in this round.
>>
>> and you are? based on????
>
>I figure it's based on the historical and current meanings of the word
>'common'. Cocksucking has not always been common across all social classes,
>groups, and ages,
and you can provide statistical proof of your theory?
>plus I got good grades in a dozen sociology courses, plus
>I developed the film studies program where I worked,
if you taught film that doesn't impress me too much, Stu-ee-dram-booie.
>plus I talked to people
>who said their mothers absolutely never sucked cock, but that's anecdotal,
>like my much younger (Catholic) girlfriend who said she wondered if someone
>of my generation (her father's) did/would do stuff like that, and I'm done
>with discussing the subject with you until you can show that you know what
>'common' means.
how do you now my minor wasn't human sexuality?
>>>> you have not made your case, Stu.
>>>
>>> What case is that?
>>
>> i see that i'm always right.
>
>About what? You're one of about 5 billion qualified experts on movies, but
>you're the only Dockery scholar on the planet. Me, I'm seldom right, but
>about those two facts I can't be contradicted.
no, i think i know lots of other stuff too.
AND i'm smart and charming.
>>>>> Live
>>>>> and learn, my grandma, on her deathbed, finally said to me.
>>>>
>>>> my grandmother said this to me long before she died.
>>>>
>>>>> That reminds me,
>>>>>cos I also made the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their
>>>>> art back then.
>>>>
>>>> i think you can say that oral sex experts have always been knowledgeable
>>>> concerning their art.
>>>
>>> You have a bad habit -- it works on rubes -- of begging the question, e.g.,
>>> putting "experts" in the subject and "knowledgeable" in the predicate as
>>> though you've made a conclusionary statement. In that instance, it's also
>>> tautologically inappropriate: Experts are knowledgeble about their
>>> expertise. (No thanks expected for the lesson.)
>>
>> yeah, but getting back to the point. i think if some one is good at what they
>> do, then i think you can make a reasonable claim that said person possesses
>> both knowledge an expertise. see?
>
>No no no no. You fucked up bad with your pinheaded point, so drop it and
>save yourself from worse humiliation.
so people who are good at what they do don't possess knowledge and expertise on
what they're good at? what do they then possess?
>> now you said, and i quote from you:
>>
>> "the point that cocksuckers weren't "knowledgeable" in their art back then."
>
>"Their art" was a euphemism I used instead of the term of art for
>cocksucking.
oh. whatever that means. perhaps you're confusing yourself now?
>>
>> and i was trying to say that i disagreed with that comment, see? because if
>> someone was good at that, even way back then, would they not possess the
>> knowledge of being good at that?
>
>Obviously while you were growing up you had to trick everyone in your family
>with stupid shit like that, probably Jesuit influence.
i was merely going by what you posted. i don't have the Stu-Booie secret decoder
ring if you're talking in code here.
>>
>>are you saying that people who were good at giving head in the past were idiot
>> savants, possessing no real knowledge of how to be good at what they were
>> doing?
>
>Do you know what 'secondary development' means in exposition? The Dying
>Animal sentence (below) is an illustration. (This tutorial is your last.)
ok. i told you, i don't have the secret decoder ring. that's not my fault.
>>>>> In The Dying Animal (Classics Illustrated version), Philip
>>>>>Roth makes a salient point about the kind of blowjobs the girls gave in the
>>>>> 1950s, which really sucked bad, contrasted with the contemporary
>>>>> (post-1970s) girls.
>>>>
>>>> well, that's sorta one guy's opinion. maybe, like you, he was living in a
>>>> place where it was not common, and all the girls he knew were Protestants?
>>>
>>> That's like saying Ted Williams writing on hitting is one guy's no-count
>>> opinion, or Tiger Woods writing about golf is one guy's no-count opinion.
>>> It's worse than like that, but I'm letting you escape again because I'm no
>>> good at this trolling shit like you are.
>>
>>then please do explain how Phillip Roth knew exactly the level of expertise of
>> all women giving head back in the 50s? did he perform a reasoned and
>> scientific sampling of all American men and women who were performing such
>> acts? his finding were perhaps published somewhere? you ask me to accept the
>> word of a fiction writer over the law of average numbers?
>
>Just as we thought: you have no comprehension of great fiction writing. I'm
>seldom right, but when I am, I can't be successfully refuted.
but i wasn't talking about your opinion of Phil's writing ability, i wanted to
know how Phil was the expert of how much head was being given in the 50s.
>> we have statistics for Ted and Tiger. where's the math with Mr. Roth?
>
>Maybe he sampled his students at Penn or at the Iowa Writers Workshop --
>hey, I was accepted there but they wouldn't give me any stipend. Jim, he won
>every literary award in the US and GB -- most a few times -- except the
>Nobel.
sure. so he was a great writer. that's great.
>You're the only person I know of who questions his experience and
>telling.
i question everyone's.
>You're alone on an ice floe. Prove he doesn't know what he's
>talking about. Make him give back his awards and honors. Do it. Show us
>you're smart, sho us you're able, show us you know how to read.
you getting all worked up here Stu-ee is making you sort of lose your mind. i
questioned his statistical analysis of how much head was being given way back
when, i never questioned his writing ability. Cormac McCarthy paints a REALLY
desolate world in his books, but i don't agree with his views, great writer that
he is.
>>>>> I daresay the well-circulated Hitchens piece in Vanity
>>>>> Fair a few months back sounded like a Johnny-come-lately treatise. That
>>>>> reminds me, a book publisher's rep was pushing his books at me circa 1974,
>>>>> and he said so-and-so "gives good read", and the rep looked at me to see
>>>>> the
>>>>> expression on my face, like, did I get it.
>>>>
>>>> when you get old you don't have to sound this way.
>>>>
>>>>> Sorry if you're asleep now, but I
>>>>> wanted to reiterate that there's a preponderance of evidence that fellatio
>>>>> wasn't 'common', just like Balsamic vinegar, cilantro, and sundried
>>>>> tomatoes
>>>>> weren't common not very long ago. Lenny Bruce was busted for saying
>>>>> "cocksucker" in public, you surely know. I'm only saying.
>>>>
>>>> just because they did not have the porn then that we have no-a-days doesn't
>>>> mean that oral sex wasn't common.
>>>
>>> You just make up shit, don't you?
>>
>> the only difference between you and me is that i'm better at it, and i don't
>> sound as pretentious when i do it.
>
>That could be Dave Barry talking. No one on these groups sounds more
>pretentious than you, and it's been known for a long time. It's why everyone
>humors you.
heh, and isn't annoying? i can be such a bastard and people still love my
Irish-Portuguese butt. heh.
it pays to be charming.
and surely i'm not the MOST pretentious person on this newsgroup. what a
ridiculous statement.
>>
>> i've noticed you don't much like people disagreeing with you, do you Stu?
>
>You mean Bleu Cheez Whiz and you in particular? The fuck do I care if you
>don't know how to read or write? If someone misrepresents what I write here,
>I'll point out their error, there's nothing emotional about it, but it's
>frustrating when I'm exchanging with people who fuck up and won't admit they
>fucked up.
i haven't fucked up.
>>>> again, i mention, perhaps you were living in a more boring region of the
>>>> Eisenhower era?
>>>
>>> That would be Roth, again, and Updike, two of the better chroniclers of
>>> manness before our time. Anyway, you should check out Carnal Knowledge
>>> (1970) and viddy well the last scene, or read Jack's Playboy Interview from
>>> around that time, or somehow get informed instead of making up shit.
>>
>>i'm just trying to figure out why you demand that the rest of the earth accept
>> your limited and unscientific views of this subject. there's quite a bit of
>> evidence to prove they've been doing the oral nasty for thousands of years.
>
>What's to figure out? You don't know what 'common' means, it doesn't mean
>'always'. I'm starting to realize that you think all words are synonyms for
>each other.
all i'm saying is that it was more common than you believe, and all i get from
you is your bitching that i don't respect Phil Roth enough.
>> again i say 2 authors and you don't make a compelling case.
>
>You also say Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter,
surely.
>you also don't know
>enough about Protestant women
more than half of my lovers were Prods. i'm pretty sure.
>to say what you say about them, and you would
>never have been admitted to any college when those two authors went to
>college, all your own fault, no one else's.
no way, i KNOW i could have charmed my Irish-Portuguese butt into any school i
wanted to go to.
>>>>>>> Its being 'common' is why OJ killed, according to Nicole's
>>>>>>> friends (it's certainly why she called 911). Maybe I should have written
>>>>>>> 'commonplace', or provided footnotes from the preteen girls I've talked
>>>>>>> to,
>>>>>>> but you'd still lie in wait.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you talk to preteen girls about oral sex????? whoa...that's weird.
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh-oh. I'm just bad.
>>>>
>>>> and creepy.
>>>
>>> Not creepy, just bad.
>>
>> oh, i think i can get quite a few votes for creepy from a grand jury.
>
>Not with your (cough) skills.
i wouldn't bet the farm and retirement on that one, Stu-buloo.
>>>>> I've been to France, plus my friends have daughters.
>>>>
>>>>so do mine, and strangely enough even in the wild and free San Francisco bay
>>>> area that's not a subject i've ever brought with them, nor think is
>>>> appropriate to do.
>>>
>>> Maybe you and they were brought up like Andre Dubus, maybe your hands were
>>> tied down in the crib so you wouldn't touch yourself (like my much older
>>> cousin's were). No maybe about your growing up believing Jesus is magic.
>>
>> ho-ho-ho, that's funny. no, sparky, i was raised in Catholic schools. i knew
>> how
>> to french kiss before i was 9. and what ever terror tactics the Holy and Only
>> Universal Mother Church in Rome used on me NEVER deterred my lust, not once.
>
>You don't have to protest so much and resort to all caps if you want to be
>believed, but it's too late for that.
i'll take that point, thank you.
>> i just don't think discussing the details of oral sex with little kids is
>> appropriate behavior for an adult. call me crazy and repressed.
>
>Who said anything about "details" or "little kids" nazi boy?
OH, so now i'm a Nazi because i don't think its appropriate to discuss oral sex
with a pre-teen girl.
ho-ho, and who's losing their "skills" now? heh.
>>>>> It's not like we're alone.
>>>>
>>>> there's more than one pre-teen girl involved in these discussions?
>>>
>>> Older sisters, cousins, adults. Like I said, I'm bad, and I don't write
>>> good. I didn't mean girls under 12. Honestly, though, I'd rather troll you
>>> than be truthful.
>>
>>why am i always told i've been trolled after i've just pointed out how someone
>> just stepped into their own shit? heh. chanelling dockery is not your best
>> bet.
>
>Let's see, "I'd rather troll you" is what kind of verbal construction? Is it
>the past tense like you say it is? Why do you think it's past tense? Is it
>your illiteracy maybe? Or Satan? It wouldn't matter except that you try to
>make a point from it. One more tutorial (still gratis): If your major
>premise is flawed, your following points are all flawed. Consider the term
>of art 'flawed' as a kind and generous term. Then find someone to teach you
>how to read English, someone with Job's patience.
sure, and dockery's not taking a government disability check and money under the
table for KKK pizza.
>>>>> You know, since Yossela Lieberman made a big deal
>>>>> on the Senate floor in '98, wearing his yarmulke -- saying things like his
>>>>> granddaughter hears about "oral sex" (as you also put it) everywhere on TV
>>>>> -- well, it's either discuss it or make it like forbidden and wicked.
>>>>
>>>> with preteen girls? like 12-to-1?
>>>
>>> Several were still in the womb and overheard, "No! Suck it, lick it!
>>> 'Blowjob' is a only a figure of speech!"
>>
>> did that idea excite you?
>
>What idea would that be?
i can only go by what you post, stu.
>>>>> You trolling, or is it your feelthy mind?
>>>>
>>>> no, i just think it might not be the most appropriate action one can think
>>>> of
>>>>to talk to pre-teen girls about the details of oral sex, especially when i'm
>>>> not a parent of said kids. perhaps you believe in some
>>>>hippy-voodoo-summer-of-love-let's-have-a-be-in-where-there-is-no-boundries-m
>>>> an
>>>> -cause-we're-like-gonna-stick-it-to-your-outdated-middle-class-ideas
>>>> philosophy about such things, but i think there is a propriety to certain
>>>> subjects, especially with pre-teens who aren't my own kids.
>>>
>>> It's highly appropriate -- not "most" -- in the light of trash-talkers like
>>> yourself who go on endlessly around here -- where my stepdaughter has read
>>
>> then perhaps you should be a better stepfather and look into what it is your
>> stepdaughter is reading? rec.arts.poems is for adults. if i had a pre-teen
>> child, i don't think i would like her to read this newsgroup.
>
>Hey, did you know that the director of The Human Genome Project was
>home-schooled? His mother says she had no idea how to teach, so she got out
>the dictionary, and they took it from there.
hey, thank god his mother didn't try to drown him, huh?
>I figure you were force-fed everything. It shows in the way you try to
>force-feed here. But IRL you're a good guy, and that's what's important.
AND don't forget charming.
>My stepdaughter read Wally Lamb's I Know This Much Is True in hardback and
>deemed it "the best book I've ever read". I'm sure much of it was beyond her
>ken.
good for her.
>>
>>> about cocksucking and coke and skinny hookers,
>>
>> i like buxom hookers who have hash as well.
>>
>>> behaviors that kids don't
>>> read as humor. At least tell me it's possible to have an intelligent
>>> exchange with someone like you. Not that I'll believe it.
>>
>> if you wish to have a discussion on any subject, Stu, all you have to do is
>> ask.
>
>Do you think Sibel Edmunds is hot?
do you mean Edmonds?
>>but if you're asking me if it's appropriate to discuss the details of oral sex
>> with a pre-teen girl, i will say it's not.
>
>The only thing I'm asking is why do you say "details", Jim?
trying to get a bearings on the discussion?
>Answer that,
>please. I've had discussions -- very very few -- with only 2 or 3 young
>girls, practically family -- and only in broad, general terms, because
>there's a lot of shit out there, a lot of misinformation and ugliness.
you didn't say that to begin with.
>>>> i guess i'm just old-fashioned.
>>>
>>> You wish.
>>
>> about certain things.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> That reminds me, did you read Roth's
>>>>> The Human Stain?
>>>>
>>>> not yet i haven't.
>>>
>>> Dear god, where's my nitroglycerin tablet!
>>
>> we're not that lucky.
>>
>> i only have so many awake hours in the day. sorry. time manangement is about
>> compromising. read this, finish that, start this project, catch something in
>> the paper, etc. i've never had a month at xmas and summer's off.
>
>It was six weeks off for xmas, hardly enough time to develop new materials
>for the next session. Including summers, I probably worked at my job 80
>hours a week, the other time pretty much consumed me with what my job was
>because I was never satisfied. Plus, until the IRS changed the laws, I wrote
>off my cable and movie tickets.
well, if i could teach movies and literature, i'd have the time i guess.
>>>>> His alterego narrator is scared shitless about the
>>>>> over-reaction to the Clinton/Lewinsky flap.
>>>>
>>>>as was i. but i don't know if you can make the sudden leap from that idea to
>>>> feeling absolutely free in discussing the details of oral sex with a little
>>>> girl who has not started to menstruate yet.
>>>
>>> Spare me and everyone else your pontifications about logic.
>>
>> blame the Jesuits.
>>
>>> Why do you leap
>>> to calling it "feeling absolutely free"? I know why, you're one of those
>>> boys from Brazil, aren't you? Aside from your nazi 'arguing' tactics, you're
>>> also ill-informed about menstrual demographics, like most things you talk
>>> about.
>>
>> Stu, it's a very simple process here. you feel it's perfectly all right to go
>> into details about oral sex with a pre-teen girl? how would such a
>> conversation go, would you describe, in detail, how she should use her lips,
>> her tongue, do you go into detail about swallowing? do you think this is an
>> appropriate topic of discussion with a girl of 12?
>
>Thanks for asking, Jim. How many times is it now that you've said "details"?
more than 2 i guess.
>No one else has said anything that even means "details". You are one
>motherfucking creepy piece of shit, Jim. No offense intended, and I hope
>none is taken.
now there's no reason to get mad at me.
>> my point is no, it's not. ok? it's really that simple.
>
>You'll melt down again here if you don't quit being a slimeball with me.
how so?
>I
>have the time to make sure of it and I couldn't care less how many of your
>goombahs try to support you.
heh...
>>
>>>>> Do you think Joe Franklin really
>>>>> raped Sarah Silverman?
>>>>
>>>> whatever that means.
>>>
>>> I assumed you'd seen The Aristocrats, before I learned you're
>>> "old-fashioned". I'm just so bad.
>>
>> i've never had xmas and summer's off.
>
>Not paid you should say.
as you were, that's for sure.
Amadeus Jinn
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:q7SdnUgrt6dQzsjb...@onvoy.com...
> On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built wrote:
>
>> In article <L92dnZWqII75msnb...@onvoy.com>, Dennis M. Hammes
>> says...
>>
>>>Will Dockery wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Nope, I never "said" that at all... I "said" Howl set the style, not that it
>>>>was the first Beat writing.
>>>>
>>>
>>>couldn't copy the earlier masters even in part...
>>
>>
>> Ginsberg was a better ad man for himself. he was very good at self-promotion.
>> i've always thought Warhol, being Warhol, was just mocking the entire NY IN
>> crowd (including Ginsberg, until he become one of them, of course. Capote always
>> thought Ginsberg was too busy being Ginsberg to really stretch out his writing,
>> but in more lucid moments, Capote said that about himself as well.
>>
>> the only reason idiot dockery makes these comments is because in his cracker
>> southern provincialism Howl is the only poem of the beats that's he's ever heard
>> of.
>>
>> with dockery, it's all about the pose. most sincerely, GodBuilt
>
> All fakes are necessarily about the pose, and there's more than a little fake to that whole crowd of names.
> But babies /buy/ fake -- well, they fake buying; they Demand, Mommy "Buys," Daddy Pays (esp. incl. priests) -- because
> store-boughten fake promises that they can, in their "turn," /sell/ fake.
> Dockery's doing no more than demanding His Turn to sell fake.
> I.e., he duggen him his very own Personal hole in the back yard, and is crying that "we won't let him" take it into the house.
>
> Trouble is, fake's apostles succeed /on the curve/, which always means that, because there's no actual substance to master, there
> isn't enough of a Movement left to sell in three generations.
> Dockery is, as always, simply too fucken late.
>
> The ultimate genesis of that crap was rap (not "rec.arts.poems," but "fuken rap") -- and /all/ the SuperRappers have grabbed their
> swag /and put it into something else/. There isn't a fuken thing left to loot with but a new generation of baby pule, and the
> media priests are desperately searching for the next Movement to tout or they're all going to have collection baskets as empty as
> NBC's.
Nice paragraph!
--
-------------------------------------------
AJ - http://ClitIns.Com e In.
(800 folders. -- kiddie-filtered -- FREE,
Usenet Porn.)
Amadeus Jinn
"Stuart Leichter" <leic...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:C27B625E.50DA9%leic...@bellsouth.net...
> in article f34bf...@drn.newsguy.com, On The Highways and Bi-Ways God
> Built at GodBui...@Yahoo.com wrote on 5/24/07 11:37 AM:
>> see? depends.
>
> But can you -- you -- tell? I can tell if someone's well-educated or not
> from how they write and read. A person's literacy level is still the only
> subjective way of telling. It can't be faked, and you can't hide from it.
> You're not well-educated, but you're likeable and smart, and that's more
> important.
I assume it is mikey.
BTW, Stuart. We all meet on June 27th concerning an "Early
Neutral Evaluation Conference". (although karla will probably
just send her San Diego attorneys)
I hope to have a "Motion for Summary Judgement" filed by then.
I have the case # and the judge.
--
-------------------------------------------
AJ - http://ClitIns.Com e In.
(800 folders. -- kiddie-filtered -- FREE,
Usenet Porn.)
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
Amadeus Jinn
--
-------------------------------------------
AJ - http://ClitIns.Com e In.
(800 folders. -- kiddie-filtered -- FREE,
Usenet Porn.)
"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built" <GodBui...@Yahoo.com> wrote in message news:f35fi...@drn.newsguy.com...