Dear Philip - thanks for the post. I'm not meaning to be or sound
contemptuous of anyone. I'm a bit vague on detailed aspects of (threats) of
list removals because I'm not very interested in going over it. The
technical difficulties I'm on about are the one's John is having/had with
his e mail access, weight of e mail and e mail malfunctioning. I did not say
that it was John who created the cult, not at all.
I'll try and clearly say what I mean and then leave it, if everyone thinks
it's rubbish. What occured in the exchange between sean me and john today
is at the nub of my problem. John claimed Seans post as proof of his earlier
post and said can I/we stick to poetryetc. It is this use of a quick poll
'concensus' that I see reflected through the list. It makes for a
brittleness of encounter sometimes. A rush to formal methods (stick to
subject, go somewhere else, report to listowneretc) that won't allow new
ideas or even old ones to develop, become variegated. The simplest and best
way for this to happen is to encourage the collective plural spirit of the
list (definitely including crabby solitary poetsetc). What has/is happening
is a break down of trust between list members, a break down between real and
imagined. It's not John's fault at all, he's a good egg I'm sure and I don't
want to sound too rhizomic but a various, dispersed ownership might more
adequately promote um non-flaming poetic humdinging. How? I hear you ask.
For instance it might allow John to disappear for a while as listowner and
reappear immediately as a poet. Different hats.
I am glad this is your favourite place to be Philip.
best
Paul
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|