Are you the Antonio that Pseudo Susannah announced as her next persona, on
the stated theory that men can get away with more inappropriate behavior
than women?
At 01:39 AM 10/20/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>To John Kinsella (from an observer)
>
>Despite the fact that a poetry list should welcome a large sample of
>cultural ideologies--with all their inconsistencies, contradictions and
>paradoxes-- at present there seem to be a tendency not to allow people to
>identify with matters of their own choice or set their own terms for what
>will develop from the chosen direction.
>
>To come out with wounded responses or to claim that because a majority of
>members has asked for the expulsion of another (who has found responsible
>for transgressing the set rules), this expulsion has to take place, is like
>legitimizing the formation of a sort of crime tribunal with trials and
>condemnations.
>
>The rules set by this present tribunal seem to be based on a common
>consensus , but are, of course, completely arbitrary (as all rules ).
>
>The present tendency is dangerous and should be discouraged. Poetry should
>welcome diversity and be opened to discussion in whatever style.
>
>In some countries, Parliaments are composed of no less than 5, 6
>conflicting parties, ( only superficially opposed to each other or hardly
>reconcilable). Nevertheless, those Parliaments are legal and active and can
>make rules , transcending oppositions and conflicts of interest or
>ideologies and different styles of conduct.
>
>The recent thread (EP, personae, associated matters) wished to establish
>codes and rules (but primarely it aimed to silence people which were
>considered radical or whose performance did not please some participants).
>As an observer, I feel one should be able to stand the presence and the
>behavior of those who have different ideologies or that come from different
>cultures. If a list member is using his own cultural communicative code,
>feeling in good faith not to offend others, the others should start from
>that very point and analyse what kind of culture that behavior originate
>from and what is the meaning of that performance within its original
>territory.
>
>I have the feeling and worry that the ongoing protest against pseudo
>entities is aiming to establish a hierarchy which has the power to decide
>punishments and set rules as universal , permanent and uncontestable, It
>seems in fact an attempt to establish a kind of totalitarism with Chief
>Executives charged of various Offices for Acceptance or Expulsion.
>
>As I read it, Acceptance is granted to a new Member only if he or she (once
>entered the established code of communication) starts acting in a
>respectful and almost servile way towards the few existing leading
>personalities.
>
>As I have argued , the recent Poetryetc World War II bears a complicated and
>ambivalent relation to modernist Politics. The dominant personalities who
>make claims baout this and that wish to impose as dominant themes their own
>cultural ideologies (Australian and British mainly: no German, Spanish,
>African around as yet) and act , in turn , as an Army aiming to plan
>aggression towards any intruders to re-establish the previous "order".
>
>In these periods of War, poetry matters seem to be hardly discussed and one
>breaths a general atmosphere of suspicion, which embitters a growing
>skepticism against the "other". Philosophical or theoretical discussions no
>longer to take place , and a sustaining and reliable relation between
>subject and object, mind and matter finally fails to exist.
>
> In these periods, one finds in the list no moment of literary insight and
>the only constituted acts of genuine signification are those against
>Imagination.
>
>Yours
>
>Antonio Gonzales
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|