I'll tell you what I really hate, Steve: it's the Machine, as in, in terms
of writer words, the routinization of language into conceptual
predictability, said Machine being the Agent of the Beast, aka Empire, which
seeks always control not creative freedom.

Order is all to It. And Kent's strategies are Machinations, acts of reducing
that very openness he preaches on his own behalf into exploitable resources,
just as his threadbare notions about Authorship are means to an end, the
ridiculously disparate ambition of promotion of Self in the name of
not-Self.

Ego Ego Ego is the message I get, never dialogue, which isn't to suggest
that he's like that in 'real life', nor back-channel with some, but it's the
public-eye games he plays piss me off.

And, as I keep on telling him, his approach undermines trust, that very
necessary quality in an uncertain cyber-world.

Best

Dave



----- Original Message -----
From: "steve duffy" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: networking/the daily we


on Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:11:39 +0100
"jackie.litherland" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>> Is it that either/or thing coming into play? When so often it is
>> and/and/ a movement of so-called contradictory thoughts which poetry
>> has the truth/honesty to contain? That two sets of arguing people can
>> be right is not impossible. The perspectives are different for list
>> members/list owners as Elizabeth's post shows us. I admire the way
>> she is consistent in her posts and her desire to keep the spirit of
>> the thing moving, like the quiet voice in the storm.

jackie,

i agree that the perspectives are different for list members and list
owners but the problem is more one of consensus, from my perspective at
least. the unmentionable kent johnson was ousted by consensus. the
danger is that consensus acts not only to maintain good order, but also
to maintain an order the purpose of which is to contain and suppress
elements which are considered dangerous, not to list stability, but to
the efficient management of opinion.

when kent joined _british-poets_ there was disinformation circling in
the backchannel. there were accusations that he and others were out to
destroy the list. his contributions were controversial. one of his ideas
is summed-up in the following quote, not sent to _british-poets_, as far
as i know:

>> "Authorship to the contemporary Literature Institution is something
>> like sex was to the Victorian upper class: It is the reason why
>> everyone's here in the first place, but it's something of an
>> embarrassment to talk about-- or at least for most can only be spoken
>> of in certain ways and with euphemistic ritual, it being from the
>> get-go what drives us in everything we do. It is the big conceptual
>> field still waiting to be cracked open by a truly radical poetics."
>>
>> --Knet Johnson

i'm not suggesting that kent was, or is likely to be, the _ideal_ list
subscriber. but i'd also place into this category anyone who attempts to
use consensus to discredit or silence another subscriber. i'm gobsmacked
at the audacity displayed by the _poetryetc_ listowners in their attemps
to advise _british-poets_ how to run a list. their own list archive was
closed to public view shortly after recent expulsions. i can only assume
that action was taken to conceal the nature of those events.

also, i'd never heard anyone on any list raise any objection to material
forwarded from other lists until this tactic was used against kent
johnson. and if candice had payed more attention to her usenet texts
she'd know that no one has ever been prevented from posting to a usenet
group. [maybe that's one reason why lists are such attractive spaces for
the discussion of poetics!]

>> From what she's said earlier, Kent is still in suspence (not banned).
>> Must be uncomfortable hanging in there. She felt the timing wasn't
>> right for him to come back.

as i see it, we can continue to sweep this whole thing under the carpet
and live with the bitterness of exclusion and the lanscaping over which
it requires, or we can admit that on _british-poets_ consensus has been
a force which has affected not just kent johnson but also others who
have attempted to share this space. as douglas clark said recently, as
he unsubscribed after a brief visit following a long absence, he'd
forgotten how "nasty" it can be here.

>> I'm still hoping for peace in our time.

so am i, but it seems unlikely.

regards, steve

                                             o
                          +          .                    o
     dEbRiS                               <><
   e [log in to unmask]         .                      ><[[[[º>
 web http://www.debris.org.uk
     scattered_fragMents.l0ose_materiALs.etc       o
                . / . .       |||    .   /      .*-|/-*      delete?
|||||||||1|||||||||2|||||||||3|||||||||4|||||||||5|||||||||6||||||||7||
                                                               exit