from my view Lawrence you are unaware that sometimes people don´t feel like
much rigour, or want a humourous, friendly chat. You always seem to wear a
suit of armour. That´s not why I joined a discussion list, necessarily.
Also, binning people´s mails seems a mite childish, surely you can find some
sabre-like wit to return with. In my opinion, you find the world to be a
place where you must win or be right always, its not always either that
intense or clear cut, PM
>From: Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to poetry and
> poetics <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Fw: Föstudagsstær?fræ?i
>Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 20:43:52 -0000
>
>decline to use = decline to define
>
>talk about unclear, sorry
>
>L
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Lawrence Upton" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: 28 November 2002 20:26
>Subject: Re: Föstudagsstær?fræ?i
>
>
>| My problem with your posts, Frederick, is that you promote or express
>your
>| "treatments" for all sorts of conditions you perceive or, as it seems to
>me,
>| others tell you to perceive
>|
>| & I react, because they are morally repugnant to me
>|
>| We are so near, as so many times before in my life, destruction; and all
>I
>| can do is at my low level is deny the validity of what looks to me like
>your
>| sneering, your violence and your simplicity - your usual response is to
>| *mock moral positions as risible (It's not *you, it's what you say and
>I'd
>| oppose anyone)
>|
>| Now I would most like to debate, because I believe I can show you are
>often
>| wrong
>|
>| & that suspicion is encouraged by your evasion - asked to explain
>yourself
>| you either don't reply or sneer - and I include in that repeated use of
>| undefined jingoistic terms that you decline to use. To *me, this looks
>like
>| the kind of behaviour which can lead to mobs. (No mob will get off the
>| ground if everyone has to explain their terms) More pertinently I cannot
>| see anyone who has reason on their side should fear debate, especially
>when
>| they have joined a discussion list
>|
>| Just now, though, I don't even know what we are talking about...
>|
>| I may well be guilty of kicking it off this time. I don't know. I imagine
>| that we both go into a particular mental state when we see the other's
>name.
>|
>| I have taken to reading your mails - I used to bin them but I inferred
>from
>| other posts that some people were finding coherence in what you say; and
>I
>| have been sampling. So I have taken to reading your posts and now I find
>| references to myself - comparatives "like Upton" (as if you have any
>grasp
>| where I am coming from - you never listen!) but then the meaning slips
>| sideways
>|
>| Something about me and Mr Bircumshaw, I think
>|
>| I tried humour, best I could do at the time, and it's just brought more
>| brown unpalatable verbal froth. I seem to have got to you; but I don't
>know
>| what you're talking about. Perhaps it's preferable to your political
>| paranoia; but I suspect it's in addition.
>|
>| So if you have something to say to me, could you say it clearly, without
>| sneering, without insult; and I'll reply in kind. If not, I suggest we
>both
>| let it lie
>|
>|
>| L
>|
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
|