Let me try one last time. I have no idea what's in David's mind, and I
haven't been in contact with him, but your reading of his message seems a
stretch to say the least.
But even if you are right, I 'm enough of a purist to think that it should
have no influence over your decision to invite Alison. The invitation, one
would hope, would be out of a regard for her work.
Alison is a s far as I can tell a nice person. I can tell you that I've
given readings to and published fine poets who are anything but. I owe it
to the art to which I've made a fair number of sacrifices to keep the two
spheres separate.
But all of this is just another bit of grand opera, isn't it? It's very
annoying.
Mark
At 04:20 PM 5/30/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi David,
>
>thank you for this letter.
>I know that Alison is busy at Christ-church and I am
>only asking her to intervene to clarify this attempt
>by both Marc Weiss and David B. to introduce gossip.
>
>I do not have one moment of doubt that David was only
>trying maliciously to insinuate a notion of enmity to
>play two women one against the other, but you cannot
>do it with someone like us who have a feminist
>conscience.
>
>So my request to Alison to come out with a statement
>about what Davis has insinuated, aims solely at making
>sure people on line will not think that she is
>backchannelling David B. with unfriendly comments and
>feelings against me (as he has clearly suggested, see
>his post below) while keeping an official friendly
>relationship with me front-channel such as to solicit
>me to invite her to read for us here in Oxford.
>
>I am confident that this is not the case, and I am
>more than sure that D.B is using Alison or Candice
>(exclude Anny) to hurt me and play people one against
>the other at his convenience.
>
>But if all this happens to be true, than David B. is
>proving to be a very unloyal friend to Alison (or
>Candice), since he has disclosed their confidential
>opinions about me (surely expressed back-channel) just
>for the sake to use them as weapon to hurt someone's
>sensibility. In both cases, I'd like to be explained,
>since I have made factual steps to favor Alison and
>let her come to Oxford benefitting of an official
>invitation from my group. I am sure I have not been
>used by another woman to be exploited of what David B.
>calls my 'tacit notion of sisterhood'.
>
>
>erminia
>
>
>--- David Howard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Erminia asks 'So, please, Alison, clear this at your
> > earliest convenience,
> > if you wish.'
> >
> > Hi, this is none of my business - and I have no
> > intention of trying to make
> > it my business - however (you knew that word was
> > coming) in fairness to both
> > Erminia and Alison I need to point out that the
> > latter is, as I type this,
> > running a workshop at the Books & Beyond Festival in
> > Christchurch.
> >
> > Alison is blissfully unaware of this list's posts
> > over the last twenty-four
> > hours and will not be returning to Melbourne (where
> > her computer is
> > attempting to babysit three children and a sometime
> > husband) until Monday
> > evening. In short, silence over the next four days
> > does not mean Alison is
> > choosing not to respond, it means she's still
> > offline - something she
> > announced yesterday. In the interim I won't attempt
> > to precis delicate messages for Alison lest I
> > unintentionally misrepresent someone's position so
> > please be patient.
> >
> > [Wystan, by the time your post arrived Alison was in
> > the air so, although she did change aircraft in
> > Auckland with the seemingly unavoidable wait which
> > renders one a prisoner in the lounge, she was
> > unaware of your offer to meet. Upon her arrival at
> > Christchurch I let her know. While she would like to
> > have talked with you she flies
> > Christchurch-Melbourne direct after the festival
> > and, accordingly, sends her apologies.]
> >
> > David Howard
> >
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
>http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
|