Robin,
it wasn't the use of 'fucking' that got to me. And I did try to describe my
own subjective reaction i.e. depression and not to trash you. The
testosterone remark belies this and I'm sorry for it. But the machine gun
thing rattled me. As you point out, e-mail leads to confusions re tone.
Anyway, it's up to you if you want to take a break. You'll be missed. I
like Thomas A. Clarke, but I fell around the place when you did the l/n
substition in his walking poem. A classic.
best
Randolph Healy
Visit the Sound Eye website at:
http://indigo.ie/~tjac/sound_eye_hme.htm
----------
> From: M G MCQUILLAN <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: The Penultimate Words of Rab C. Nesbitt
> Date: 10 May 1999 16:06
>
> I'm at least as sick of the sight of my own pixels as every other
> present, so signing off for a spell to recharge and hopefully return
> lithium grease enhanced not to break under heat stress.
>
> But finally: "poetry's Rab C. Nesbitt" would like to point out that
> if he uses a word like 'fucking' in an e-mail, it's because he uses
> it when he speaks, and he writes it as he speaks it, in an entirely
> unemphatic way. Middle-class English literary critics of James Kelman's
> novels and short stories have made the same mistake, and written him
> off as the novel's Rab C. Nesbitt. If this usage contributed to the
> responses of Ric and of Randoph (the "testosterone" remark) then I
> suppose I can understand that: you would have had to talk to me
> face-to-face to be sure I wasn't shouting.
>
> My original point, such as it is, still teeteringly stands, re: 'open'
and
> 'closed' responses: a verdict was contradicted, and a whole approach
> was dismissed, instead of being disputed; a listmember's charged and
> eloquent prose was dismissed as "turgid," instead of its content
> being disputed; another post of mine, weak as it was, was not
> disputed - I was trashed. Hey, Ric, I won't say I've "heard you
> described" as the perpetrator of these heinous acts: you are that
> man. In the name of pluralism and openness: ain't love grand?
>
> I'll remain a subscriber 'til Tuesday afternoon, to allow the right
> of reply should it be taken up.
>
> all best
> robin
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|