 |
 |
Patrick Don't do that L On Mon, September 19, 2011 16:25, Patrick McManus wrote: > Hi isn't this all a bit political for these refined poets living in their > ivory towers (built on greenbelt land!!) :-) P-again > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On > Behalf Of Lawrence Upton > Sent: 19 September 2011 16:17 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Verbal clarity > > > I agree with you, to an extent > > > Rhetoric was really all that was available to me short of stating what I > regard as being obvious and which ay not be obvious -- or acceptable -- to > some > >> "Let's be clear" (twice) is defensive. What kinds of unclarity is it >> trying to ward off? > > The last thing he wanted was clarity. What I didn't say, because it > wasn't really my point, was that this morning I heard someone on the radio > differentiating between legal and lawful. Generally I would close the > door on such a discussion and leave to their privacy At that point anyway > I was > looking my right boot, holding my left boot. So he may have been asserting > _legal_ aggressively Certainly that's in this context defensive, but > defensive of aggression > > Unclarity with regards to motive: "this is > >> about...legality" and not, for example, cash or crypto-racist nimbyism. >> Unclarity with regards to the projected outcome: "it will >> end" as intended rather than abort or be turned back. > > Yes, clearly, but he did not say that. > > > It is like - ish - the announcements that say _because we are late, we > shall now not call at the following stations_ eliding the decision they > have made, claiming a false causality > > and in such elisions sprout sometimes not just muddles but genocides > >> But the situation *is* unclear. The fog of war's come down. "The >> operation" is going to be a mess, or made a mess of. The arguments >> around the rights and wrongs of it are not going to be decisively >> settled, to general agreement, in favour of either side. Their >> respective polemics will strive mightily to banish unclarity, but >> unclarity is going to win. > > I think the fog is mental here I doubt either is striving for clarity. > The > council has frequently refused to debate / speak, merely referring to how > long this has been going on > > Israel is very good at that. We've been negotiating for n years! > > > No, you've been delaying and talking bollocks for n years > > > It's going to be a mess. Yes. It will be made a mess of. Yes. But the > individuals concerned are also doing something, waffling, talking crap. > > We can make something of it, but that something is then open to debate. > > > It's to do with liars always hating to be called liars, which is from > some viewpoints odd. They would prefer to lie to not be called liars than > to be called liars. > > This man was lying. He wasn't trying to be clear The legality of the > situation isn't clear. And it's not that they ARE stupid but that they > simulate stupidity rather than accept reality. > > I'd better go back to work, I think. I have a computer beside which says > _You are on a network_ and then asks what I want to do; and when I tell it > the reply is _but you are not on a network_ > > I may have to send in the bailiffs > > > L > > > ----- > UNFRAMED GRAPHICS by Lawrence Upton > 42 pages; A5 paperback; colour cover > Writers Forum 978 1 84254 277 4 > wfuk.org.uk/blog ---- > Lawrence Upton > Dept of Music > Goldsmiths, University of London > > ----- UNFRAMED GRAPHICS by Lawrence Upton 42 pages; A5 paperback; colour cover Writers Forum 978 1 84254 277 4 wfuk.org.uk/blog ---- Lawrence Upton Dept of Music Goldsmiths, University of London