The Ellison Bulletin Board

Moira Russell <MRussell@sjcsf.shadow.edu>
- Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 19:47:13 (CDT)

**Sue** & **Keegan** -- Right on in the language debate -- I don't think it's necessary to adhere rigidly to hide-bound rules (most of which don't make a lot of sense -- "Never begin a sentence with 'And' -- what B.S. --) but I do think there's an interesting and exciting structure to English grammar which hasn't even been explored yet -- certainly not by all those miserable grammar "manuals." I speak rather colloquially myself (and am certainly capable of writing in that manner too) but even when I'm writing in my most formal Standard English voice (say, for the seminar paper I just handed in....) I prefer precision over sounding "stuffy"....Not to bore everyone with my arcane knowledge (I had two semesters of this stuff during my teaching stint in college & it was far more than enough for me) but I think one of the big problems with grammar today is that the first English grammar manuals were not only based on Latin, they were written in Latin....there are lots of "descriptions" of English which correspond to Latin but not to English. But trying to describe that stuff is bringing back flashbacks (I once had memorized the first dozen grammar manuals published in Britain and the U.S. because I had to....) so I'll quit now. Keegan: was about to recommend "The Elements of Style" until I heard you call it a "chestnut" (hey, that book's dear to my heart, don't call it that!). There is a pretty good book called "Style: Towards Clarity and Grace," which is not quite as much of a chestnut, but I'll have to go digging around to look up the name of the author. Will pass it along.

William Knott
(First time caller, long timer listener) , - Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 19:32:04 (CDT)

I heard about a story by Harlan Ellison called "Go Toward the Light," that it was published in the Janurary 1996 issue of The Mag. of Fantasy & SF. I have two questions: 1) Does anyone know where else it may have been published or will be published (say, for example, a future HE book)? 2) And if anyone reading this has read the story, could they tell me what it's about and give me their impressions of it? (It is worth seeking out, or can I live without it?)... I bought Harlan Ellison's Dream Corridor yesterday and read the story "One Life Furnished in Early Poverty," and I was actually moved by it. I loved it. I've read all the previous HEDCs and I liked them for the novelty, but this new quarterly goes beyond the novelty of seeing a HE story in a comic book. This is the FIRST time I was equally impressed by the comic book as I was by the original short story.

keegan
- Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 11:10:18 (CDT)

Yuppers, Sue ol' pal!!! It's a livin', breathin' thing! Anybody out there besides me interested in the resurgence and phoenix-like rise of Yiddish? I'm glad it ain't dead yet. It's a marvelously colorful language. Any thoughts?

Sue Luesse <jaluesse@htonline.com>
- Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 10:20:05 (CDT)

Yo,**KEEGAN** Wazzen dissin no one. People Write neat language they hear. People Say neat language they read. They influence each other, keeping pace with the changes in Real Life they are communicating. I tend to see language as being 'alive', and the criteria of Good is Communicating. Doesn't mean 'There Can Be Only One' (appologies to Highlander fans).. And in fact, that is what I am objecting to (<- split infinitive, damn me..), the pinky-up puritanical narrowmindedness which decrees only one, as a way to deny creativity and preserve an artificially smug literary superiority. i mean, hey, lookit alla trouble the french is having staying 'culturally pure'.. my own take is that american (and that isn't the same as english ask the brits) is fast becoming the 'lingua franca' (bet the french hate that) of the world, and all those 'foreign' grammatical structures are being applied to it routinely, being understood, and often altering structure because they better ways to communicate.. it is changing 'the rules' in the interest of languages' primary focus, which is communication. and american is the language of choice not because it belongs to 'the superior' culture but because it is already a hodge-podge of melded grammatical structures and words from other languages (and a lovely product of our 'melting pot') with built-in flexibility. and, yeah, i still strongly support teaching basic skills and techniques of language (and all art), so folks can understand enough to appreciate, and artists can boldly (and intentionally) 'break the rules' with creativity and innovation by purposely devising new rules.. oi! gotta rest my head.. starting to feel like i know something.. and it's scary.. try high fly straight drive safe

keegan
- Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 09:07:48 (CDT)

Hey, Sue. The reason I want to learn the "rules" of Standard American English is so that I can break 'em with malice aforethought. Now I just break 'em 'cause I don't know no better. It's sort of like how I had to learn Bach-style four-part choral writing. Now I know why all those parallel fourths, fifths, and octaves sound so funky. Theory profs hated me because I was always trying to sneak a bit of the blues into my four-part writing excercises. What good's a rule if it can't be broken once in a while? OH, and BTW, I hope nobody thought I was ragging on THEIR writing. Only observed my own and am determined to learn the "rules" for my own edification. I dunno. I think it's fun to conciously break a rule (every four-year old knows that form of entertainment--mine sure does). Right now I'm just stomping on 'em with a big ol' idiot grin on my face. Oh,well...there's always _The Elements of Style_. Could chaw on that old chesnut for a while.

Sue Luesse
Just in, and too wired to sleep - Saturday, August 17, 1996 at 00:50:20 (CDT)

Coupla quickies.. **KEEGAN** If you are truly considering "going buns-up", I heartily reccomend a stringent workout program to prepare...for grabbing on with both cheeks while savagely twisting from side to side like a dog with a rag... If times get bad enough, it could put some meat on the table (every little bit helps..). And re: Language Usage.. I really hate to be the one to mention it, but language changes with societies and cultures over time in a pretty interactive fashion (I believe the only two living languages unchanged since the advent of writing are Basque and Greek). I don't think Wm. Shakespeare would be writing in that "Classic" style had he been born in our era (got accused of being 'low-brow' by all the disciples of literary purity at the time).. And they would be shocked by the parody of 'their' English used by Mark Twain, Dickens, and even HE.. Maybe we should critique all the arts the same way...pick a period when some 'Master Genius' created, and freeze the art form there.. All Music after Mozart MUST conform to THAT epitome of form.. All paintings after Michaelangelo MUST conform to THAT definition.. See what I mean?? A whole lot of real art forms developed AFTER them (which they would have applauded), and we would be poorer without them. So what's the rag with Keeping English the same?? Is it truly that our language is 'devolving', or could it be evolving? Is it less expressive and rich, or simply 'not the same'?? I thought creativity and innovation were intrinsic to art. But wadda I know.. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 23:18:24 (CDT)

Re: politics. I am reminded of a two part writing session Hemingway slogged thru in Cuba. I reproduce it in its entirety.

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 23:15:28 (CDT)

To

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 23:13:39 (CDT)

hell with it.

keegan <insomnia.com>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 22:23:04 (CDT)

You know, going back through this conversation, I cringed to see all the split infinitives, the disagreeing verbs; the free punctuation. I know that y'all understand it was a fast and furious post fest and that you won't hold it against me. But I would like to re-hip myself to standardized American English (I've been speaking in hipster for so long that I have to be very careful when I teach. Fortunately, most of the parents think it's ever-so-lovely to have a Real Live Jazz Musician chained up for the entertainment and edification of their children that nobody's yet raised it as an issue). I used to think grammar was boring, too. Then I studied Spanish, Italian and French (none of which I speak well though I do okay in French after a few days in Quebec) and became very interested in grammar. It might be nice to remediate myself. I'd really love it if I knew how to put it together properly the FIRST time rather than having to do 20 re-writes for stupid stuff. Anyway....can anyone recommend a well-written book on the basics of English grammar and style? There are thousands of them and I'm frightened. Anybody have any preferences for that sort of thing?

Jeff Kempin <cappc@ix.netcom.com>
Inside the Fishbowl, Looking Out, - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 20:16:28 (CDT)

Politics is always a touchy subject, isn't it? I guess the main reason I don't like Dole is that he thinks America is stupid. He thinks that by waving the terms "tax cut" around more people will vote for him because they're gonna get back maybe twenty bucks a week. The sad part is people probably WILL vote for him for just exactly that. That, and the fact that he is against the teachers unions. That was what I studied in college, even got my license in English, but at the last moment I discovered I didn't have what it takes to be a REALLY good teacher. So I went and did something else. Unionbusters piss me off in general anyway. Look at what Reagan did to the airlines. Are things REALLY better now? Anyway, I'm not so much FOR Clinton than I am against Dole, but if I had to pick, I'd still take Slick Willie. Is HE a diehard democrat? After reading his "An Edge..." columns recently, I seriously doubt he'd be a republican. Thoughts anyone? Jeff

Al Columbato
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 19:33:26 (CDT)

*KEEGAN* said: "The piece probably bores you because you know nothing about how to listen to this kind of music. That doesn't mean the music's boring, it means that you are unwilling to spend any of YOUR energy on understanding it." And I say, "Absolutely dead on." That is SO true, and not just as it applies to music, but books, films, the works... This is touching just the tip of the iceberg. I'll let the rest of you take it away if you're so inclined. I'm going out to buy my HEDC Quarterly.

Steve again
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:47:23 (CDT)

Sue, Miora, keegan -- great points, all! Never could have put it better, myself. It never fails to amaze me, with all the morons I have to deal with in my life, when I find people who can discuss differing views intelligently and nicely. This board is like a breath of fresh air at times. But then again, maybe it's because we're like this that we like HE so much....

keegan
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:37:37 (CDT)

Steve and I agree: We both hate 'em all. Good points. I must think. Maybe I'll just go buns-up like Sue. :-)~

keegan --OY!!
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:33:22 (CDT)

Oh, yeah: the operative word in my speech to the "slack-brained" student is "TRY". Not everyone feels free or posesses to skills to create wonderful music. It is very scary to some people (though I was born this way and can't imagine NOT thinking musically). I respect this in my students, but I also believe that music is a set of skills that can be taught and that learning these skills improves the overall quality of the mind. Music and the Arts (according to the most recent research) improves skills in other areas (anybody remember the Mozart study?). The Arts stretch our minds like sports stretch our bodies. Art and Music are disciplines (I repeat, "disciplines") of the Human Mind. I don't think everyone has to be a great musician, or even be musically literate. But it is my experience that those who actively understand how music is made and have some experience actively participating in it, lead higher quality lives. The Arts feed our souls and give us voice. I see the sciences IN art--music certainly has many mathematical and scientific aspects. The Arts (including writing, of course) are a watershed for all of our physical, mental, and spiritual skills. Okay, I really GOTTA turn off the computer NOW. Sorry for the monologue!

Steve Pagano <zazu@spectra.net>
Endicott, NY - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:25:14 (CDT)

Ok, in short response, I should tell the reasons why, even though I refuse to join the Republican party and will never make a blanket statement to the effect that I agree with their politics, I also will never vote for a Democrat, for any reason, until their party politics change. First, while I agree with the Dems' (outward) views that cultural diversity is necessary, I think that their methods of attaining it are hopelessly flawed and don't have a prayer of attaining the result desired. In fact, I think that their methods are actually slowing progress in those areas. Second, I don't agree that it's the Republicans who are the only racist ones in this country (and I don't even buy that flat statements that all Republicans are racist; I just see one group of morons (those imbecile white supremacy groups and their ilk) within the party making the whole party look bad). The Democrats are the ones who wanted to keep the Welfare system the way it is, and only budged on the issue of welare reform now that it's an election year and they have to lean towards the middle of the political spectrum. The Welfare system is not an aid to people; it is a trap. This spoken from one who has a number of friends, family, and in-laws in this trap, and have seen them struggle for years unable to get out. And one unfortunate fact about poverty and welfare is that (despite there being more whites than any other racial group within it) there are proportionally more minorities on welfare than whites, so to keep the welfare system as it stands would in a way keep more minorities trapped in poverty; that seems awfully racist to me. I think keegan and I would both like to see the govt provide a lot more along the lines of child care; I know a lot of single moms who are stuck in the welfare system and can't get out of it because they wouldn't be able to afford day care for their kids. Third, while the Repubs aren't anywhere near kosher in this area, the Dems just love to lie with statistics, especially when it comes to money. For example, suppose that a certain program has a budget of $1 million one year, the rate of inflation is 4%, and that next year the program is scheduled to get $1.3 million. There's a scuffle in Congress and this new budget is cut to $1.1 million, still well over inflation, but less than what was projected. If it's a social program that's in question, Dems will find every camera to tell people that the Republicans are slashing spending on important social programs. If it's an unpopular program, the Republicans grab the cameras and tell the country that they've cut back an unimportant program. Who's lying? They both are, actually. I hate them both for it. In all, when it comes right down to it, I don't think there's any one way in which any one party is strictly better than the other; I don't see any hidden agendas against 'bohemian thinker types', because to a certain extent I am one and I don't see anyone in the Republicans bashing me for it. So, all things pretty much equally bad, why won't I vote Democrat? Because of two things: 1) I believe that good government is efficient government, and that the Democrats don't want _better_, they just want _more_ government, and 2) If all the projects on both sides of the fence are failing anyways, and will continue to fail at the rates things are going, why throw money away on them? The Republicans at least tax me less. Heck, I can even give my money to a place it can be used, like the American Heart Association, or an AIDS-based research group, or the Boys and Girls' Clubs of America. Of course, the ideal is that we balance the budget, get government to work in a way that at least borders on being efficient, and be able to create good social programs that actually work; but in the current system, with the current set of morons in Washington, and the morons both parties are setting up as their successors, there's no way in hell that's going to happen. Like I said before, politicians suck.

Sue Luesse
No room for a view - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:19:31 (CDT)

Neat stuff, pollyticks. I can vote for the "family values" icon, who has his trophy wife doing a "Hillary thing" (which is good, unless Hillary does it) - or I can take my chances on the Dufus with the loose zipper, who may be held in check for at least a little while until the prostate thing is all better.. Hhhmmmm.. Let me restate that. I can vote for the "fiscal improvement" icon, who keeps losing and finding his own money all over the place (in various degrees of deep Water) - or I can put my money on the Codger who has taxed me to the hilt for several decades already (citing economic gains for Business as a 'break' for me)... Sssigghhh.. Choices, choices... where are they? At least I got to see 'our very own' Governor graciously accept that he isn't even second best.. And didja know, the Guv changed the name of the school system in Beal City (where he grew up) to Mt.Pleasant/Beal City, after it was noted in the media that being born in a hospital in Mt. Pleasant and leaving a day or two later for life in Beal City does not constitute "Coming From" Mt. Pleasant?... Typical. From where I squat, burning paystubs for light and heat, don't much matter.. They all Talk. And it never 'tickles down' our way as anything but a yellow liquid threatening to put out the little fire we got left.. Deregulation? Phhhtah.. Downsizing, pay freezes, eliminating benefits and security is more like it. All justified by 'Market Pressure'.. What Market? They keep merging and buying out independants until they have virtual monopolies (and legally now) - and I'm still waiting to see ANY price reductions as a result (OK, except the Airlines.. Prices have gone down considerably there..so have the planes, though..). My property taxes were cut in half - four years ago - and climbing again from there. But the sales tax went up 50% to 'cover the loss', and they aren't going down to correspond.. I get the feeling that the goal is not to run Government as a business, but as a Pyramid Scheme..with a 'divide and conquer' strategy.. It sure doesn't make a lot of difference to bottomfeeders like me - screwed no matter who tells us what about why who did what (that isn't them) that caused it - and I don't see many folks 'cashing in', either. What I do see is a lot of blaming the victims, and divisive rhetoric (who should get 'more', teachers or police?) when the answer is all of the above. Guess that makes me a real Dummy, since I just can't grasp these rosy big pictures, and 'complex' simple answers they keep giving me, when I'm bent over grabbing my ankles.. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

keegan
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 16:06:45 (CDT)

Yep- I hear ya Moira. The Politically Correct Left has shot themselves in the foot more than once. Kids are incredibly bored in school even in the tender elementary school stage. I get it all the time when I play unfamiliar styles of music to kids (you know, stuff like CLASSICAL music and JAZZ). "It's boring" is almost ALWAYS the reaction. My reaction is to start asking questions like, "Why do you say that? What do you know about this kind of music that would lead you to say it's boring". They usually sit and stare blankly at me. I say, "Look it's probably boring to you because you've never heard anything like it and don't know how to do it or talk about it. What did you hear?" They'll name the instruments. Then I point out the theme to them and have them sing it. I have them listen for it as the composer embellishes it. We move to the phrases. We figure it out --and guess what? A half-hour later, they don't think it's quite so boring anymore. They learn something about it and learn to appreciate what goes into it. Furthermore, they're PROUD to posess this arcane knowledge about that old music. We write our own pieces using simplified compositional ideas like theme and variations. Some of them really do fine work. If the boredom theme persists (which it usually doesn't but some kids are a tough sell) I tell 'em straight--"The piece probably bores you because you know nothing about how to listen to this kind of music. That doesn't mean the music's boring, it means that you are unwilling to spend any of YOUR energy on understanding it. Well, your grade depends on trying to understand it. I don't care if it's your favorite kind of music--it isn't necessarily my favorite either. But you are responsible for learning about it. If you don't---you haven't met the goals." Harsh, maybe but it's the truth and it gets results. Nobody likes to think of themselves as slack brained. Pointing that out (as a last resort to cajoling) usually gets results. I think todays students need to be challenged, not mollycoddled.

Moira <same as last time>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 15:48:10 (CDT)

**Keegan** just read your latest posting seconds after mine went up (some kind of time lag here....oh well....better than some of those IRC discussions with all the pings and the lags and the God knows what....) Buchanan etc. all seem extraordinarily intolerant of any kind of intellectual quality (bohemian or no....) but also have to say that the so-called "tolerant left" in many cases are just as close-minded--cf. that job I keep referring to at UNM, I left before I was fired ("You can't fire me, I quit" -- my working motto) and one of the reasons I was almost fired was I clashed violently with the brand-new English Dept. Head who was into every latest theory that came down the pike while I was more interested in such boring, mundane questions like "Why can't these kids make their tenses agree?" and "Why do these kids think grammar is boring and full of intrinsic rules" (It's NOT! although, as a former English teacher, I admit a definite bias towards thinking grammar is interesting....) and "Why are these kids so goddamned bored in class? What can we do to get them interested?" She was sort of interested in the last question but in terms of solutions like this: let's bring in a picture, purposely taken so you can't really decipher what the subject is, go around in a circle and have everybody do a writing exercise for five minutes in which they have to figure out what the objhect is. Then everyone will read their writings (orig. terminology here) aloud. Then everyone will "communicate" in a "collaborative oral effort" (yum, yum....no, no, wrong idea) to figure out what the object is. Then everyone will "find out" what the object is at the end of this HOUR-long class period, the purpose of which is to: display there really is NO method for determining the "right" way of identifying this fuzzy object. I swear to God. I was more interested in solving the problem of boredom in classes by actually getting the kids to READ things...you know, WRITTEN things, like STORIES and ESSAYS....but I suppose I am antidiluvian....or radical....or both....or something. Suppose everyone has these kinds of horror stories. What I'm trying to point out is: too many people in charge, for my money, want things their way and only their way....or else, the "else" consisting of all sorts of things....in my case it was getting fired, but what the hell, I quit and joined a temp company for more than teaching ever paid me....but I still miss trying to make a difference. At the administrative level as well as the teaching level....

me again (keegan)
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 15:42:01 (CDT)

BTW, Steve, I agree with your views on outcomes based education. I believe, as does HE, that some people are better than others. That's highly unpopular in education at the moment. I agree we should maintain high standards, demand that they be met, and strengthen ideas and programs (such as mentoring and turoring) that support student acheivement. Kids can meet demanding goals if we expect that from them and help them get there. I'm a good example of that. I credit public school and public school teachers with saving me from being an uneducated, barefoot-and- pregnant teen bride. That's why I teach. Concerning unions: I neither love nor hate mine. Had I choice, I probably wouldn't join though I might support their actions. The problem is that you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. I don't think I necessarily deserve a six-figure income, but there are those who really believe that teachers are paid too much. We should do it for the principle of the thing and moonlight at Kwikie Mart to feed our families, right? The union thing is complicated, but I think it's a necessary evil.

Moira Russell <MRussell@sjcsf.shadow.edu>
Santa Fe, NM (Nowheresville) the late great US of A - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 15:37:08 (CDT)

**Keegan** Right on about the IMPORTANCE of the separation of church & state...in my opinion it's one of the few things which sets America apart from so many other countries, that this is literally WRITTEN into the Constitution etc. ....I think there are actually 2 Republican parties in action, one being the party of less-government-in-your-face-less -taxes-and-so-on, which appeals to most people (including me) and then you sort of get this zinger tacked on where the speaker takes a deep breath and says, "AAAAAnd....no evolution in schools, forced prayer in schools, and no abortion-on-demand!" (which seems to be more threatning to them, for some reason, than just plain "abortion," don't ask me, I don't know how....) It's two irreconcilable viewpoints & I think the "show" of the past 4 nights was to somehow "reconcile" the two parties...or at least caulk over the more gaping cracks. I was PRAYING for the religious right folks (no pun intended....honestly....even tho' I'm an atheist myself) to make some kind of scuffle so it would be plain these are _two_ different parties, really. But no one did. I think that's what angered me most, really, about the whole convention: In the Name of Unity, and so on, all kinds of individuality, principles, and actual beliefs (and I'm talking about the pro-lifers just as much as the pro-choicers!) were absolutely squelched. That was sad, that was demeaning, that was disgusting. ***Steve*** Agree with you on what high-school students should be taught before entering college....when I taught a very basic English class at the not-so-hot UNM here I had dozens of kids who insisted they always had at least A's or B's in their English classes, and yet, although they could talk fairly coherently in class discussion, couldn't write an understandable sentence or understand why they should even _want_ to write one in the first place. Moreover, what I found sad was that most of them couldn't even justify their opinions: they had their feelings, and that was that. "What did you think of this story we just read?" I would ask. "I don't know." "Did you like it?" "It was OK." "Did you not like it?" "No, it was OK." "What do you mean, OK?" "It was just, you know, OK." "Was it boring?" (this usually elicited at least a smile and _some_ reaction from some of the students, plus a little more honesty) "Yeah, it was boring." "Why was it boring?" "I don't know, it just was." I don't mean to be putting down these kids....but I had the feeling that by the time I came along, at college level, it was far too late....I only had a semester with them, and how am I supposed to help them with all they were lacking in one semester? Forgive me for going on and on about this, but this is something I really get hot under the collar about. Those kids were cheated! Not just by the high school system - but by even me in a certain way, because I had to spend time with them on stuff they should've learned in ninth grade, and never got to go on to anything else with 'em --Well, you can tell this is an issue I at least care about. But how do we translate the caring into actually _doing_ something about this problem???? (I know, I know, it's not an easy question....)

keegan <keegan@lightlink.com>
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 15:31:40 (CDT)

STEVE-sorry. I was ranting while you asked a question. :) Why I'm Leaning Toward Clinton: 1) I tend to favor the social agenda of the Democratic party and AM a Democrat although I almost never vote a straight party ticket. 2) Strong pro-choice stand 3) Respect for cultural diversity; seeing differing peoples as threads in a great Tapestry of America rather than blanching ingredients of a Great Melting Pot where those differences are considered anathema to being a Patriotic American. It ain't much, but I absolutely cannot abide the hidden Republican agenda which is suspicious of intellectual bohemian types such as myself. Dole may be a swell guy who really DOES give a shit, but I don't for one minute want to live in a country where policy is in the hands of Rush Limbaugh dittoheads. Then again, when the Republicans were in office, I had much more fun as a political activist. Some freedoms needed constant defense then. *Sigh*. Guess ya can't rest for a minute! :)

keegan
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 15:17:32 (CDT)

Yes, Moira. It was quite a show, wasn't it? I mean just that--a SHOW. Actually, I felt that the G.O.P. was trying to silence its pro-life and Christian Coalition members. They trotted out their women (including Liddy who walked the floor in a move the media dubbed "Oprah-esque" but I recognized it as being more in the form of Jerry Fallwell and other teevee preachers). They had the great Colin Powell speak "not as the poster-boy for racial tolerance in the party" (and if you or Colin really believe that, I have some lovely swampland in which you may be interested). Dole chose not to speak about abortion. So me, the American Viewing Public, sucking on my cigarettes and Zima, am supposed to believe that the Republican Party is the party of tolerance and rights. Right? Wrong. The G.O.P. is endorsing the idea that America needs to "come home" to the "old values" that make us great. Well, here's an analogy from my personal life: I left home for a reason. That reason was because I couldn't possibly thrive there because of the dysfunction (I know. A buzz-word. Sue me. I'm trying to spare you all the ugly details of my Fundamentalist Christian upbringing). The G.O.P. is trying to sanitize their image for liberals who can see the dysfunction in the Republican "family" right there, just below the rousing rhetoric. They are silencing the far right of their party to try and convince humanist liberals that one can be tolerant and financially conservative at the same time. While I think that may be true, I certainly DO NOT believe that the Republican party is truly tolerant. That became apparent to me when I saw them interview a pro-life Buchanan delegate. She said that many pro-life Republicans had intended to stage a walkout on on Kay Bailey Hutchinson (pro-choice) but that party higher-ups had conviced them not to represent themselves in any way that might embarrass the party. The pro-lifers then decided to wear white hats and "respectfully" and silently protest. She then went on to say almost verbatim what three other pro-life delegates said to different reporters:" We just want the American people to have a balanced budget and a return to family values". I think that the party has assured the extreme right that the first step is to get into office by putting on their fleece of compassion and tolerance in order to dupe the American people. THEN they can work on outlawing abortion and forcing us to pray in schools. Does that give anyone besides me a shiver? I believe that won't come to pass because if the threat of curtailed reproductive freedom or religious freedom actually becomes more than a threat, citizens won't allow it to happen. At least, I *hope* we wouldn't let it happen. The separation of church and state is extremely important. It was clear to me, despite the G.O.P.'s whitewashed family pose, that the religious right still wields great influence in the Republican party. Oh, and that Tax Cut. I figure I'll see about $20.00 a paycheck extra. That'll get me a quarter of a day with a respectable day-care provider. Besides, everytime a leading Republican was asked about the figures, s/he lithely danced 'round the question and I never heard numbers. I question whether they actually exist and add up.

Steve Pagano
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 14:45:39 (CDT)

*Sue*: (grin). *keegan*: I only listened to parts of Dole's speech last night, and the one part I did remember seeing is his bit about teachers and their unions. When he first made his statements about the sad state of education, he got booed. But he continued: "But by this I don't mean to blame the teachers. I blame their unions." And he went on to praise the individual teachers. This is basically the same as my own views: that the individual teachers know best, but their unions, and the administrators of the schools, force them to do other than what is best for them or their students. *in general, not aimed towards anyone or meant as an attack against ANYONE here* What terrifies me about outcome-based education is the abolition of 'hard grading', as keegan put it. I've heard it argued that the current grading system does too much to destroy the self-esteem of the students, that it places too much emphasis on negatives. First, I don't agree at all with that idea. What we should do instead of getting rid of the standards to keep students from feeling bad about themselves, what we should do instead is improve the whole system -- what happens both in and out of school -- so that every kid can achieve those A's and feel good about themselves. I have a lot of problems with any system that uses only negative stimuli to push students onward, but I also have problems with systems that abolish *all* negative stimuli. A mixture of the two is needed. And I get the feeling that if it were all left up the the individual teachers, that's the way it'd be, and this country would have a smarter, better-educated bunch of kids (and adults). As far as curricula go, it's my strong belief that kids should be taught a number of basic things before high school: a balanced history of the world, in that we don't pay attention to only the US and/or Europe, but we don't go overboard like that disastrous textbook I mentioned earlier; basic scences and arithmetic/math; literature and grammar; the arts (including music, which I see as one of the most important arts); and some phys ed (tho I must say I despised phys ed because I was very small in grade school and the class became an arena of allowed beating up of the smaller kids by the big ones). In HS, I like the ideas of three years of math and science, four each of English and Social Studies, and requirements for "betterment" courses, like music, art, and languages. (There should also be room for 'alternate' diplomas than academic ones per se, for those who wish to pursue career-related courses and paths, and the like.) What I'm mostly pointing towards is that when I graduated from HS I didn't consider myself really well-educated, but I find now that, in comparison to the vast majority of the college-bound kids of today, I was a walking library, and that scares the snot out of me. I see college kids who insist that they never got lower than A's in their math classes in HS, but can't pass my Calc class -- and it's not because they aren't bright kids, it's because they were never taught the necessary background, nor were they taught how to deal with what happens when there's a tenable chance for failure. :( Teachers' fault? Doubtful. More likely the Board of Education, and the town and state governments. But to continue, there's also problems in that kids don't know how to write simple essays, they have horrible grammar, they know so little history it's terrifying, and they don't know beans for any of the basic sciences. Will removing the grading system make them smarter or more capable in the subjects or more broadly-educated? Doubtful at best. But if we find a way that we can bring these kids up to the set standards, rather than lowering or eliminating the expectations, I think we can do them, ourselves and our country a great service. Harlan is a great example of what I'd love to see more of in this world: people who actually *know* things, and know how to use their knowledge, and know how to speak about their topics without having to resort to mudslinging (it's my observation that Harlan, while he does do a lot of mud-slinging, and he does that quite well indeed, he does it mostly when provoked first, and he can always pull back far enough from the fray to explain clearly and lucidly his exact points and objections). Just imagine it -- politicians who can actually make a coherent point or two without using every other sentence to smear the oposition.... PS. *keegan* -- just for my own info, could you tell me why you're leaning towards Clinton, even if it's only because you're leaning away from everyone else? :)

Moira Russell <same Bat-time, same Bat-channel>
stuck here in NM till I get $$$ to move, like all the other local, - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 14:24:47 (CDT)

Keegan -- wanted to say I agree with you that all too often TEACHERS aren't the problem -- it's the ADMINISTRATORS crazy for every fad that will look good on a grant-proposal end-of-year-quarterly-statement piece of paper that gets filed to their benefit and the students' disadvantage....last (and only) time I taught there was a large push (equivalent to continental drift, English-Dept. style) towards "portfolio" style, which I found repulsive, and so did all the other TAs, but what the hell, the English Departmental Head liked it, so.....

Moira Russell <MRussell@sjcsf.shadow.edu>
Miles from the Edge of Nowhere, the Edge of Nowhere - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 14:17:15 (CDT)

Since everyone is talking about the Republican party I thought I'd throw in my spare change....I find it disgusting that (just read this in the local rag today) local delegation bosses called "whips" were planted in each and every delegate crowd and filmed with cameras stuck in the ceilings, to make sure they generated "spontaneous applause" and "spontaneous cheers" and "spontaneous boos." Call me old-fashioned, call me naive (believe me, it's been done before) but I this struck me as the height of that which-is-TV-and-which-is-life debate. Was made miserable by the way the pro-choice delegates & senior politicians were silenced by the religious Right. Started off watching Bob Dole's speech but got caught up in C.S. Lewis's "Till We Have Faces" instead (which at least half a dozen people have recommended to me in as many years, and I duly recommend it to all of you). Despite this managed to catch much of the speech which I'm still not quite sure how it affected me yet....Didn't think it was terribly go-for-the-jugular in his usual style (also didn't think Kay Bailey Hutchinson's "funny" riff about Clinton was all that miserable, compared to what every other Republican has been saying about him for the rest of the year) but have a problem when it comes to politicians: tend to automatically disregard what they say, as a matter of course, so tend to tune out and read instead, trusting that when something red-hot comes along (i.e. "I've just been informed nuclear warheads are heading this way, so in the five seconds I have left I really want to persuade you to elect me," etc. ....) -- About the bit on teacher's unions: I did sit up and take notice as I was a teaching assistant at a large processed-education factory (also known as UNM) and we were desperate for a union but no one would touch us with several thirty-foot poles. As far as I'm concerned it seemed like more pandering to the Christian right to get evolution and birth control out of the schools. At the risk of setting off another firestorm with ME as the center, re the suicide debate: I've had long and grisly personal experience with this topic, in my own life and the lives of my best friends....All I can say is, I don't think it's anybody else's business what you do with your life (and that includes ending it) but suicide is mainly thought of almost as a _cure_ to pain by depressives and I guess the only way in which I'd openly approve would be suicide by someone who has Alzheimer's, is in grievous pain, etc., and even then I would be very cautious. It's an absolutely miserable experience to go through and those who have who have attempted "successfully" or not (ugh, what a terminology) should be treated with compassion & understanding....not condescencion (can't spell that word) or condemnation. I say all this at the risk of being off-the-mark since I haven't had time to catch up on the entire debate but since it's a personal & important topic to me, just wanted to leave a note. One last thought on the Republican convention (at the risk of trivializing the above topic): Did anybody catch the ABC News "Pulse" poll thing where they gave 35 no-neck individuals little dials to swing from 0 to 10 (5 being "neutral") and then somehow "combined" them all into three prettily color-coordinated graphs (red, white and blue!) which jiggled and joggled out-of-synch along with a video of a speech by, say, Colin Powell, etc.? Did anybody but me think this was really nuts?

keegan
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 13:39:55 (CDT)

BTW: Looking for alternatives to Clinton/Dole? You might consider Ralph Nader who is running on the Green Party ticket. Many people are unaware of Mr. Nader's candidacy because the Greens are notoriously poor and Mr. Nader refuses to use his own money to garner more publicity. I believe this is probably to protest the fact that BIG BUCKS is what gains the most political attention (because you can buy alot more of it). Anyway, Ralph's a stand-up guy and has done some very good things for the American people. I am considering casting my vote for him, though I lean decidedly toward Clinton despite his shortcomings (and yes, Steve, I admit he has many of those).

keegan
- Friday, August 16, 1996 at 13:28:49 (CDT)

Yeah, I think big politics is a sham. I find that when voting, my decision is generally based on who I think is the least evil rather than who I deem "best". Steve, I hear you about the teachers' unions. I work in a closed shop and thus HAVE to be a member of the union in order to work. Unions are not by their nature all sweetness and light. If you've read the NEA newsletter recently, it's apparent that there is a wide diversity of opinion amongst its members. I must say that I am not particulary in favor of "outcome based" education (for those who don't know, that means that each child begins a "portfolio" of their work when they enter school and this portfolio travels with them from level to level. It is supposed to contain work to show the actual ability of each student and should represent the "benchmarks" achieved in different areas). It is currently unwieldy and difficult to manage because most teachers working now were not introduced to the concept in college. It also abolishes "hard" grading. I contend that it is not the union that's the biggest problem in education, it's administrators who jump on every going educational bandwagon in an attempt to appear progressive. The bandwagon is piloted by educational-book publishers who push out every latest fad as the "one" that will save education. I reacted strongly to Dole's words because I found them insulting to my profession. His opinion seems to be that teachers (who do the best they can, with only moderate financial recompense and with little public support or appreciation) are the root of problems in the educational system. Gimme a break! Yes, there are poor teachers, but the overwhelming majority of teachers I've met are dedicated to their call to serve society in their capacities as educators. So what can I do? I can go back to the job I will have for at least one more year, do an exceptional job, and hope that my performance convinces the "Site-Based Decision Making Commitee" that I and my subject, music, are an indispensable part of their childrens' education. Like I said, I'm gonna have to start hustling more gigs, because soon it may be the only work I can find in my field. Not because I'm a lame teacher, but because money (or the lack of it) means everything. When those vouchers for school choice come out, watch your public school crumble. I'd much prefer a voucher for childcare so that I don't have to spend more than half of my paycheck on securing childcare for MY children while I try to educate everyone else's. JMO.

Sue Luesse <yeah, again>
Whatcha gonna do about it?.., - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 13:23:14 (CDT)

Hey, STEVE - maybe no one picks on Clinton, 'cause he does such a good job on himself before anyone else has a shot at it... (;-)..

Steve Pagano <zazu@spectra.net>
Endicott, NY - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 12:37:26 (CDT)

When I hear people start bashing Bob Dole, I can only shudder, because they almost never bash Clinton in the same breath. Clinton is laden with problems, from Whitewater to the failure to get Health Care done to accusations of moral pulchritude to letting the deficit spiral upwards while blasting the Republicans for the same thing. Not to say Dole is perfect or holy or what have you -- I have a healthy distrust for all politicians, who think that they are educators, scientists, artists, and everything else under the sun wrapped into one, when in reality they're little more than moneyraisers and black-slappers who know little or nothing about what really has to be done in this country. One or two of you mentioned Dole and his stance against teachers' unions. I also say I don't care for them, even though I belong to one myself. Why do I not like them? Because of their support (via the NEA) of some ideas that I feel are destroying the educational system, including the delightful outcome-based education (in which no-one fails, and so no-one succeeds) and the rewriting of history. Remember that proposed American history book that was backed by the NEA? It mentioned Lincoln exactly once, Lee not at all, and it ignored Einstein, the Wright Brothers, and a number of other important American historical figures, but those figures who were 'politically correct' got a lot of coverage. That's not to say that Harriet Tubman isn't worth mentioning; I'm proud that the area in which I grew up was a noted stop for the Underground Railroad. But when Ms. Tubman is mentioned eight or nine times and Mr. Lincoln is mentioned only once -- and the Gettysburg Address completely ignored -- I can only shudder. I cannot support organizations that would rewrite the history books in their own political image. I want *everything* that's important, including Tubman and Susan B. Anthony and Lincoln and Einstein and Seneca Falls and all the rest, mentioned and talked about in perspective. To ignore the role of women and minorities and other traditionally omitted groups when teaching American history is bigoted, but to study them to the omission of the traditional subjects is just as unforgivable. Where the hell is the middle ground in this? As to the Libertarian party: who is the candidate this year? Andre Marrou got largely ignored in '92, despite the fact that he was also on the ballot in all 50 states and had more experience than Perot (and unquestionably more smarts). The networks didn't invite him to the debates. And who says that the media have no effect in electing the president. ):P I'll be lucky if I can even find out the Libertarian candidate's name ahead of time. I'm certainly not going to vote for Dole or Clinton, but I won't vote for anyone unless I can find out some information about him/her. I do support the Libertarian party more than I support any other, but I still don't agree with all their ideas. Ah, enough of my blathering. Time to find something by harlan to read. :)

Sue Luesse <jaluesse@htonline.com>
FREE FOOD, ....for thought - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 12:32:57 (CDT)

LOOKY! LOOKY! So many new folks here, I'm beginning to suspect someone advertised this joint across the Net offering Free Food, and they're organizing tours by the busload.. (;-)... WELCOME One and All (I forgot to take notes again, and it's too much for me to remember all the names without them..). So, if all these new people keep showing up, then *I'm* not 'new' anymore, so that makes me ol......HEY!.... Good thing discussion has veered through the shattered landscape of politics - Dole makes EVERYONE else seem young.. **BETH** Been wondering why no links to the Libertarians at the top myself for a bit.. They don't do the Net? And **Robin/Rump/Puck** - Is the clue to your 'other self' in the choice of psuedonyms - or is that just what's on the menu for dinner?? Why do I get the feeling this is a 'test'? And why do I feel so sure we'll all be thinking "I knew that" AFTER your triumphant disrobing (and can I have the tights and cape when you're done with them.. I've almost got the BWAH-HA-HA and SPOON! down now..). Well, this is a HE Board, and we ALL got Attytude (though mine is currently limping along on three legs unable to give the 'official' salute) - so I'll go with the first option you gave: I didn't pay attention, and don't really much care what you call yourself.. Take the easy way out, I says.. But DO keep posting (I'd miss you). Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Beth <witkowski.7@osu.edu>
never really gone, - Friday, August 16, 1996 at 10:37:39 (CDT)

Hi all! Puck/Robin G.: Do you have an affiliation with the Sandman? With all this politics-talk I'm surprised nobody has brought up the Libertarian party. Sounds like a lot of you share their beliefs. I keep dreaming about the egg and eggcup on the Dillons' HEDC cover. Maybe I'll get a tattoo of it.

keegan <keegan@lightlink.com>
educator gearing up for the fight - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 22:50:04 (CDT)

Since ya brought it up.....Dole just publicly denounced and vowed to stand in oposition of teachers' unions. MY union doesn't currently have a contract. We are at impasse. If Dole becomes president, I may be forced to put more energy into my jazz career because it will have more job security than being an Arts Educator. Just somethin' to chew on folks. BTW-some of you know I just moved. I realized this means I must re-register to vote. You might need to do the same. Just a little reminder. Use all the rights you can because there's always somebody rarin' to take 'em away.

Mike Barclay <mbarclay@westol.com>
Indiana, PA USA - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 21:57:15 (CDT)

God! I just couldn't stand that most innane of neurotic crap that Dole-Kemp shriek so desperately. A more wonderful mix of stained, strained, pained, and drained non-faces never graced the our beloved airwaves. I gotta go sleep this one off. BYE, BYE

Jeff Kempin <cappc@ix.netcom.com>
Staring Down the Black Pits of Hell, - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 21:12:24 (CDT)

Feeling kinda funky today. Part of it is that I have to go back to work tomorrow (12 hr swing shift), part of it is listening to Bob Dole give his acceptance speech(enough to drive anyone mad), and part of it is the lingering feeling I got after reading the adaptation of "One Life Furnished in Early Poverty" in HEDC. It wasn't the first time I'd read or seen the story, but it still affects me every time I come in contact with it. As for the Michael Mancini debate on the other board, I came in late to it also. The only clues I've been able to glean is that someone going under the name "Michael Mancini" said or wrote something that pissed Harlan off and a public (sorta) debate followed. Everyone kept bringing up the fact that "mancini" was the name of a character on the funniest show on television, Melrose Place. Every now and again a few people will come on the board, insult each other for a day or two, and then disappear mysteriously. Right now everyone out there is comparing all their HE memorabilia. I don't have much of anything beyone his books, so that board is REALLY boring right now. Oh God, now Dole is espousing "family values" again. I'm convinced that Dole is posessed by demons. Just look at the way he blinks his eyes. I've tried blinking them as fast as he does and I always get dizzy. I'm also scared of the fact that his VP candidate has a name so close to mine. See y'all tomorrow. Jeff.

Richard Kettleson
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 20:10:17 (CDT)

All right, then---I'm getting it.

keegan
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 17:59:34 (CDT)

HEDC is $5.95 in the USA. By the way, it's better than great. I especially loved "Gnomebody". Nice to see a work written partially in that hipster-bop-slang. Funny as all get out, man!

Richard Kettleson
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 17:36:41 (CDT)

Can anyone tell me the price of the new HEDC Quarterly?

Shaz
Roaming round Holland - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 16:17:36 (CDT)

Sorry to post this so far after it was mentioned, but we are on vacation now. As for Ellison's comment about disliking greeting cards: send blank greetings with letters inside or customized ones to those friends of yours who don't immediately toss them, and (like I have recently done) send WEBCARDS to those friends who don't keep cards (preferably with a nice long personal note attached). Acknowledging birthdays and anniversaries is always nice, as long as you do so for people whom you care about enough to write to or phone at non-special-occasion times of year. WEBCARDS seem to be the environment-friendly solution to the desire to send a card to someone without worrying about tree loss. Just a thought. And MANY THANKS for the HEDCQ#1 info--I will look for it this weekend (usu. takes 3 more days for comics to hit the stands here after they are out in the U.S.). Can't wait!

keegan
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 11:52:58 (CDT)

Happy news from the land of Comic books (and someone hand it along to HE because it's just the kind of thing he loves to hear): When I visited my local purveyor of graphic stories (Comics for Collectors in Ithaca, NY), Harlan Ellison's Dream Corridor Quarterly was prominently displayed at the check out and the clerk assured me that it is "...great. I read it last night". How nice to see HE's work out front and in your face as is appropriate. Many thanks to Doc for bringing up Dorothy Parker's poem and to Rumplestiltskin for posting the text. That poem kept me alive at many a low point. Writers of all stripes are SO important! BTW, thought provoking conversation abounds here, as usual. Thanks for taking the time to think and write!

Jason
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 11:08:25 (CDT)

Al What did you expect from a page devoted to HE? Can't stay long, so just one comment and a question, Loved HEDC, and can someone who's followed the newsgroup tell me what the hell this Michael Mancini thing is about? Jason P.S. "Robin' I think I know who you are and if I'm right You'll be getting an e-mail from me later.

Al Columbato
Philly, - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 11:02:23 (CDT)

Hey *DOC*, I'm not sure how you interrupted my message, but when I said there's no such thing as suicide etiquette, believe me, it wasn't without compassion. This is one helluva comments page. One last thing about suicide: Has anyone read HE's "Opium" within the past two days? (You can find "Opium" in SHATTERDAY, as well as the excellent omnibus DREAMS WITH SHARP TEETH, consisting of Shatterday/I Have No Mouth.../Deathbird Stories, available through the HERC---next to, or along with, THE ESSENTIAL ELLISON and LOVE AIN'T NOTHING BUT SEX MISSPELLED, it's the best HE book in my collection. Make HE happy and order it today!)

Rumplestilskin
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 10:36:32 (CDT)

Good guess Wolfmistress, but Wrong! Guess again. Anybody else want to give it a shot? Doc I should have remembered that, in fact I did and by the time I got to the end I forgot it again. I had it printed up on a t-shirt, wear it now and then when I'm in a blue mood. For those not in the know I'll type it here. (Capital letters signify the starts of new lines.) Razors pain you; Rivers are damp; Acids stain you And drugs cause cramp; Guns aren't lawful; Nooses give; Gas smells awful; You might as well live. By the late great Dorothy Parker. And from the other corner "One hundred thousand lemmings can't be worng." which was a piece of graffiti I read a while ago. Al there is or was an etiquette for suicide, the Romans had it, the Japanese had it, I think I even heard somewhere that the Inuit had or have one. There are many cultural viewpoints to the subject. JT how do you know so much about 'Woodsmoke?' I'm envious of your inside knowledge. *Keegan* You can't miss it, just look for the comic book, with the words Harlan Ellison's taking up half the cover. I'll be back later.

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com (til COB tomorrow!)>
Building a Life Hutch in the Cosmic Barnyard...., - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 09:56:30 (CDT)

Good Morning, All! -- Yes, I think I've got you pegged, Puck! When's the next Buzz coming out? As for the current thread of discussion - Asimov wrote in one of the first Foundation Books: "Violence is the last resort of the incompetent." I tend to agree from a public viewpoint. But what about the violence we wish to inflict on ourselves - and thereby inflict on others indirectly? The suicide itself was personal violence. The manner in which it was carried out was public violence. This is a fact. Yet, everyone one who has commented on this situation has stated that the only thing most of us really find fault with is that the gentleman had the bad taste to commit suicide where everyone could see it! That brings to mind the dark truth behind the whole Watergate Thing of Nixon's years. I learned (being a part of the DC political scene for a number of years) that the Washington Elite, The Permanent Government if you will, worked very hard to force Nixon out of office for one reason, and one reason *only* -- He got caught! That was Nixon's Unpardonable Sin. Not that he was up to his eyeballs in Watergate and even worse carrying-on, but that he got caught at it. He was too arrogant to cover his butt the way all the rest did (and still do - except Clinton, whos handlers seem to be totally inept at covering anything!). So this is the deceased's Unpardonable Sin as I understand what's being said -- not that he was driven to kill himself by whatever and, but that he "got caught" at it in front of a lot of so-called "innocent bystanders" who no doubt partake of our ingrained aversion to dealing with death on a personal face-to-face level, but shrug it off when it's a footnote in the evening news. What I think about *that* may or may not be addressed later. Gotta run.

Sue Luesse <jaluesse@htonline.com>
Standing in Hell with an open heart, and getting flamed to cinders here - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 09:02:11 (CDT)

For all who tuned in late - *I* 'began' the suicide debate by asking for thoughts and POVs on a specific Real Life Event which occured this week (scroll back), that troubled me greatly and left me ANGRY - and I couldn't figure out why, or where my anger should be directed. **TO ALL WHO RESPONDED** I cannot thank you enough for sharing your thoughts and personal support. As I read the responses, I realized it was NOT that suicide had occured which troubled me (a tragedy, but one I can cope with and accept), and not even the terrible consequences for family and those who witnessed it (also a tragedy, and quite horrific - but one that can be addressed in a supportive, healing way). When I read the post from *AL* saying there is no suicide ettiquette, I found myself nodding and agreeing... And then ANGRY - because there IS ettiquette for journalism, and public comportment. That's what is wrong with the picture that weighs on my soul. The article in the paper triggered my Anger with a PC "nicey-nicey", 'sensitive compassion' which ENNOBLED this man's public suicide. It did not say WHY he did it (and one can only assume a 'public suicide' is a Last Desperate Protest since most suicides are done privately), did not include any sidebars or quotes from anyone in the medical or mental health field to offer insight or information to help others with similar problems, did not mention the witnesses or their trauma - just went on and on about how 'rational', 'considerate', and brave the man had been, and portayed the family as accepting, supportive, brave, strong heroes (like the deceased). It gave the impression that our community had been "blessed" to host this Good Thing... And worse - that many people reading the article ACCEPTED that as the Truth. Traumatized witnesses (and there were quite a few, including children), the fact that the man had only been diagnosed and was not symptomatic, the fact that the family had not talked to or visited the man in more than five years (small town folk Know such things), the FACTS were entirely ommitted in a 'sensitive' way to allow a CONCLUSION to be promulgated they don't support. MANY THANKS to you all. You've restored my personal belief that real people DO care, helped me sort through this terrible mess, and pointed me (and my ANGER) right at the source.. They WILL be hearing from *me*.. So will everyone else.. Love you all. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Jeff Kempin <Brewing up that Strange Wine>
- Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 07:23:28 (CDT)

When I made the dignity comment, I was under the assumption that we were talking about euthanasia, terminally ill patients, not some tortured teen who just can't take it anymore. Just read the Dream Corridor. Thought it was great. My only question is this: is Harlan pulling a fast one here? I seem to recall reading somewhere that "Chatting With Anubis" an original story published back when HEDC was monthly, was simultaneously published in another magazine. People seem to have heard of the "Wood Smoke" story before too. The deal with publishing an original story with every issue means that it shouldn't be available anywhere else. Is it wrong that I'm arching an eyebrow here? Jeff

Doc
A Lonely Place, Sans Lecturn - Thursday, August 15, 1996 at 01:51:33 (CDT)

Well, here I am, back at the Big Pill, and it seems a bit bitter, today. Just no sugar-coating something like that, is there, gang? H.G. Wells said (at least, in the movie *I* saw), "The first man to turn to violence is the first man to run out of ideas." Violence has been defined by Learned People Who Know as, "intentional trauma." Now, place suicide in the Wells quotation. See what I'm getting around to here? I have, in the past, run just clean, flat **OUT** of ideas, myself. I count myself fortunate, today, that a.) I was a failure at departure, and b.) there were people to help me through the Bad Patches. Here comes a mind-boggling surprize for you: I am an ordained minister. Many people sneer about Universal Life Church, but I take my responsibilities rather seriously; they include making Life a little pleasanter (my syntax) for the people that I meet. But, I digress. As a minister, I cannot condone suicide; simultaneously, as a Hooman Bean, I honestly don't feel that I can condemn it, either. Just the same as I can't tell people what their Spiritual Beliefs oughta be. All that is strictly between a person and his/her Maker. I know how *I* find peace and meaning in my life, and if others are interested, I'm happy to share; otherwise, my job is to BE THERE. Me an' Tom Joad ("Wherever there's a guy gettin' beat up by a cop, I'll be there."). If my Brother/Sister is hungry, I should make with some chow. If they are sick at heart, my shoulders a wide. If they are lonely, angry, frustrated, whatever. Even if they just need to talk. There are options to everything, I think; but some of us truly run out of options, out of "ideas." Personally, I recommend the Dorothy Parker poem, "You Might As Well Live." I can't -- meaning, it's not my business to -- decide the propriety of the man's actions. I don't always (ever?) see The Whole Picture. I believe God is on the job, even when it makes no sense to me. Somebody grew (or will) from that; it's certainly made all of *us* think. What is so different about his death, compared to the fact that our children -- and I've worked in an adolescent C.D.U., people, I mean CHILDREN -- killing each other over the poisonous crud that's killing them anyway? The drive-by's, the armed robberies, the simple demonstration among groups (read, "gangs") of showing who's got the biggest pee-pee by walking up and putting bullets and watermelon-knives into people, even strangers. What is the purpose? The point? I *wish* I had an answer. GOD, I wish. I think that these are all symptoms of our society and what we're becoming by not seeing EACH OTHER any more. We've lost real Neighborhood. By-en-large, we aren't THERE for each other, any more. In days of old, someone was sick, people showed up with chicken soup, casseroles, pot-roasts, fer cryin' out loud. Even if it was only a cake. Look at Amish communities -- they're *communities*. Your barn burns down -- is everyone okay? Phew! Thank God! Everybody helps you build another one. Whatever opinion one has of the Amish and their beliefs, the facts are these: they know each other, and they are THERE. It takes dogged persistance and heaps of courage to do that, these days. People are so shocked by it now, it's not too extraordinary for a helper to get taken advantage of, and largely shat upon. Good Neighborism gets you nervous-laughter-behind-hands. But what if we were consistant? What if we kept at it, kept doing unto others as we'd have them do unto us, until they realized that we really meant it, we really weren't charging them for it, there were no strings, we were just being decent? Ah, what then? Well, people start talking more, communicating more, and suddenly fewer people are hungry and homeless -- not many, at first, but some. A start. We cannot keep looking to the Guvmint to solve the problems, when the ways and means are in our very own hands, right here and now. Once people are talking again, maybe we *can't* prevent a man's suicide; but, maybe we can find a way to comfort him and his fam