[ Home ] : [
News ] : [ Links
] : [ Pics ] : [
Bio ] : [ Store
] : [ Resources ] :
[ Wanted ] : [ Comments
] : [ Rant ]
The Ellison Bulletin Board
Comments Archive - 03/23/99 to 05/17/99
Doc
- Saturday, May 15, 1999 at 21:13:59 (CDT)
Phew! No wonder I don't hang out here s'much these days...
THE MATRIX was a lotta fun, nothing more than it was supposed to be.
IDLE HANDS is much better
than one would think -- black comedy in the spirit of Roger Corman's
BUCKET OF BLOOD and
LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS. See it at once!
Then there's THE MUMMY. They took a classic creepy film and turned it
into an $80 million 1950s
adventure flick, leaving Brendan Fraser with the Cornell Wilde role. For
what it is, it was okay; but it
shoulda been more; like, scary, maybe?
My pal is alive and safe and back in SF. My cousin, Luann, passed away
last Saturday, after a 2-year
battle with cancer; so there's as much relief as grief; unfortunately,
it hit my uncle really REALLY
hard -- he's 76 and just lost his youngest child. Thanks, Shane, for
your kind words.
BUCK -- You're down, on the "poopyhead" thing. I'm surprised, though,
that Rick didn't threaten to
turn this whole board right around and drive straight back. Still,
speaking as a "cracker" (from
Oklahoma and Texas?!?), I have to agree with you -- Boo, Hess.
Cheers, Doc
Bill Dennis
- Saturday, May 15, 1999 at 15:15:24 (CDT)
JIM: Sleeping Beauty, yeah I think I've heard of it somewhere, maybe.
But didn't we get a "hint" right
up front that only a prince's kiss could bring her back (like maybe when
the witch said, "I'm putting
you to sleep, and only the kiss of a prince will wake you")? In MATRIX,
it can out of nowhere. -- Billy
D.
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Saturday, May 15, 1999 at 10:52:59 (CDT)
Something is amiss Obi Wan. . .just checked in with a source at the
local Toys-R-Us that had stocked
big on the STAR WARS stuff and am told it ain't moving off the shelves
as expected. Hmmmm. .
.could it be The Force (Lucas) forced it too far? Until next time. . .
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Saturday, May 15, 1999 at 10:50:16 (CDT)
RE: Why kiss a 'dead' guy? Ever hear of a story called "Sleeping Beauty"
where the prince's kiss brings
back Sleeping Beauty? Since THE MATRIX mangaes to shovel, squeeze, and
shoehorn just about
every other story into its narrative this is just another example. But
ya gotta love the ALICE IN
WONDERLAND digs here. Until next time. . .
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Saturday, May 15, 1999 at 10:47:32 (CDT)
Shane: RE: Jack in? I had to wonder, as the storyline took a nosedive if
it was really the opposite of
jacking in. (Cyberpun of sorts intended.) Until next time. . .
Lynne
- Friday, May 14, 1999 at 14:35:47 (CDT)
All the SW:The Phantom Menace frothing seems like a bit much, but part
of me does understand it.
Years ago, when Star Trek III was coming out, I decided I just HAD to
see it on opening day. This was
before the days when you could pre-purchase tickets for movies (at least
in my neighborhood), so I
ended up waiting on line outside the theater for three hours to see it.
And it was worth it, because I
had a great time. Everyone that was there really, really wanted to see
it, so the atmosphere had an
intensity and enthusiasm unlike anything I've experienced since. It
definitely added to my
enjoyment of the movie. Although today's Star Wars fans, who wait on
line for a week for tickets,
make me look like an amateur!
As for the merchandising, I have nothing good to say about it. I used to
collect science fiction
memorabilia, but it's just not fun any more. Part of the fun used to be
in "the hunt", just trying to find
neat things. But now everywhere you turn around you find something with
Star Trek, Star Wars etc
plastered on it. Not to mention, I would have to spend my whole year's
expendable income to keep
up with the stuff. Wow, don't I sound like a cranky old fart!
In the HE-related area, my pictures from ICON18 can be seen on the web
starting at
http://obelix.rutgers.edu/pub/lreed/icon18_pics.html for anyone who is
interested. It wasn't one of
my better photographic outings, but they are good for few grins.
Charli
- Friday, May 14, 1999 at 07:48:24 (CDT)
The latest Locus reports that HE recently sent out $20k in royalties for
the Italian version of Dang.
Vis.. HE is quoted, "pretty good for a 32 year old book!".
keegan
- Friday, May 14, 1999 at 00:30:51 (CDT)
Insomniac tonight.....
Frankly, I'm more excited about HE and Penn Gillette on the same PI than
I am about the new SW
movie. I saw the original Star Wars at the drive-in which made it double
hip 'cause all that space
action looked like it was happening in the sky in front of me. Wish
there was a drive-in left around
here. They've all been turned into flea markets or trailer parks.
Still one left in Maine last I was there.
My husband is a major Star Wars fan, but I think we, too, will wait for
the hoopla to die down.
Probably something to do on some rainy summer weekend.
Barney Dannelke
- Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 21:15:58 (CDT)
re: Star Wars:TPM - I've got tickets for the midnight premiere out here
next week. While I'm as burnt
out on the hype as Shane - I have had major plot points given away in
the stupidest places - I learned
something the other day about the movie I would have preferred to not
know simply because I saw a
t-shirt on a kid in a parking lot - I've had other stuff ruined by
making the mistake of picking up the
new Tom Waits at the local Borders [end caps and point of purchase
displays are tools of the devil, I
say]
Well, the above paragraph is a mess but I ain't a' fixin' it. The point
I was going to make, before I got
lost in run on sentence land, is that going to the midnight show is
something I wouldn't miss. It'll be
like the casting call at a Fellini film. If it sucks - even better! It's
what this culture deserves. If they all
keep going to see it for the rest of the summer it's more space on the
local bike paths and at the gym
for me.
"Force this!" he exclaimed, grabbing his light saber...
Peter
- Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 16:21:44 (CDT)
Oh yeah, I'm also avoiding the theater for the first month so as not to
run into the "fandom menace"
---Peter
Peter
San Jose, CA - Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 16:20:41 (CDT)
You almost have to admire the sheer beauty of how Star Wars is going to
succeed. I have no doubt
that this first movie will be as shallow and lifeless as the original (I
loved it as a kid, but then I grew
up and it grew boring.) I hope that the other two will have a little
more meat to them (I'm expecting
that the third movie will have to end on a down note, which I'm actually
looking forward to---I'm
sick, aren't I?) but I still have to admire this first movie.
This movie will suceed for two reasons. The first month or so will most
likely be filled with the
die-hard camp for two years to buy tickets fans. They'll generate most
of the early revenue which will
keep it up top. then, as the hype slowly starts to die away, the rest of
us, the ones who didn't feel like
forsaking out lives, our loves, and our jobs for a lousy movie, will
feel safe in venturing to the theater
once more. We, and the few stragglers who are in the "who can watch
phantom menace the most
times" competition will also push the Star Wars revenues up into the
stratosphere. Therefore, Star
Wars will succeed, even if it turns out to be complete and utter dreck.
---Peter
Peg
- Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 15:42:58 (CDT)
On SW:TPM - Personally, I plan to wait a couple of weeks, then go to
catch a mid-week matinee,
preferably at a time when all the kiddies are still in school. Some
folks are really excited about going
to the opened weekend, etc., but I find nothing ruins my movie
experience so quickly as to be stuck
in an overcrowded noisy theater surrounded by small shrieking children,
having my seat kicked from
behind me and me stuck sitting someone who will inevitably block my
vision (hey, I'm short, so sue
me).
Now, I remember seeing both Star Wars and Star Trek, either on the
opening or shortly after, as a
child (10 - 13 year old range). I remember the theater being full, but
it was a mixture of adults and
kids. And I recall everyone being so captivated by the flick that there
were no side conversations, no
shrieking, no kicking of the seat was going on. There were the fun
elements of the crowd booing and
cheering. (BTW - noticed the same thing at the MATRIX, both kids and
adults were spellbound).
However, I don't expect that with this Star Wars flick. Call me
cynicized, but with all the hype and
merchandising and kids being already exposed to technical marvels and
such, I don't think the same
atmosphere will prevail. And sad to say, the few articles I've read
about the previews weren't
completely flattering about the movie, so I don't think hard-to-please
audiences with high
expectations will be so easily captivated.
Wow. That was a lot more than I intended to say. Guess I derserve my
nicknames...
Peg
DTS
- Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 14:07:48 (CDT)
SHANE: Not even "Titanic" had this much hype going for it. My local
paper (as have, I'm sure, dozens
of others across the country) reported today (in a small story, true,
and in the third section) that all
area movie theaters sold out of tickets for the debut showing of "The
Phantom Menace" and had
already begun selling out shows that follow on the days after May 19th
(some folks were already
buying for the following week). What's more, my daughter and I went to
see a movie after school
yesterday ("The Mummy," a terrifically fun, no-brainer, action/adventure
which we both loved) and
some guy rushed up to me when I unknowingly walked up to one of the
designated "Star Wars" only
lines and asked (in a voice shaking with hyperventilation), "Are You
gonna sell those tickets later?
Huh, huh?" I just shrugged him off, figuring that he'd had one too many
coffees or to much speed.
Only later, after being directed to the right (single) line (which was
selling tickets for that days shows
while the other four handled the "Star Wars" sales) did I realize what
he was going on about. And
when I stopped at a local toy store to buy some action figures for my
daughter's birthday (she's a real
tomboy, loves all kinds of toys), the clerk told me that the didn't have
any "Darth Maul" figures left
because it was a "hot item" (some stores don't have ANY of the figures
left), and that it was already
selling for $50.00 on the local (Midwestern)collectors market. I've seen
guys that had to be at least
twenty (and sometimes closer to 30) buying these things -- I'm all for
collecting, but when ya can't
even get something for your kid's birthday -- sheesh! Am I sick of the
hype? Absolutely. Will I see the
movie? Yeah...but I think I'll wait until July or August, when all of
the fruitcakes and Lucas-junkies
have been satiated. Man, and people call ME crazy. Out here, DTS.
Shane Shellenbarger
Phx, AZ USA - Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 08:20:38 (CDT)
You know folks, I've reached Hype Overload and it's made me cynical.
STAR WARS: THE PHANTOM
MENACE has so overwhelmed every area of my life, so saturated my senses
that I'm loath to stand in
line to see this film. Not since TITANIC have I experienced such a
feeling of malaise and
ambivalance toward a film. It saddens me. I remember that charge I felt
when I first watched the
saga of Luke Skywalker and his friends unfold on the screen of the Cine
Capri Theatre, the sound
enveloping me and lifting me into another world. Now, I see Darth Maul
toys everywhere. I take note
that the SW:TPM subscription issue of TV GUIDE is the least desirable of
the four covers that TV
GUIDE is hawking to collectors...and why is a movie on the cover of TV
GUIDE? Yeah, I'm saturated
and cynical, how about you?
Bill Dennis
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 22:21:23 (CDT)
TODD: Gotta disagree with you on the voting thing. Just because
something "seems more logical"
doesn't make it true. Do you have data to back up that claim, as you
accuse people holding my
position of lacking? For me, when it comes to human nature, I'd say
being logical is a strike against
your argument. I know a guy, age 75, who has never voted in his life
because "it doesn't matter, they're
all crooks anyway"--which would at first glance lend credence to your
position. Yet this same man
has always lived a comfortable life, been free to do and go as he
pleased, etc. I'd bet my fortune (and
believe me, I'd miss that $3.58 something awful if I'm wrong) that if a
politician legislated something
that affected this guy directly--like taking away his land or wiping out
his bank account--he'd be the
first one in line at the next election to vote the bastard out of
office. -- Billy D.
Bill Dennis
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 22:03:51 (CDT)
P.S. on the Matrix: SPOILER WARNING -- SPOILER WARNING -- why could her
kiss bring a dead
guy back to life? Did I miss something? -- Billy D.
Bill Dennis
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 22:01:52 (CDT)
Re: Matrix--great special effects, lousy movie. In addition to the
earlier question, I also wondered
how they could be jacking into the matrix from their ship with no
physical connect. They must have
been microwaving or radioing in somehow, so why couldn't these
ultrasmart machines just track
that back to the humans' ship? -- Billy D.
Mitch
Hazlet (this year's vacation hot spot), NJ - Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at
21:34:36 (CDT)
POTENTIAL MATRIX SPOILER...Shane - Here's a theory. The traitor contacts
an Agent while
jacked in. He offers to turn coat, but wants to set up a meeting to
discuss terms. Also, jacking in solo
is problematic. The Agents designed and built the system. They give him
information that let's him
jack in more conveniently, and guide him in and out of the system. He's
their link to the real prize, so
they won't screw him over. Everyone on the ship is a techie to some
degree, and I'm sure Tank isn't
the only one who knows how to work the equipment. Questions? Comments?
Mitch?
Chris
Philly, PA - Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 20:19:44 (CDT)
Thanks for the news update today, Rick.
Today's me old birthday and I couldn't ask for more than to find out
that both Harlan Ellison and
Penn Gillette are going to be on the same episode of PI. Talk about a
dream come true.
But why waste those two on the Internet. How can you have two die-hard,
outspoken atheists like
that in one place and not talk religion? Man, talk about a golden
opportunity. If there's anyone who is
able to flay the skin off a religious whacko better than HE it just
might be Penn.
That is not meant to imply that anyone who is religious is whacko or,
indeed, anything close to it.
That's just meant to be about, well, religious whackos. We've all seen a
few of 'em. :)
-chris
Shane Shellenbarger
Phoenix, AZ USA - Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 13:25:37 (CDT)
CHARLIE: The information that I got off of the SCI-FI Channel web site
last month stated that the
History Channel would be showing "The truth about science fiction"
episode on June 8th.
Speaking of THE MATRIX, can anyone tell me how the traitor was able to
"jack into" the machine
world without the help of someone else on-board the ship or without them
detecting what he was up
to?
Peg
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 13:18:28 (CDT)
I'll start this off by saying I'm a pretty easy-to-please movie goer, so
my demands aren't as high as
some folks' may be. Second, I've mentioned certain aspects of the film
though I've tried to do it in
such a way as to not drop spoilers. Apologies if that fails here.
My husband and I loved the Matrix. First, it was just grand
entertainment; fun FX; major eye candy
that kept us riveted for the length of the flick. Second, while the
major themes - what is reality, for
instance - aren't new, I though the treatment they got was somewhat
innovative compared to most
other SF movies (not novels or stories, but movies). And those things
made some of the other pitfalls
more forgiveable to me - like the less-than-thorough character
development; the "love interest"
aspect which I thought had no roots at all; etc.
As a side note, a friend of mine said that the story mimics the Gospel
of Luke in the Bible. Interesting
thought, though I haven't checked to see how closely the movie tracks
the literature. There were
definitely themes in the movie that parallel the story of Christ (though
I do not presume to say that
was the *intent*, just that they do) - a character who is mankinds's
savior; rebirth into a new life; a
Judas character; a John the Baptist, searching for the savior; and
others.
I'd be interested to hear more about what folks thought of the movie,
the themes, the treatments,
parallels, etc.
And a last comment. My husband I reflected after the movie and decided
that - there was little if any
nudity and no sex; little if any foul language; and almost no gratuitous
violence. That is to say, the
violence was all consistent with the plot, and there were no instances
of violence being performed
for the sake of having the audience hate the bad guy, i.e., in support
of a vengeance theme.
Cheers......Peg
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 12:29:13 (CDT)
Okay, one last sweep and then back to HARLAN ELLISON. Let's get
something clarified here. I don't
care one what you believe, why you believe it, whatever. I could care
less if you worship that
moldering cucumber that hides in the dark in the linen closet. You can
do or believe whatever.
Really. But when you start shoveling your beliefs down others throats
(mine, for example), when you
do this posturing number whereby you present yourself as being better
than another because your
satellite dish is smaller or bigger than theirs, when you start screwing
with my life because your life
MAY be screwed, then I get cranky. And rightly so. I don't care a rat's
toot if you hide behind a handle
or not. That you may do so causes my ever hyperactive imagination to
start running in overdrive as to
WHY. Are you, maybe, oh, I don't know: Thomas Pynchon out for a romp in
cyberspace, collecting
material for your next novel? If you are, drop me a line. I have a
question or two for you. Are you,
maybe, Stephen King, out to check out Harlan's web site to see if his
site is more popular than the
King site? That you choose to hide behind a handle implies to me you
have something to hide. Good
or bad you ARE hiding something. SHARE. Geez. Now. Back to Harlan
Ellison. But reaching a bit to
get to THE MATRIX. Interesting movie, I must say. It's right up there
with BLADE RUNNER in that
you have to watch it more than once to get it all, and even then you
don't. You wanna goose
somebody's pocketbook this summer? Forego STAR WARTS, er, WARS and go
see THE MATRIX
again. And again. 'Nuff said this time around. Until next time. . .
Peter
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 07:27:30 (CDT)
Okay, I have to come in defense of anime on this one (simply because I
know that gross
generalizations based on individual cases are dangerous). While I will
admit that most of it is crap, or
"porn for fanboys who only like to look at animated breasts," as Paul
Riddell puts it, there are a few
shining examples of what a good and even great animation should be. Just
like the other "genres" of
entertainment, there are always going to be examples of things which
shine above the crap. I suggest
taking a look at "Key the Metal Idol" and "Neon Genesis Evangelion" to
see that there is a lot more
ambition in the world of anime than cartoon porn and kiddie fluff, which
if you think about it, is
what a lot of american animation is as well.
---Peter(awake at six in the morning and it's not even finals yet)
Wylie
santa rosa, ca - Wednesday, May 12, 1999 at 00:18:10 (CDT)
That's "live action" anime, Chris. I don't care for japanese anime
myself. Had to pull a title off the
shelves a few years ago, it had 16 rape scenes in it (according to the
staff). Yuck.
Chris
Philly, PA - Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 13:29:52 (CDT)
Wylie, I bought Happiness on DVD from Amazon. Ya gotta love Amazon,
don't ya? They have
everything and they have it cheap and you get the stuff within 2 days,
usually. And if you happened to
buy any AMZN stock, you can afford to buy from them. :)
Happiness is definitely sick. The usual gang of morons who didn't bother
to watch it mistakenly
labelled it a "pro-pedophilia" movie which is absurd. What it does is
depict one of the characters as
he is - a husband, father, psychiatrist and... child rapist. It's not
anywhere close to pro-pedophilia
but it makes the unforgiveable error of not depicting the molester as a
shambling monster with
horns and drool dripping down his chin. Like I said, it's good,not
great. Worth seeing but unless you
are a compulsive movie collector like me, probably not worth buying.
HE on PI: OK I know HE knows everything but does he know enough about
the Internet to be his
usual entertaining self about it? Ah, silly question, I could listen to
that man talk about mowing the
lawn and it'd be fascinating. Any chance they'll pit him against one of
the cultural Nazis making
noise nowadays like Falwell, Buchanan or Gary Bauer? Or would that be
such offensive material it
would be considered part of the cultural pollution? :)
Hmm, if Matrix was anime that might expain why I was fairly neutral
towards it. I can't stand anime.
Blech.
-chris
Rick Wyatt
- Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 13:18:32 (CDT)
Okay, folks. Stop being poopyheads. Don't make me wade in there with my
truncheon! I don't mind
the occaisional verbal tussle but let's not make that the whole point of
this board, hmmm?
First of all, just because Jim might need to take three deep breaths and
let them out before
responding, he's not an asshole. And Otto DOES know Everything, he just
forgot where he put it.
Second of all, the use of handles is a known and accepted practice that
goes back to the original
BBSes and to CB radio before that. As I've said before, people are
encouraged to use them provided
they have identified themselves to me. And if you don't trust ME, gang,
you need to find another
playground.
I loved THE MATRIX - my only complaint was they went for deep about a
third through the movie,
came up for air another third of the way through, and then never went
back down. It was some of the
best live-action anime I've ever seen though. And I could even stomach
Keanu, that in itself MUST
involve some kind of fantastic special effects.
I don't know what the deal is with the Truth About Science Fiction. I
have received several
contradictory e-mails on it and I don't get the History Channel. Sorry.
FINALLY, set your alarms now for May 26th - Harlan will be on
POLITICALLY INCORRECT and the
subject of discussion is The Internet. It's already been taped, HE
didn't tell me what he said.
Otto
- Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 12:26:51 (CDT)
Excuse me, Jim. I may be a jerk, but at least my offensive comments are
relevant to the topic, and I
don't put words in you mouth. I have no recollection of ever claiming
that I knew everything -- or of
Sheriff Buck doing so, either. Can't anyone defend their position
without being labeled as a
know-it-all? In fact, in my last post, I asked you a question
(obviously, this would be something which
I DON'T KNOW), which Sheriff Buck had already indirectly asked, and
which I'm still fairly curious
about the answer to . . .
Re: Movies. I am fiercely jealous of you all. I have no, repeat, NO
money with which to see them. I've
been entertaining myself by learning how to do a "'Round the World" on a
yo-yo.
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 11:57:44 (CDT)
"Sheriff Buck". I suspected as much, but decided if I didn't have the
objective facts before me I
wouldn't advance a subjective opinion. Of course, with the facts before
me now--your bio, as
such--it helps to understand you better. And now that I do I leave it at
that. Until next time. . .
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 11:55:11 (CDT)
Otto: It must be nice to be perfect, to know everything, to have the
answer to everything. Of course,
since you do possess all this why are you here? Until next time. . .
Wylie
- Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 10:30:36 (CDT)
Chris in Philly: you were right on in your analysis of The Matrix but I
really dug it anyway. Congrats on
being able to watch Happiness. The synopsis alone makes me want to puke.
Did you rent it on DVD?
I'm wondering because my store didn't get it, and if we should have I'll
have to follow up and find out
why. Maybe it's too controversial for Hollywood Video. Maggie: Arsenic
and Old Lace is a favorite of
mine and if Waking Ned Devine reminds you of it, I'm there.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 09:58:26 (CDT)
Buck::: Welcome to the wonderful world of college. I have almost three
years down and maybe three
to go. By the way, loved the satire. Remove the high language that some
of us (myself included) are
inclined to use, and basically you have poopyhead. sorry for ruining it
through interpretation, but
that's what an engineer's for... I think. (three years, and I still have
no idea what I'm studying. Getting
decent grades, but have no idea)
---Peter
Sheriff Buck
Parkersburg, WV - Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 08:56:39 (CDT)
Well...interesting discussions while I was moving out of the dorm after
my freshman year at college.
Thanks to everyone who came to my defense. I know most of you were
merely defending the use of
an online alias, but since Jim had already taken the whole thing to a
personal level with that silly
post about my knowing everything (as if I were putting words directly
into his mouth rather than
extrapolating from his comments), I thank you.
As for me, I'm an 18-year old white male, 5' 11'' with brown hair and
eyes, no facial hair, size 34 jeans,
generally untrimmed fingernails and a nasty cough. I chose my nom de
keyboarde because the TV
series American Gothic was a great work of art, and because I thought it
would convey the
impression that I was male. In fact, in an interesting interpretation of
the TV series, Buck represents
masculinity itself. And I don't like to give out my real Name on message
boards where any sort of
argument takes place, because the net is indeed a bugfuck place, rife
with folks who take offense
very easily and who may be wackos. Not to be paranoid, but it seems to
me that the potential
anonymity of the internet often attracts a maladjusted sort. (He said,
whilst protecting his own
anonymity...) Of course, that email address floating around is a correct
one, and a university one, so
anyone really interested could find me out anyway.
SATIRE
Jim, you are a poopyhead. I tried to play nice. I tried real real real
real hard. And then you were so
mean I hope you have to kiss a girl. You're just a poopyhead. Poopy
Poopy Poopy Head. Otto may be a
pottymouth, but I'd rather be a pottymouth than a poopyhead,
Poopyjimhead.
END SATIRE
Maggie
St. Paul, - Tuesday, May 11, 1999 at 07:00:56 (CDT)
Well, I went and saw Waking Ned Devine over the weekend, and it was
lovely. Nice writing. Nice story.
Nice acting. Lovely scenery. So funny, that even Minnesotan's laughed
out loud! Really, theatre
people here say that it's because of all the people of Nordic descent
here, but whatever the cause,
I've been to movies with friends where I have just laughed and laughed
and they've barely made a
peep. After the movie, they'll go on about how funny the movie was,
while I just stare in amazement.
There is a Johnny Carson story that I heard before I ever moved here,
that really sums it up. Johnny
was doing a show here in MN. No matter what he did, the place was quiet
like a tomb. He's upset, he's
bombing, he's swearing to himself that he will never come back to MN
again. After the show, a lady
comes up to him and says "Oh, Mr. Carson. I just wanted to tell you how
much I enjoyed your show. It
was so funny, I could hardly keep from laughing!" So, there's your
apocryphal MN story for the day.
Still. Waking Ned Devine is just a lovely little film. Kind of in the
Arsenic and Old Lace realm of
existence.
Well, back to the grind.
Finder Doug
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 20:29:52 (CDT)
Wylie (and all): I thought "The Mummy" was very entertaining - an
amusing, non-cerebral monster
flick with all the trimmings that was a lot of cheesy fun; "Election"
was a little darker than I expected
(based on the recent spate of commercials), but Matthew Broderick and
Reese Witherspoon played
well off each other and drew some genuine laughs; and "Entrapment" owed
some definite tips of the
hat to Hitchcock in his prime - twists galore that kept me guessing.
What can I say? It was a slow
weekend.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Monday, May 10, 1999 at 19:36:40 (CDT)
Chris::: it isn't taboo, but the Code of Hammurabi insists that we now
cut off your hand. Actually, I
think the best answer for the new Edgeworks would have to be "when it's
ready"
wylie::: I was going to go see the Mummy for kicks and giggles, but the
line was too long.
Jim et al::: I'd like to mirror wylie's sentiments. What gets me is how
the original argument got lost in
the scuffle. Sometimes, honor dictates that you stuff a sock in your
pride. That's what I do whenever
I cease responding to an argument, especially when it starts to circle
itself. Sheesh.
---Peter (a friendlier, happier antagonist)
Chris
Philly, PA USA - Monday, May 10, 1999 at 19:09:36 (CDT)
Nope, I haven't seen any good movies lately. Leastways, not at the
theater. I saw The Matrix but it was
just OK. It was moderately enjoyable, I suppose but I think it was one
of those films meant to
impress the hell out of people who don't read F/SF and are just going to
be in awe of the basic
premise of the script. The characters were pretty much non-existent and
the story, while
respectable, wasn't good enough to make up for it.
I saw Happiness on DVD. Good but not great. It would have been better
served without a couple of
the more disgusting moments in it. Real cheap gimmicks to get people to
talk. But it's obvious that
Todd Solondz is talented and I expect he'll be making some great movies
in the future.
I also finally saw Dark Star, John Carpenter's first movie. What a riot!
Everybody told me it was
terrible but I have to say I laughed my rather sizeable ass off.
Is it taboo to ask when the next volume in Edgeworks is coming out?
We're about half a year late now.
Not that I have anything else to do but I've never read Glass Teat and I
think that's up next.
-chris
Otto
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 18:37:11 (CDT)
You see, Jim, I "feel the need" to label you with profanity because you
have consistently shown
yourself to respond to challenges in such an irrational and tangential
manner. When you respond to
an argument merely by saying "No, it isn't," and making fun of the
challenger's name -- wholly, as you
have just confessed, in ignorance of its origins, and not bothering to
learn more before you do it -- it
shows a kind of childish mentality whose attention I'm only sure I can
attract with said profanity.
See, just because I use profanity doesn't mean I'm stupid or necessarily
vicious. In fact, I just
managed to be completely unpleasant to you without using any profanity
at all. Does that mean you
would rather respond to this message than the other?
As to the handles: why in God's name must everyone be HIDING something?
Are you just grumpy
because you can't find a way out of the corner you argued yourself into?
If you make fun of Mayor
Webb for using money from a group which he no longer supports, but don't
advocate politicians only
making actions in the favor of groups which finance them, what do you
mean? Couldn't you just have
answered the initial question? Then, we wouldn't have gotten into this
whole mess at all.
Todd Mason
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 18:08:42 (CDT)
You know, Bill, people have been claiming "no vote"="Contentment" for
quite some time, w/o
anything to back it up. It's always seemed to me that "no vote"="no one
worth voting for" a lot more
logically. Apropos of that, Wylie, ELECTION is quite an amusing film.
Wylie
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 13:57:12 (CDT)
Boooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring . . .
Can we move on now? Jeez. Anyone seen any good movies lately?
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 12:13:11 (CDT)
First up: That anyone would feel the need to reduce themselves to the
use of profanity to respond to
a remark tells me something about them. Something that I have no desire
to delve into. That you do
use a certain word to describe me tells me that responding to any post
at length from you is not
worth the time or energy. Second: Let's explore this whole handle issue
for a moment, shall we?
Admittedly, cyberspace is something a scary place. I won't deny that.
Every time I load up my e-mail
and hear that little -ping-- that announces the scan program has
identified a piece of mail with a
virus in it just waiting to rip my computer I get a chill. But at the
same time I accept and sort of
embrace this particular fear because I *am* voluntarily entering
cyberspace. No one is making me
come here. I do it of my own accord. Because I do I present myself
straightfoward, not hiding behind
some handle or e-mask. When someone hides behind a pen name of sorts I
have to wonder just what
is going on with them. Do they have a legitimate concern that merits the
use of this fake name or is
there something else going on? Of course, when someone using a fake name
comes at me in a rather
unpleasant fashion the ol' instincts kick in and I have more than ample
reason to question the use of
the fake name. Now. As to where 'Sheriff Buck' came from, well, the
source info is something to new
to me because I didn't watch AMERICAN GOTHIC and presently have no
desire to. But it make me
wonder what the connection between 'Sheriff Buck' (the character on the
tv show, not the person
using that name) and Harlan Ellison is. Until next time. . .
Barney Dannelke
Allentown, PA - Monday, May 10, 1999 at 07:32:28 (CDT)
RE American Gothic/Star Wars - I used to think there were dozens [or
maybe hundreds] of stories
but back in the eighties I read Campbells stuff [Hero With A 1000 Faces,
etc.] and Robert Bly's "Iron
John" [It's really not that bad] and I realized there may be less than
half a dozen. Delaney spoke of
this a few years back in an interview while explaining why he weas
reading more non-fiction than
fiction these days. Barney (2 cents) Danne [Prince of the parenthetical]
lke
Finder Doug
- Monday, May 10, 1999 at 06:42:28 (CDT)
Oy - my slip is showing; it's highly presumptuous of me to refer to the
good Sheriff with all those
gender-specific pronouns. So much for my alleged enlightenment.
Apologies.
Mitch
Hazlet (driving our cart over the bones of our drive-in), NJ - Monday,
May 10, 1999 at 00:43:32 (CDT)
It took me most of the season of American Gothic to figure out the
show's secret: Star Wars! The
future of a young boy hangs in the balance. On the one hand, an evil
authority figure (his father, as it
turns out) tries to turn the lad to the dark side. On the other hand, a
beloved person from the boy's
past, whom the evil authority figure killed, appears as a ghost to guide
him toward goodness. No
wonder the show is being run on the Sci-Fi Channel...
Mitch
Finder Doug
Centerville, VA - Sunday, May 09, 1999 at 18:53:34 (CDT)
John - info, statements and some news links can be found on the
Rainforest Action Network page at
http://www.ran.org/ran_campaigns/beyond_oil/terry.html. Scot - thanks
for the link. Otto - I too
loved American Gothic; it's too bad CBS didn't stick with it - where it
might have gone in a second
season would have been interesting. Jim - Who, precisely, defecated in
your corn flakes? I mean, I'm
always up for a rational discourse, even an irrational one at times
(depends on the company and the
amount of Magic Hat #9 I've imbibed), but this, as my old roommate Josh
used to say, is excessively
silly. Handles and alises are part of the net landscape. Many people use
them, many don't. It's
nothing so very suspicious. To insinuate that Sheriff Buck has some kind
of gruesome secret or
sinister agenda to hide because he doesn't post using his real name is a
paranoia below even the
likes of the fictional Fox Mulder (talk about your improbable names...).
And why would you lash out
at Keegan, whose post a) was neither rude nor nasty and b) was primarily
concerned with her use of a
stage name in her jazz life? Is a stage name any less valid than a nom
d'plume? Or is she just a bad,
bad person because she didn't personally care about Sheriff Buck's ID
choice? I often use Finder
because, much like Otto, there are times and places I don't want my name
floating on the net.
Psycho former romantic interests WILL give you some pause in the
information age.
John
- Sunday, May 09, 1999 at 02:52:38 (CDT)
I'd like to know if anyone on this board is aware of a news story that
disturbed me some time ago.
This story was barely a few paragraphs in a major newspaper here in
Australia; I'd be interested to
learn if it received greater coverage in the US.
The story regards 3 US environmentalists found murdered,
execution-style, in Sth America (I
believe it was Peru, though possible Colombia or Chile). These activists
had travelled to Sth America
to get involved in protests against a large multinational oil company's
(Shell? I'm not sure)
environmental & human rights abuses; one of these activists was a Native
American woman, I
believe.
The details just get more interesting: The US government blamed a local
leftist resistance group for
the killings. This organization was apparently in a process of
reconciling with its government, and
perhaps gaining real political legitimacy. The leftists roundly denied
the accusations, and suggested
the involvement of right-wing death squads and groups seeking to thwart
the leftists' success.
In any case, it does seem rather hard to swallow the suggestion this
left-wing group brutally
targetted environmetal activists who were trying to draw attention to
corporate crime and abuses -
even if these activists were US citizens.
The alternative then? More corporate-instigated brutality a la Shell in
Nigeria?
Can anyone shed some light on this story? I'd appreciate any details.
John M
Bill Dennis (Real Name, alas)
Salt Lake City (Somewhat Real City), UT (Totally Unreal State) USA (Real
Low Voter Turnout) - Saturday, May
08, 1999 at 22:42:13 (CDT)
Aye, JIMMY, me boy, you did misrepresent my sentiment. I merely noted
people FEEL less
compelled to vote when they're doing all right. It's that old human
nature thing. Didn't claim it was
rational--and sure don't recall mentioning anything about NECESSITY.
Just stating the way things
are. -- Billy D.
Scot Lockman
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 20:56:35 (CDT)
Um. This didn't post right earlier, but there's a wildly funny Ellison
interview in RealAudio at
http://www.nardwuar.com/audio/. Great stuff!
Scot Lockman
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 20:45:00 (CDT)
For anyone interested: I finally found a pretty funny link to an Ellison
interview I've always heard
about. It's located at http://www.nardwuar.com/audio/ , and it's
conducted by this nutty Canadian
named Nardwuar, who basically interviews lots of more or less famous
people and asks incredibly
silly questions. Fun stuff, right? I'm listening right now, and I
haven't got pissed off yet. Yet. Please
consider this a break to the rather serious conversations as of late.
Charlie
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 13:08:57 (CDT)
RICK- I forgot where I heard this, but I thought there was a show on the
History Channel on 5/9
called The Truth About Science Fiction, w/HE. However, a review of the
on-line schedule does not
reveal the show. Will you clarify. Thanks.
Otto
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 12:27:59 (CDT)
Boy, Jim, you're really kind of an asshole. Instead of responding to
Buck's argument in any kind of
rational way, you denied his point and made fun of his name. Otto's not
MY real name; it's a
nickname. I don't post my last name. Hell, you don't know if any of the
people here are using their
real names. You picked on Sheriff Buck just 'cause he's easy to spot.
And no, the name is not out of a
second-rate western, it's a character from a fairly wonderful television
show that had a single-year
run, "American Gothic." I thought his nom was great -- it's been hard
trying to find other fans of the
show, and his name let me identify him as one immediately.
Some people (including myself) just don't feel comfortable posting their
real, full names on an
internet bulletin board. I have an unusual enough one that someone could
find my address, phone
number, etc, in a second. And yes, I've already had someone do so in the
past.
Maybe you could find a legitimate response to people's comments in the
future, huh?
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 10:57:32 (CDT)
Keegan (and whomever else you may be today. . . including 'Sybil'): It
is one thing to *write* under an
assume name as Stephen King has done (and, um, may still do). It is
another to assume a handle like
'Sheriff Buck'. I can understand why King did what he did. Why Harlan
Ellison (didn't think I was
going to leave HE out of this, did you?) did and may still do. King and
HE, to some extent, are brand
names. As such they are expected to produce certain forms, voices,
styles of writing. To get around
this expectation they write under assumed names. But to go around using
a handle that sounds like
something out of a really bad, probably dubbed, B-Western is another.
Makes me wonder what s/he
is hiding. Until next time. . .
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Saturday, May 08, 1999 at 10:51:01 (CDT)
The voter turn-out is low because people are content, happy, and
satisfied? Okay, that weird little
'wheeeeeek' you may have just heard is a part of me dying in response.
If I understand what you
wrote then voting is ONLY necessary when things are not good, as in bad?
I hope that I have
misinterpreted what you have written. Until next time. . .
keegan
- Friday, May 07, 1999 at 21:40:01 (CDT)
Hey, man---some of us lead lives so big we need two names! I speak from
experience. Yes, it's
caused my homies some consternation that I fully adopted "Cookie Coogan"
as my jazz persona. "Why
aren't you proud of your name?" "Why would you adopt a name when you are
so fabulous?" Well, I
dunno. It was bestowed upon me, it fits, it works and folks remember
Cookie Coogan a whole lot
longer than they remember generic ol' "Lauri Keegan". Besides, Lauri
Keegan is a legit educator.
Cookie, well---she's a wild woman.
Look, Sheriff Buck.....Joe Smith....it's all the same with me. It's the
relative consistency that counts
here in Netville and though I don't generally dig "the fuzz", the
Sherrif's always seemed straight-up
with me (and strong enough to handle any difference of political opinion
like a tuff.)
my .02 on an inconsequential matter.
Bill Dennis
- Friday, May 07, 1999 at 19:43:21 (CDT)
JIM: I've never been too concerned with low voter turnout. First, it's
not a recent event, and second, I
think most people are just plain satisfied. We've got such a good form
of government, so many checks
and balances, and such a high degree of freedom, most people realize
that in general, their lives will
be affected very little by who wins and loses an election. So I say,
let's keep up the good work and let
that voter turnout stay low; it's a sign we're doing something right. --
Billy D.
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Friday, May 07, 1999 at 17:34:07 (CDT)
Thank you for the information on 'Sheriff Buck. I am not concerned with
nor interested in the
e-mail address. But as to the name game, well, it makes me wonder who as
to the real person (if
indeed there is such) behind the mask. Until next time. . .
wylie
- Friday, May 07, 1999 at 16:33:30 (CDT)
Greetings all. Glad there's a place where intelligent discourse can be
had about the terrible killings
at Columbine High. Sue: I know what you mean about kids not wondering
why it happened. I still
remember what junior high and high school were like and I wasn't
wondering either. Anyone
thought of the similarities between high schools, mail distribution
centers and other institutions
where these things keep happening? There are always people on the
outside but still trapped there,
feeling powerless and slighted. I think attending or working anywhere
one would call an institution
has that element and should be avoided whenever possible. The
institutions themselves have a
dehumanizing effect. How many of us went to schools that resembled
prisons? I went a lot of schools
and only one ever felt like a good place to be. Simplistic this may be,
but it's the only truth I can find
in this horror. Later. Wylie
Peg
just call me anal, - Thursday, May 06, 1999 at 23:57:21 (CDT)
Ummm..... While "Sheriff Buck" may not be the real name, the person
seems to have satisfied Rick's
requested board etiquette by posting with an email address earlier on
the page... There are a couple
of whimsical ones, but towards the end there's one that appears legit.
To save you the search...
jhurtz@email.unc.edu
Hope this helps, and my apologies for butting in if the address is a
loser.
Peg
Jim Hess <10465.765@compuserve.com>
- Thursday, May 06, 1999 at 17:27:13 (CDT)
Actually I don't advocate that. But since you know everything, hiding as
you do behind a nome de
plume, you know that.
Sheriff Buck
- Thursday, May 06, 1999 at 16:57:10 (CDT)
Jim: Since this is the second time you've brought it up, I feel I should
take issue with the idea that a
politician is somehow morally obligated to return donations to
individuals or organizations that s/he
"turns against." Of course, the entire political donations system is a
travesty, but to believe that a
politician only gets to keep his contributions as long as s/he does
exactly his masters' bidding is to
turn all modern politics into nothing whatsoever but a conflict of
bribes.
Which may be what it is anyway, but you seem to advocate even more
mindless a system than "money
talks"--"money rules with an iron fist."
Peg
- Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 18:38:14 (CDT)
A quickie here - there's be a lot of discussion around rights, the Bill
of Rights, the amendments, etc.
Now, I've got a favorite document called the Bill of No Rights. Are
folks here familiar with it? If not,
it's a document that describes what you're NOT entitled to; it's
humorous but also true in a way.
If anyone's interested please email me and I'll forward you a copy.
(It's a bit long to post).
Peg
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 17:33:56 (CDT)
One comment on this and I will stop. (It's like potato chips; one just
ain't enough): Mayor Wellington
Webb, who first embraced the NRA and now condemns them though he keeps
their donation for his
mayoral campaign was reelected mayor of Denver with less than fifteen
percent of registered voters
voting. So does Democracy work still? Apparently, here, not 'cos no one
cares enough to get and care
with a single vote. Oh, let's just be done with it. Make Clinton God and
Master, abolish individual
rights because they weight too heavy, and it's too much responsibility.
Sue Luesse
- Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 11:53:36 (CDT)
*HUG* Keegan - well said. **Alejandro** - GREAT URL
Seems my last post has been subject to some rather interesting personal
intrepretation.. I did not
write in "favor" of guns or the NRA. I did write in disgust at people
buying into the illogic of emotional
agenda's pushed by special interest groups using any and every tragedy
to advance their agenda - no
matter how superficial and tenuous the connection may be to their goal.
Somehow, I don't think Eric
and Dylan intended to die as martyrs for the NRA or Gun Control or
censorship or any of the
agenda's currently using the deaths to advance a political position.. In
fact, I'd be willing to bet
money none of that sort of thing entered their minds as they planned to
die.. Not that most people
care WHY they did it, just THAT they did it - and maybe how to stop
other kids from doing it. First
thing to disappear in all the Columbine High debating and speculation
was the humanity of the
people most affected - the dead - replaced by a lot of blame-placing,
political manuevering, and
overly simplistic analysis..
I do think a WHOLE lotta people are *still* completely ignoring the
entire context of the tragedy -
because it's easier to just assume the perpetrators (nice dehumanizing
term, that) were insane (ipso
facto, isn't it? no proof required) and it was an isolated incident (we
really should call them
"Occasional Incidents" since they keep happening all over the place),
rather than accept something
has to be VERY wrong for a long time to result repeatedly in bright kids
concluding they have no
future worth living for, and the existence of a few kids more or less is
inconsequential. The majority
of kids in High School and Middle School all seem to understand WHY it
happens. In fact, I have
seen very little in the way of judgmentalism or blaming from that peer
group - mostly "bummer", and
sympathy/grief for ALL the deceased.
Why aren't we listening to them? Why do adults tell kids "they know",
advise the kids to just "ignore it",
dismiss everything they just heard as unimportant, and complain about
how much things have
changed for the worse since they were in school decades ago? Whole bunch
of denial there.. And a lot
of non-response when the opportunity is given to learn from the only
people who do know what IS
going wrong - the kids living it. What a message is given by example!
Kids lives aren't worth even a
listen, so whatever happens to them is no big deal - unless they die..
And even then their lives are still
no big deal, only the details of how they died are important..
OTTO - I'm definately in your corner on the grieving. There are only
victims in that scenario.
Peg
Anchorage, AK USA - Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 11:20:48 (CDT)
Folks - I'm not going to jump into the gun control debate, I've heard
both sides, I know where I stand
and meither my or other's minds will be changed by reading or adding to
the arguments already so
well-written in other posts. [boy, was *that* a long sentence...] Since
I believe you should know my
bias before reading further comments, I'm in favor of gun control. And
no, I'm not going to explain
why.
Recently I've been working through Edgeworks I, the second book "An Edge
in My Voice", which are
the columns Harlan wrote first for Future Life and then for the LA
Weekly and then for ???(haven't
got that far yet). It has turned out to be timely, since there are
several columns dealing with
EXACTLY this topic. During that period, Proposition 15 - a gun control
measure - was on the ballet in
California. Harlan was then (and I assume he still is now) a staunch
advocate of gun control. Pushing
aside at lot of the passion in the columns *and* the letters from
readers, I found some of the
viewpoints and facts presented on both sides revealing. There was a lot
of similar arguments to
what's been here and all over, but the additional insight into the
tactics was eye-opening. [as a
teaser - I was astonished on one hand by the sheer volume of cash that
out-of-state gun
manufacturers were pouring into the campaign to defeat the measure; on
the other hand, if the
reader was accurate about the actual proposition, there were some
extreme portions of the
measure which even as an advocate of gun control I wouldn't have
approved - such as adoption of a
policy of presumption of guilt for gun crimes, etc.]
In any case, I HIGHLY recommend this to everyone to read. Our views of
the opponents (no matter
which side you are on) tend to be stereotypical and I believe this
material will expand your
understanding.
Peg
Peter
San Jose, CA - Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 10:34:19 (CDT)
I want to throw another two cents into the pot...
Jim::: The beauty of our system of government and of our constitution is
that we don't have to love it
warts and all. We, as a people, as a government, are allowed to burn off
the warts when the need
arises. Otherwise, we'd still have slaves worth three fifths of a
person, only land owners would be
able to vote, we might have had Reagan for another term or two, and
worse, we would have never had
the bill of rights to begin with. Our constitution has survived for over
two hundred years because of
the undeniable fact that it is and always will be an unfinished
document.
---Peter
DTS
- Wednesday, May 05, 1999 at 09:47:23 (CDT)
JIM: Somehow, I can't "get behind" the thought of comparing Eric (who,
by the time he started filling
folks with lead was a racist and unstable enough to think all things
Nazis were cool) and Dylan (who
was a "follower" of the worst sort -- the teenage equivalent of Germans
who did what they were told
during the Third Reich era)...somehow I can't equate those two with
someone who got upset over the
Littleton massacre but not the things happening in Africa, the Balkans,
etc. On that point, and a few
others, you're full of it. As for the incident that recently happened in
Great Britain (the killing of
elementary school children), yes their gun control didn't stop it. I
can't recall how the killer came to
possess the weapon(s) he used, but just because he did get his hands on
a gun isn't an excuse for less
control of guns in general. In America, we have more people (mostly
young, more often than not,
lately, children) who die of gun related deaths, per capita, every year,
than England, Germany and
Japan -- combined. That figure is no accident. It's the result of
availability. Sure, gun control laws
are not going to change volatility of the human mind and heart. All of
us, to one degree or another,
are capable of violence. Recent studies show that folks who have been
the victims of violence or
brain trauma are more predisposed...but even those folks out there with
"normal" brains and
synapses are capable of mayhem. And when you make tools like handguns
and automatic weapons,
etc., so readily available, because of the sheer number of them, you
provide the last needed element
for a society which can no longer control its own primal impulses. (no,
I'm not talking about the
majority of us...but with today's firepower capabilities, all you need
are a handful of aberrant people
to wind up with long lists of victims...obviously). The NRA, and various
weapons manufacturers, have,
over the last ten to fifteen years, saturated our country with with guns
of every sort (it seemed to pick
up speed during the Reagan/Bush administrations...republicans do seem to
be the fairygodfathers
of all things conservative and destructive, don't they?). Anyway, my
point (and I do have one), is that
America suffers more deaths, cripplings, etc. from handgun and rifle
violence than other countries
simply because they are more available over here. To argue against more
control because of the
(very) occassional incident in a country with more constraint is
illogical and pointless (unless you are
a member of the NRA or on the board of one of the gun manufactures).
Humans have proved that
they cannot show restraint without laws and rules...and even then they
still break them (how many of
you out there, at least once in your lives, have driven a car or
motorcyle while intoxicated? Many of us
have, and that's like playing Russian Roulette with the lives of OTHER
people). To tear down the
existing laws we have, or go backward and NOT put up more controls where
they are clearly needed,
is just plain selfish. Societies have to exist in a state of
compromise...much like two people do when
they marry. You give up some things (freedoms) in order to gain others.
It'd be great if we could trust
each other enough to let everyone go around do whatever they want to
do...but the sad fact is we
can't. It's 1999 and we still live in a country where crimes are
committed agains people because of
their race or ethnicity or sexual orientation (because their
parentsraised them in an atmosphere of
hateful ignorance, and their peers fostered it), where women are (in
many areas) still treated as
second class citizens, where puritantical attitudes toward sex and
gender are still alive and well,
where alcohol abuse is still promoted as a way to socialize, where caste
systems (in schools,
businesses, and neighborhoods) continue to prosper, where the belief in
things of a supernatural
nature (we're talking here, mostly, of religions) are still celebrated
and promoted over science and
knowledge...let's face it, we are still (relatively speaking and
evolutionary-wise) living in the dark
ages. A few more constraints and controls upon the availability of our
killing tools would do us a
world of good. And puhleese, Jim, don't drag out the old 2nd Amendment
argument each time (the
NRA and Charles -ohmygod- Heston) have beat that into the ground.
Everyone knows that exactly
what the framers of the constituion meant has never been quite clear
(since government was still in
its infancy and we had just stepped out from underneath England's
heels). I'm pretty certain,
though, that if Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, and all the rest could have
looked into a crystal ball and
seen just where and how their fledgling country would end up, they would
be amazed (advances in
medicine, science, technology) astounded (the Apollo program, heart
transplants, pocket
computers, television, radio, cell phones), flabbergasted (more sexual
freedoms, transcontinental
highways, books printed en masse, fads like "beanie babies" and "hula
hoops") and horrified
(overpopulation, world wars, mass starvation, genocide, and Jerry
Springer). It's a brave new world,
baby, and I really doubt that the men who wrote the constitution (given
all this new information and
all these changes) would see things the way they did way back then.
That's (one of the reasons) why
we have all those amendments. And why we need to constantly questions
ourselves and our
government...move forward and effect change when it is needed. In other
words, use our brains a lot
more often than we are prone to doing. Otherwise, evolutionary-wise,
we'll never equal the success
of the dinosaurs (who were, after all, around this place a lot longer
than humans). Whew. Okay, I'm
finished. I yield the floor. Out here, DTS.
keegan
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 21:37:17 (CDT)
Otto, I weep for you. I hear what you're sayin', man! It's as much a
tragedy for the killers as for the
killed.
What I took away from the whole thing was this: We are fragile creatures
on all levels and we had
better start realizing it. Placing blame is a fool's game. We're all to
blame. I told my kids straight: "It
just goes to show that you better show kindness and common decency to
everyone because you never
know if you're picking on a psychopath." Hell, the criticism CREATES
psychopaths.
I'm uncomfortable laying blame at any one doorstep. Yes, absentee
parenting is a problem, but
from where I'm sitting, the stay-at-home parent is a thing of the past
and simply impossible in some
families. You just can't "get by" in the "accepted" middle-class,
sold-to-you on the Tee-Vee and
Internet lifestyle without some serious digit.
And there's another problem: affluence itself. It has become the be all
and end all of some folks'
existence. Quite frankly, I'd rather live in a trailer and tell my kids,
"No, you can't have that
commercial tripe" than to cave in to them and let them have everything
they cast their greedy little
eyes on. Call me old-fashioned, but I believe it is my duty NOT to be my
children's friend and
handy-dandy-materialistic-slot-machine, but rather, their authority,
mentor and guide to
civilization.
I dunno. I have lots of opinions about the event and its reasons, but
ain't nothin' gonna erase the
stain of those kids' deaths.
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 19:19:34 (CDT)
One more comment on the Littleton high school (Which, despite what ABC
News reported earlier
today is NOT called 'Littleton High School'. It is, in fact, called
'Columbine High School'): I did some
bumping around cyberspace in an attempt to get a better understanding of
this (relying on the news
media for 'objective' coverage of this or any situation like it is akin
to sticking your head into a
beehive wondering if you will get stung) and came across an interesting
fact: The mother of the man
who bought one of the firearms (I believe it was the automatic and his
name is Matison ("Mathison"?)
belongs to an anti-gun organization. Irony? Sure. The point here is that
a) He was of legal age when
he bought the firearm, b) the firearm he purchased was purchased
legally, c) the ammo he used was
legal. d) What he did with the firearm was not legal. So. Where does
that leave all this? Well, some
could argue that if we followed the time-worn cliche about outlaw guns
and only outlaws will have
guns this would not have happened. Um. . .yeah. Tell that to the people
in England where firearms
are not allowed who got splattered, spattered, and impailed when the
nail bomb went off. The thing
here is that the NRA (I am NOT defending them, okay?) was blamed for
what happened? Why? Well,
because they make for an easy tagert (shoot, another pun. . .AH! and
another. . .). Because Heston is
Clinton and Gore in that he doesn't listen to what comes out of his
mouth. Because they don't
promote the good things they do to protect folks and The Second
Amendment. I think that if they
focused on the good they do instead of playing politics they might not
get branded like they have
been. Incidentally (and slightly off-topic) did anyone reading this know
that the two killers who
committed the manslaughter in Littleton went to more than a dozen gun
shows and two dozen gun
shops before they were even allowed to *look* at guns like those they
eventually used to commit their
bloodletting? It isn't much, but give the folks who turned them away
some credit for obeying the law.
Anyway, to bring this all back to Harlan Ellison and what this site
should be about, I have, through all
of this, think about the story "Knox" and about what Ellison once said
about the remarks in that story:
If you take offense to only one or two of the terms listed you are a
bigot since you should take offense
to all of them. The same goes for what happened in Littleton (and
Arkansas and Canada): If you take
offense to only one mindless slaughter like this you are no better than
those who pulled the trigger.
You should take offense to all of them. And that leads me to the
Constitution: If you support part of
it you should support all of it. Warts and all. Until next time. . .
Otto
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 18:51:20 (CDT)
I would like to thank everyone who sent me private e-mails regarding the
violence at my former high
school. It's been very hard for the last two weeks, because I'm over a
thousand miles from home and
can't go back for another week. It's very difficult to grieve when
there's no one near who can
understand the loss. But what is driving me bugfuck is that people keep
on being bastards.
I saw Nick + Adam Foss on the news, describing the Trenchcoat Mafia as
"the scum of the school."
Totally ignoring the fact that they were some of the brightest kids, and
that the rest of the school
population had already driven them into their niche and had provoked one
to violence a year earlier.
I saw the story about the father of one of the victims tearing down the
memorial crosses for Dylan
and Eric. He was offended that they were being honored in the same place
as the victims. Why are his
sensibilities more important than mine, than their other friends, than
their parents'? I can't even
imagine what their parents are going through, but I know that I am
furious at having been told that
Dylan and Eric were such human offal that I am not even allowed to
grieve for them. They are just as
dead as the other victims I knew and am weeping for.
The NRA argument I leave in the hands of those who know more about it. I
know that my best
friend's mother went and protested, and I'm glad she did. I've never
liked them and I think it's clear
that the biggest concern for them at this point is PR.
God, I want to go home.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 13:45:32 (CDT)
Alejandro::: wow, thanks for that link. I haven't read anything that
good in a long while. I've started
passing that link around to my friends, most of whom can easily identify
with it. Again, thanks.
---Peter
alejandro riera
chicago, illinois - Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 12:21:54 (CDT)
Just to add more fuel to the fire, let me recommend an excellent rant by
Chris Gregory about the
Littleton Massacre which airs out some of my concerns about the knee
jerk reaction from media,
fundamentalist priests, social and civic leaders, politicians and even
parents after this tragedy.
(Suffice it to say that high season has been declared on those members
of society who do not wish to
conform to the tenets established by the schools and its hypocritical
cliques of cheerleaders, jocks
and other principals' darlings.) Check out the rant at
www.sequentialtart.com/may99/guestrant. Hey,
check out the entire site. It has some of the best writing I have yet to
see on the Web.
DTS
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 11:56:04 (CDT)
DAMN: for the sake of coherence.. the sentence below should read "Only
thirty or thirty-five years
ago..." -- DTS
DTS
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 11:54:31 (CDT)
SUE & Jim Hess: I aboslutely agree that the BIGGEST problem where
violence and children are
concerened are parents -- bad parents and absent parents, something
American has plenty of...
but,while I can't pretend to speak for anyone else in this debate, I
think that the problem most
people (who argue against them) have with guns is that there are so damn
many of them in our
country. The NRA and gun manufacturers have virtually flooded our land
with them. Only thirty or
thirty five (depending on if it's high school or junior high) I was
attending schools and worrying about
getting beat up (occasionally) or getting in the middle of a (pretty
rare) knife fight. Guns never
entered the equation. Now kids go to school wondering who's packing and
who is not. Guns may not
kill people, but they sure as hell make it easier to do so. And I
guarantee, Sue, that if the two guys in
Littleton had been rampaging with only machetes, they wouldn't have had
killed so many. Maybe a
few extra lives saved isn't anything to brag about...until your
daughters or sons become one of the
victims...Out here, DTS.
Sue Luesse
- Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 09:49:27 (CDT)
Sheesh!! Get back from an out of town trip, and what do I find? A
stinking, steaming, brown, gooey
mess.. The issue of violence in society has everything to do with
people, and nothing to do with their
tools. Good thing guns aren't readily available in Rwanda and Burundi so
all they have are machetes
- someone coulda got hurt otherwise... If you don't want people killing
other people, get rid of the
Cause. Ban bigotry, nationalism, greed, self-empowerment through abuse
of others.. Oh - there's a
problem with that? Well, dang - then lets blame some entertainment
industry / the NRA / Religious
Right / Clinton (a choice for every personal emotional bias available on
request).. God Forbid we
teach kids by example it's OK to co-operate and give up sole posession
of the credit/reward, that the
bottom line counts less than personal integrity, that immediate self
gratification isn't the only (or
best) achievement.. And if we want to throw around "facts", lets throw
in the Colorado legislature
showing their sensitivity by delaying the vote one week to make
concealed weapons permits easily
available to most citizens (so the public can arm itself with handguns)
- because states that allow
their citizenry to arm itself have 'unexplainable' lower incidences of
violent crimes.. Or that most
tragedies like Littleton don't involve handguns at all - bombs,
shotguns, and semi-automatics is
more like it, 'cause handguns just aren't very efficient for the mass
killing desired... It's not a "simple"
issue, and there are no "simple" answers - and trying to solve a complex
issue with an emotionally
charged simplistic assumption almost always makes the situation worse.
Hey! let's get rid of schools!!
Then there will be no more school-shooting tragedies.. geeez...
Chris - I am also very concerned about a return to the fun-filled 50's
of HUAC (once was too many,
thank you). I don't see where censorship does less "violence" to people,
simply because souls and
minds don't ooze blood and cover the floor when they are murdered.. I
truly resent the trend
towards using any tragic violent event to justify restricting personal
rights and freedoms - events
which are at best supeficially related to the targets of consorship. So
did the movie The Matrix cause
the Littleton tragedy? The computer game the boys played? The TV shows
they watched? Their
moms didn't get the advertised softest brand of toilet paper, and it
rubbed them the wrong way?
sheesh.. The only thing that bothers me more than the illogic of those
agenda's, is that so many
people actually buy into the justification..
Hiya Jason!! *hug* sure I remember you.
oooo - way too long and serious.. VROOOM - off to do the Zen thing on
the bike. Try High - Fly
Straight - Drive Safe
Peter
San Jose, CA - Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 00:43:32 (CDT)
Chris::: actually, I think your fears are well founded. Even with the
supposed silver age of comic
books the comic code kept comics dumbed down and safe. Stan Lee has a
story he likes telling about
a Spiderman issue from the late sixties. He did a story about spiderman
trying to help Harry Osborne
get off of drugs, and the comic code people refused to approve it
because... it mentioned drugs and
that was a no no. Nevermind that the story was as anti-drug as you could
get, they still refused to
approve it because their code said no sex, no blood, no criminals
getting away with a crime, and
absolutely no mention of drugs. So Marvel published that issue without
the comic code seal of
approval. When we start blaming the media for a "culture of violence" we
lose sight of the real issues
and hide behind our fears.
The only thing scarier than a "culture of violence" is the potential
reaction to one.
Buck::: I do the most posting during finals. It helps my brain take a
brief break before cracking open
the books. Have at it, good luck, and remember, posting is good for your
mental health.
---Peter
Chris
Philly, PA - Tuesday, May 04, 1999 at 00:11:15 (CDT)
To take a sidetrack from this Littleton/gun debate, is anyone else as
concerned as I am about the
furor being kicked up now about the so-called "Culture of Violence" and
violent movies, tv, etc.
I don't know how many of you know your comic book history but there was
a big stink made about
comic books in the late 40's and early 50's spearheaded by religious
groups and a fellow named Dr.
Frederic Wertham (hope I got the name right - I have a mental block on
this guy's name) who wrote a
propaganda pamphlet called _Seduction of the Innocent._
These groups decided to blame comic books for the terrible juvenile
deliquency of that time. Kids
then were violent and vicious and had no respect for authority, not like
int he good old days, blah
blah blah. Enough people got sucked into the frenzy that the Comic Code
Authority was created and,
as aresult, the entire industry was almost knocked out of existence.
many companies folded, the
entire horror genre was all but wiped out and comic books pretty much
SUCKED for several years
until the Silver Age got well under way.
I fear something similar is happening now. People want to find easy
answers. They don't want
something difficult like "Be better parents", they want a scapegoat. And
there are enough ignorant
people as well as opportunists with agendas to make Hollywood and video
games the convenient
scapegoats.
I'm afraid we're about to enter a very reactionary period in our culture
with the oppressive
censorship of the 50's returning in only a slightly, altered form.
Am I worrying for no reason? Does anyone else share these fears?
I have more to say but my post is long enough. I figure this is an
appropriate topic for this forum as
you could bet the running dogs would be nipping at HE's heels if the
frenzy builds up to critical mass.
-chris
Sheriff Buck
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 23:37:58 (CDT)
Peter, Jim: Just wanted to jump in on your little discussion (this is a
public board) and say thank you
to Jim for a real nice, hard, curative belly-laugh re your last post. I
quote: "As to the 'anti-Clinton',
'right-wing' diatribe, puh-lease. Don't wander into that bigoted
minefield." Quite humorous, I
thought, considering you couldn't help but throw a completely unrelated
anti-Clinton diatribe into
that very post. I don't care if the Clinton subject had already been
raised (on a different issue, mind).
The best way to keep folks out of the minefield is to stop layin' the
mines.
Note: this is not to weigh in on either side of the issue; I'm in the
middle of final exams and don't
have the time to keep myself really informed right now. Here's hoping no
one points out the
apparent inconsistency that I can somehow find the time to contribute to
the board...
Buck
Peter
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 21:56:18 (CDT)
two things, and then I'm done with this discussion, for this is not the
forum for an extended debate
of this nature. The meeting was in fact an integral part of the
convention. I acknowledged the fact
that they cancelled the festivities and exhibits, but to call it a
meeting and not a convention is a silly
argument in semantics. The point is, it was held in Colorado. Not that
it was held. But it was held in
Colorado. I cannot break that one down any further. And I cannot accept
that their bylaws don't
allow them to move or postpone the meeting based on extraordinary
circumstances. Under this
condition, should the building in which they were scheduled to meet be
hit by a comet, then the NRA
would dissolve because they failed to meet. Such rigidity in an
organization can only serve to stifle
growth. And without growth comes stagnation. Two. The connection between
the two teens and the
NRA is not misinformation, but association. The NRA is an organization
devoted to preserving the
second amendment. That said--and thank you for the info on Heston--they
are very active in trying
to curb legislation geared toward the regulation of fire arms (check
their own site if you don't believe
me). So, there is a mental connection between the NRA's attack on
gun-control legislation and the
fact that these two high school students had such easy access to fire
arms. Association, not
misinformation. So their presence, especially to the families of
victims, was, as I said, salt on an open
wound. Don't ask me. Ask the fathers and mothers of victims who were
protesting outside of the
hotel. I was just expressing my outrage that they even felt that they
had to be there.
oh yeah. right-wing and anti-clinton. Those are facts. Heston makes no
bones about his being a far
right conservative, and he also made no bones about attacking clinton in
his speech at the meeting,
in the press, and in his written communications with NRA members.
---Peter
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 21:03:13 (CDT)
I read your comments in reply to my post replying to your original
comments and will once more
point out a few things: Yes, the killers who did the Littleton murders
are publically associated with
the NRA. But it is because misinformation such as that you cited that
perpetuates this notion. The
NRA did cancel the convention. (Please reread my comments on this. They
cancelled the convention.
They did not cancel the meeting they had because of the by-laws of their
organization. Had they
forgone this meeting they would no longer legally exist. That's the
rules, and I give them credit
following the rules. (Unlike, say, Clinton, who believes himself above
the law and beyond rules that
govern the rest of us; incidentally, whatever came of that contempt of
court charge he got slapped
with? Last I heard he was trying to negotiate his punishment; oh, to be
able to chose the punishment
for our given crimes.)As to anti-gun legistlation, apparently you have
not done as much research on
the matter as you claim. The NRA does support what can be deemed
anti-gun legislation. In fact it
was Heston, before he was pres of the NRA, who asked that certain types
of bullets and ammo be
banned. It was also Heston who introduced more stubborn safety measures
on handguns. (He was,
pun intended, shot down on this.) As to the 'anti-Clinton', 'right-wing'
diatribe, puh-lease. Don't
wander into that bigoted minefield. Using terms such as these just go to
discredit you. Until next
time. . .
Peter
San Jose, CA - Monday, May 03, 1999 at 20:20:01 (CDT)
Jim::: no offense taken, but I did research before I went on my little
verbal tirade. First of all, I never
claimed the two teenagers had any NRA affiliation. That is a specious
claim. My claim is that through
fault of association, the two teenagers are inexorably linked to the NRA
in the public consciousness.
I will acknowledge that the NRA shortened the convention from three days
to one, but the fact of the
matter is, they were asked to either move or cancel their convention all
together. They were asked,
out of respect and consideration for the families of the victims who
died in the recent school
shootings. Now I don't see this as unreasonable request. Even
logistically, it could have been
accomplished. But no. The NRA, as represented by Mister Charlton Heston,
decided to get on its high
horse and spout a whole bunch of right-wing, anti-clinton, anti-gun
control rhetoric. I found that to
be a bit tacky. What I find reprehensible is not the NRA as an entity (I
have several gripes with them,
but that is not at issue) what I find is their lack of respect and their
flagrant lack of tact. In a situation
where it would have been better for them to bow down and keep a tight
lip, especially with tempers
as hot as they are, they decided to use this incident to push their own
political agenda. Now, I made
no effort to hide my own personal bias against the NRA. I will admit
that some of my statements may
have been wildly exaggerated (ie the armor plated deer) but those were
not intended as statements
of fact, but rather as attempts to attack the situation with hyperbole.
Call it my writing style. In fact,
if I were to count the claims I made and took issue to, I could count
them on one hand. The
convention, Heston, and the political attacks. All three of which can be
verified through
independant sources. Connections to the Littleton incident are merely
acts of logic and common
sense. However, in this world, we seem to be driven more by extremist
reactionism. Clinton's guilty,
the NRA is guilty, I'm guilty, the world is guilty of reacting to this
tragedy badly. However, that still
does not excuse any of it. Check out www.nra.org for some of their own
communications about the
event. However, also note that sometimes, actions do speak louder than
words. But then again,
public words can also be loud enough.
As for my gripes about the NRA. I oppose the extremity to which they
invoke the second amendment.
They freely admit to opposing any and all legislation which attempts to
regulate fire-arms. It almost
seems as if they've shut their ears to any and all arguments in favor of
gun-control. It's their closed
mindedness which ticks me off, and their refusal to act with any degree
of tact is just, for me,
another indication of that closed mindedness. Now, I ask anyone who
reads my two messages to
please point out if I am, at any point, being unreasonable, or if my
arguments still seem erratic and
uninformed. If I have learned anything from reading Ellison, it's to
keep informed.
---Peter
Jim Hess <10465.765@compuserve.com>
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 19:17:40 (CDT)
Peter: No offense intended, but I don't know where you got your
information regarding the NRA, the
recent meeting in Denver, the convention, and the Littleton situation. A
couple of quick points on
the convention in Denver. Actually, they did cancel the convention out
of respect for the mindless
and pointless murders in Littleton. They held the meeting they did
because they are required under
the governing laws and rules of their charter to have the meeting they
did. That was all. Had they
failed to have that meeting and produce, according their laws and rules,
evidence of the meeting
taking place their charter would have been placed in jeopardy and the
NRA would, as a result, have
faced the possiblity of being terminated. Which, I suspect, would be
just fine with you. Of course,
that being the case, the next step would the elimination of the Second
Amendment. Then The First
Amendment, then The Fifth Amendment (unless you are Charlie Trei or a
friend of Bill's, and then
you would be allowed to claim it). Then the Constitution. Another point
regarding this situation
which may be of interest to you: The killers who did what they did were
not and had not been
members of the NRA. Did you know that the NRA runs background checks on
its members? Did you
know the NRA reserves the right to refuse membership to anyone with a
police record? Despite what
you may have heard by way of the 'objective' news media, the NRA is not
the orge it is painted to be.
(Incidentally, I am not presently a member of the NRA, so this is not an
attempt to condone or justify
them.) I suggest, if you wish to be taken seriously on this issue you
research the matter of the NRA
further as well the matter in Littleton. As one who lives in the area
where this slaughter took place I
can tell you that there is more to this situation--NRA and a convention
in Denver or not--than the
news media has reported or will ever report. And, oh, by the way: Did
you know that the current
mayor of Denver, Wee Willie Webb, solicited and accepted a substantial
donation from the NRA
when he ran for the mayorship the first time? Did you know he has yet to
return that donation
despite his recent turning on them? (Which, incidentally, was prior to
the Littleton massacre.) As I
said, there is more here than what you may have heard, read, or seen by
way of the mainstream news
media. Until next time. . .
Shane
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 11:26:29 (CDT)
That should have been "I've helped..."
Shane
- Monday, May 03, 1999 at 11:25:07 (CDT)
DOC: I can't imagine how you are feeling. I helped suicidal friends and
I've known depression
myself, but to find a note and not know the fate of your friend must be
hard. I hope for the best.
Jason Kuroshima
- Sunday, May 02, 1999 at 17:35:07 (CDT)
Hi does anybody remember me? I was here a while ago. I remember keegan
Sue Doc i've been busy
for a while now. since i also knew of shaz could someone email me about
the shaz incident?
Jason Kuroshima
- Sunday, May 02, 1999 at 17:34:52 (CDT)
Hi does anybody remember me? I was here a while ago. I remember keegan
Sue Doc i've been busy
for a while now. since i also knew of shaz could someone email me about
the shaz incident?
Peter
San Jose, CA - Saturday, May 01, 1999 at 21:40:48 (CDT)
Preface::: this is a Rant of the Nth degree. I needed to get this off my
chest. I'll probably rework and
re-edit it into a proper essay later...
In a display of tackiness so--despicable that even I am having a hard
time ignoring, the NRA refused
to cancel their annual convention in colorado. Chucky "Moses" Heston has
stated that holding the
convention was a question of freedom and attacked the Clinton
administration for using the
Columbine incident to push gun control laws. Now, call me crazy, but I
would think that the decision
to cancel the convention would be more of a question of respect than of
freedom. No one said (as far
as I know) that they couldn't hold the convention, just that they
shouldn't.
The fact that the NRA refused to cancel what could only serve as a
salt-on-wound reminder of the
tragedy in Littleton really shows where their priorities lie. It really
shows their true face. They don't
care about people. They seem to see deaths as an unfortunate side-effect
of their god-given
constitutional rights. Nevermind that with freedom comes responsibility,
a responsibility that too
many people refuse to take on. Nevermind that the constitution only
mentions the right to bear arms
and makes no mention of automatic assault rifles with laser targeting
and nightvision scope, for
hunting the rare breed on armor plated deer with their own arsenal of
semi automatic machine
guns. when Chuck came down the mountain, bearing the two stone tablets
upon which the bill of
rights was written, he spoke the ten sacred amendments to an awaiting
people. However, he failed to
realize that these ten amendments weren't proclamations of god. They
represented the freedoms
and wishes of the people. And if people call for the freedom from terror
over the freedom to arm
militant bears, then so be it. There is no power in this country greater
than the constitution save one,
and we are it ladies and gentleman. We the people of the United States,
as a gestalt entity of both
fractured mind and fractured body, have the capability of rising up and
taking control of our
government.
Now, no one I know of is saying we should revoke the second amendment.
The right to bear arms is
still an essential freedom in that our govenrment is built on a healthy
distrust. But the limiting of
that freedom by controlling the more destructive of these elements can
only ensure against a
greater freedom from terror on the part of the people, and a greater
prosecuterial power against
those who find it necessary to transgress the limits we as a people have
set forth.
In staying true to form, perhaps someone should let Chucky know that the
control of weapons whose
only defensive capabilities lie within their potential for lethal
destruction, would indeed allow him
to part the red sea--the sea of blood which is spilled on the soil of
all American cities. For until the
NRA gives up their pig headed reactionary ways, the path to the promised
land will forever be
blocked by the sea's troubled waters.
---Peter (for an atheist, I tend to reference the bible a lot)
DTS
- Saturday, May 01, 1999 at 08:14:06 (CDT)
DOC & everyone else: Funny you should mention "changing the channel"
during a short rant that
mentions Littleton...did anyone happen to read the article (which ran in
USA today) about a day or
two after the incident in which one of the victims stated that he wished
he'd had a video camera with
him...to film the event...when some of his fellow classmates and
survivors looked at him in horror, he
tried to amend by saying that he only wanted a film because it all
seemed so unreal to him at that
point...like a myth, or something. Scary. The poor kid couldn't connect
to reality unless it was on
video. I immediately remembered the introduction to Strange Wine. I know
everyone reacts in odd
ways after such a traumatic event, but even so...just reading something
like that in the midst of all
that trauma and sorrow was unsettling. Out here, DTS.
Doc
- Saturday, May 01, 1999 at 02:28:12 (CDT)
What a world, huh? I get my picture wuth Donald Duck, and return to SF
to hear about Littletown,
CO; I am initiated into the magic that is Poppy Z. Brite, but,... well,
there's this guy, a good friend of
mine, who would enjoy her work tremendously, but I cannot recommend it
to him because, 5 days
ago, he disappeared, and we found his suicide note Wednesday, but still
no body. And I have no
trouble getting the words on the page, but it all reads like -- to use a
professorial term -- crap. I
mean, well-meaning junior high student stuff. Except, Ms. Brite was
writing stuff at 18 that puts my
current work in the shade. JeezUS. Can I change the channel, now? Doc
Todd Mason
- Thursday, April 29, 1999 at 18:09:15 (CDT)
The oddest thing to me about your posts, Peter, is that I first
encountered Donald Barthelme,
William Faulkner and Ronald Sukenick in anthologies of horror and sf.
Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily"
is certainly a ghost story chestnut, and Barthelme's "The Genius" was in
the first volume of Harry
Harrison and Brian Aldiss's BEST SF (71 I think it was) that I
read...Sukenick was probably in some
metafiction/modern fantasy collection. (Barthelme deserves credit, or
blame, in part for the '60s
BATMAN series, as well, thanks to his short story "The Joker's Greatest
Triumph"--in which Bruce
Wayne trades leaden quips with his writer friend Fredric Brown...meaning
DB was aware of at least
one significant figure in SF, even if not too impressed with him
[perhaps, or perhaps it was simply a
rib]).
Shane
- Thursday, April 29, 1999 at 09:16:22 (CDT)
ALL: I'm sorry, but the previous e-mail address is invalid. If you want
the article e-mail me and I'll
send you my copy.
Shane
- Thursday, April 29, 1999 at 09:03:32 (CDT)
ALL: If you missed Harlan's appearence on PSIFACTOR you can read about
it here:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?TS=925397942&Did=000000039176454&Mtd=1&Fmt=3&Sid=1&Idx=1&Deli=1&RQT=309&Dtp=1
Shane Shellenbarger
Phoenix, AZ USA - Wednesday, April 28, 1999 at 12:46:21 (CDT)
ALL- I came across this website concerning "The Starlost" and found it
interesting:
http://www.snowcrest.net/fox/star.html
Peter
San Jose, CA - Wednesday, April 28, 1999 at 10:48:25 (CDT)
It is a good feeling when a published professor looks at an essay and
says "I'm impressed, this could
be published." An even better feeling is the fact that I thought I would
have to sell my soul to Ronald
Sukenick in order to impress this professor. Too bad he thinks my
stories are genre "crap." But after
showing him my essay on the literary/genre debate this morning, he was
truly impressed and really
looking forward to the discussion in this afternoon's workshop. The man
who has said time and time
again that he didn't find my humorous stories funny, actually laughed
out loud within the first
fifteen seconds of reading my essay. And that was at a strategic
placement of the word "crap". So I am
doing something right.
Now only the lecture will tell.
---Peter (updates will follow)
DougFinder
- Tuesday, April 27, 1999 at 09:39:16 (CDT)
Peter - You make good arguments in your essay. Indeed, could one not
make the case that "literary
fiction" is a genre unto itself? If we accept that a genre is classified
by specific trappings or elements
used to tell the story, then an author setting out to create a piece of
literature as art is, by
incorporating certain types of characters or time-worn dramatic
situations found in the rich history
of literary fiction, actually writing within a genre. It just isn't
recognized in the traditional sense of a
'genre'.
It's all just trappings, really. Set the story of the junkie trying to
survive a Nazi invasion in 1941 Paris,
with its examination of said junkie transforming from shiftless grifter
to legitimate survivor-villain,
and it's potentially literary fiction. Set it against the Kyben invasion
of Deald's World, and it's "Run
For The Stars". And what Academia can't easily slap into a pre-defined
'genre' it assigns ex post
facto classifications to: for example, book so-and-so uses dark imagery
and has a god-theme
running through it, so it's existentialism. How else do you break up all
the fiction that is bereft of
robots, gnomes, stagecoaches or a dead body behind locked doors at the
Vicarage?
How do you defeat labels? You never fully will. They're ingrained in the
psyche of the world. The
masses draw comfort from being able to use a thumbnail sketch to
identify the whole picture, no
matter how off-base the sketch is. But as a reader, you can refuse to
use them - and as a writer, you
can refuse to write comfortably within any of them. And if you attain
the level of art within what is
considered a genre, in a hundred years you may be taught in a university
classroom as part of the
"Speculative Humanist" movement of the 1970s-90s. In a world where
Carrot Top gets to be in a
movie with Courtney Thorne Smith and I don't, anything is possible.
Peter
- Monday, April 26, 1999 at 20:14:48 (CDT)
If I lived in a perfect world, I would never want any kind of label ever
used to describe a writer.
However, I don't. More to the point, I live in a world of closed minded,
bigoted, elitists who like
nothing more than to declare themselves as the end all be all sages of
literary art. And sometimes,
you just have to get down to their level and beat them at their own
stinking game just to survive the
horrors of academic fiction classes. Now, I could just turn my head, go
off in my own direction, and
hope to god that I improve as a writer, but I have to be the first one
to admit, academia certainly
does a lot to show me those who have come before me. If it weren't for
this class I never would have
read Faulkner or O'Connor, or Gardner, or Barthelme. I probably would
have been gibbering on the
same ol' same ol' that I've been reading. Not that what I've been
reading is bad. I'll be the first to
admit that what I read is good. Its just limited.
So, I've finished my essay. I don't give it to my prof until wednesday,
but I've posted it at
http://www.netvista.net/~petero/genre.html
if anyone is interested. Feedback is most welcome. It's about twice the
size my prof wanted, but what
the heck, I love writing. I love writing so much, I even put up with a
prof who calls me Pat because he
mixes Peter with Padraic. My first with my middle.
Sheesh.
---Peter
Jim Hess <104656.765@compuserve.com>
- Monday, April 26, 1999 at 17:37:49 (CDT)
What's the difference between genre and non-genre writing? Stupidity on
the person calling a
specific piece of writing 'genre'. Whenever you label something as
'science fiction' or, bleh, 'sci-fi',
you are nailing yet another nail into the career of the writer who write
the piece in question. So I
suggest NOT labeling writing as such. Unless you enjoy being viewed as
'stupid'.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Monday, April 26, 1999 at 16:54:54 (CDT)
Everyone has battles to fight, and mine is an old battle indeed. I have
just been asked by my writing
professor to write an essay explaining the difference between "literary"
fiction and "genre" fiction as
I perceive them, having been schooled in both. This came about because I
got tired of all of the
literary posing I had felt I had to do to get any of my stories taken
seriously. So, I submitted a straight
as you come piece of speculative fiction for the class' reading
pleasure. My only problem is that I am
a better writer than I am speaker, so whenever I attempt to discuss my
viewpoints, I come across as
extremist in the least, fanatical at worst. Still, this will either
clear the air between me and my class,
or just serve to muddy it further. Either case, it will at least let
everyone there know where I finally
stand. I'll report back on how it goes, as I know that this thread has
been beaten to death on this
board many a times.
---Peter
Robert
New York - Saturday, April 24, 1999 at 01:40:22 (CDT)
Hello everyone. I just wanted to say, I enjoyed seeing HE at ICon. I
managed to catch the Liar's panel,
and was lucky enough to get in his Saturday evening discussion. Does
anyone remember the person
who got paged by Mr. Ellison during the Liar's panel? That was I. I did
however manage to sneak back
in. Since I live on Long Island, I hope to see Mr. Ellison at future
ICons. If so, I hope the next time
they have sense enough to get him scheduled in a larger room or perhaps
an auditorium. The ISC
Stage would have been perfect. Anyway, I had a great time and enjoyed
meeting other HE fans from
all over. Hopefully I'll see you all in the future.
Charlie
St. Pete, FL - Friday, April 23, 1999 at 15:34:41 (CDT)
NEWS FLASH- (not really, but I thought that sounds more exciting)- The
new F&SF announces that
the "major new novella" from HE for the 50th Anniversary special will
actually be a short story. The
novella to be saved for another time. Charlie
Todd Mason
- Wednesday, April 21, 1999 at 17:54:08 (CDT)
Good luck to your friends, Otto, and better luck to all the survivors of
senseless violence...or, for that
matter, purposeful violence, as it unfolds around us. And sometimes far
away, but in our names.
Todd Mason
Philly, PAh USAw - Wednesday, April 21, 1999 at 17:51:11 (CDT)
Sue/"Buck"/Barney--Theodore Sturgeon did indeed write "It Wasn't Syzygy"
and other stories he
wrote made at least metaphorical use of the term...James Blish, in his
critical writing about
Sturgeon, was slightly perturbed by what he saw as TS's rather loose use
of the term, when "synergy"
(not yet a buzzword!) seemed more what Sturgeon was reaching for; I
suspect TS disagreed.
Hello, again, folks! Perhaps I'm not sorry I missed ICon.
Shane
Phoenix, AZ USA - Wednesday, April 21, 1999 at 14:04:23 (CDT)
Otto: As Rick said, our thoughts are with you and all of those who are
affected by this tragedy.
Rick
- Wednesday, April 21, 1999 at 09:42:46 (CDT)
Otto - My thoughts (and I imagine I speak for the rest of the Web-rats)
are with you and your friends
today. I was having a lot of problems at work and feeling sorry for
myself and then I read your
message. I think the saddest thing is that the media is only going to
encourage repeats of this sort of
violence with their instant and constant coverage.
You may already know this, but there is a victim's list (the injured
only) on CNN at:
http://cnn.com/US/9904/21/school.injured.list.02/
Otto
- Tuesday, April 20, 1999 at 21:47:10 (CDT)
About Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado -- for those of you
who've been unconscious or
cut off for the last twenty-four hours, this is a school where two boys
came into the cafeteria
shooting, putting twenty-three people in the hospital and killing
possibly as many as twenty-five
others, including themselves.
Why am I re-depressing you with this? Because it's my high school.
Slight correction; it used to be my high school. I am currently a
freshman in college. But I have a
great many friends that still attend the school, who I have been unable
to get in touch with because
all phone circuits in Colorado are busy. I can't even contact my
parents. No names of the dead or
wounded are being released yet, because most of them are minors.
As I sit here, chewing my fingers off with anxiety and frustration, I
would appreciate it if you would
all keep me and my friends in your thoughts. (It's times like this that
I wish there were a deity I found
believeable.) Additionally, I thought that this was the perfect group to
hand this topic to, to rant
about.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Tuesday, April 20, 1999 at 19:12:41 (CDT)
Major tom to ground control. I'm approaching burnout. repeat. I'm
approaching burnout.... wow,
this semester is beginning to get to me. Ah, to be young and in college
and trying to balance writing,
school, and a social life. I've been reading Gentleman Junkie over the
last couple of days. I like it. I
like it a lot. Now if only I could take the time to actually enjoy it.
That would be nice.
---Peter (taking the slow, scenic route to insanity)
Lynne
Tirade-free today, - Tuesday, April 20, 1999 at 13:18:14 (CDT)
Thanks to everyone (Doug, Keegan, Amy, Shane, Barney, Mitch) for your
responses to my mega-post
about ICON. I have sent my comments to ICON, and perhaps they will be of
some help.
Doug - A safety escort is a good idea; I added it to my note to ICON,
thanks.
Shane - Thanks for your comments as someone who knows the inside
workings of putting together a
convention. I really do appreciate the enormous amount of time, effort,
and work that goes into
organizing a large convention like ICON. Unfortunately, because of the
events which occured I felt it
was necessary to express my displeasure. But now that I am no longer an
ICON-newbie and I would
know better, that is not really the kind of solution I am hoping for.
That just means that next time it
would be someone else stuck on the wrong side of the door.
keegan - Thanks for your very kind words and your support. I guess it
would make me happy if they
just said "we're sorry about that and we'll try to keep it from
happening again".
Barney - There were two drunks at HE's talk? Geez, I missed all the fun!
8-)
Shane
Phx, AZ USA - Monday, April 19, 1999 at 09:38:04 (CDT)
ALL: There is a review of the movie, A BOY AND HIS DOG, at
www:scifi.com/sfw/issue95/classic.html
Has anyone seen the DVD version and if so how does it differ from the LD
& video tape versions?
Sheriff Buck
Chapel Hill, NC - Friday, April 16, 1999 at 15:05:20 (CDT)
Sue - Wasn't aware of the alchemical thing...but the term actually means
something related but
different, the way Actual Scientists use it: rather than the occurrence
itself, it refers to any of the
points in another planet's (or Moon's) orbit at which it is in
opposition (or conjunction) with the sun.
Of course, it's not as if I purport to be an Actual Scientist. But I've
met a few, and took a solar-system
astronomy class last semester.
All - has anyone read the hardcover Borges "Collected Fictions" that
came out last fall? I own many of
these stories already, but I was just wondering: are the new
translations as superior as the advance
press made them out to be? And does the volume include any previously
unpublished material?
Rick Wyatt
- Friday, April 16, 1999 at 12:52:02 (CDT)
DeeTeeEss - yes, it's refreshing. I'm one of them, too. Witness my
latest debacle daring to stick my
head into the sf and fandom newsgroups. File under "Mistakes, Failing to
Learn From".
Peter - loved the poem, you should get Jethro Tull to do the music to
it. Then maybe you could get
Finder's boy Mccoy Tyner to cover it - he's my favorite keyboardist,
although seeing Jimmy Smith
work the Hammond last week at age 74 made that a difficult decisions.
And Sue, I'm still telling people about the pictures of dirt. Guys, the
woman wants to send me
pictures of Harlan but she's got quite a few shots left on the roll, so
I say "I dunno, take pictures of
dirt or something". So the package comes in to Webderland HQ, and,
well...now I know all to well
what the various patches of mud and earth and rock look like in Sue's
backyard.
DTS
- Friday, April 16, 1999 at 09:20:08 (CDT)
RICK: Just read your message -- isn't it nice to know there are still a
few "innocents" out here among
the over thirty crowd? PETER: nice poem. Until next time, I
remain...clueless. Out here, DTS.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Friday, April 16, 1999 at 08:29:34 (CDT)
a bit of merriment, enjoy.
women, women, birds and bees / bringing men down to their knees /
slipping through the slivered
cracks / while silver lines the camels' backs.
reeking rasping respiration / hardly hides his hesitation / pentecostal
words and phrases /
disordered thoughts like clustered mazes.
trailing through a hedge of bets / forgetting what his life begets /
courage through a lack of reason /
except the moon, the month, the season
emerging slowly from the wood / man discovers life is good. / come this
summer, come this fall / he'll
never know he's lost at all.
all:::I don't know why, but that poem hit me this morning as I woke up.
Since I don't consider myself
a poet, I generally don't draft them. But I thought maybe, given some of
the discussions and
miscommunications which have been proliferating, we could use an
intermission to jump us back
on track.
---Peter
Just Don't Call Me Late For Dinner
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 23:04:07 (CDT)
Peter & Sue - By all means, you can still call me Finder. I do still
like it as a handle; I just wanted to
let loose a little identity. In truth, I answer to a number of things,
including the occasional
well-directed 'hey you'. Rick - I envy you the opportunity for NYC;
despite rampant bad press, all of
my trips there have been very good experiences, and I love the palpable
energy level that courses
through the place 24/7. It really doesn't ever sleep - so get rest while
you can. Keegan - Go get 'em! My
fingers are crossed for you in between snaps to Blue Note's "Blue
Bacharach" compilation (tonight's
musical bill of fare); your post has single-handedly led me to pine for
a sunny, top-down drive
through the Finger Lakes betwixt Geneva and Owego, wind in my hair and
McCoy Tyner tickling the
ivories for a soundtrack...SIGH
keegan
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 22:17:39 (CDT)
Dig, 'meister. That's only fair. Hey all, if you think a good thought or
pray a prayer, think or pray up a
grad assistantship for me. Not only is it tax day, it's the day I met
with my grad advisor. He say that I'm
sittin' pretty if they grant me an assistantship. If I get the bread, I
can take the summer off and finish
up the masters by May 2000. Not only will I get to spend the summer
swimmin' and catchin' frogs 'n'
fireflies w/ my little boys, but I might actually get to read some
Harlan lakeside while I pay enough
attention to keep my progeny from drowning. Then I get a year off from
teaching the joy of song to
other folks' children to pursue my academic interest in education. The
advisor says he will sign
waivers to let me write about my music, Jazz instead of the dead white
guys most folks write about.
I'm up for the challenge!
Rick, you and Kristen are always welcome. You really wanna come up here
where the wind blows
cold, though?
Sue--look for email soon. I miss ya.
ALL: Webderland is one of the hippest places on the Web. I dig all of
you.
---keegan
aka Cookie Coogan, BeBop vocalist
Rick
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 21:37:26 (CDT)
No, no, no, NO. Ya just have to identify yourself ONCE, either e-mail to
me or on your original post.
Really. It's fine to continue using initials (and yes of course I really
knew who DTS was, let me take
my tongue back out of my cheek) and to use funny names and e-mail
addresses. It's just if you're
going to come in here and make unwarranted allegations or piss in
anyone's wheaties, and you're not
willing to leave your calling card, then don't expect to be hanging
around for long. Both I and Harlan
have had enough of folks who pull the equivalent of running into your
parent's dinner party,
shouting "DooDoo!", and running out giggling. Those of you who are the
Good Guys have earned the
right to hang without me asking to see your papers at every street
corner. Dig?
Sue Luesse
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 20:38:41 (CDT)
Yaknow, I can appreciate that there are trolls and flamers on the net,
folks with no self-esteem that
self-empower by abusing total strangers. They are the folks who write
down the name and e-mail
attached to a post they don't like, and sign you up to receive all the
solicitations for membership to
all the porn sites, etc., they visited and used your name and e-mail to
"register".. That takes forever to
get your name off the lists.. Yes, it has happened to me more than once.
That is a MAJOR reason I
stopped putting my e-mail on every post. I *like* the idea of
registering to post. It protects the people
posting from abuse, stops the lame crap that seems to amuse the trolls,
and doesn't even affect
Lurkers, since they "read only" by definition, and can register any time
they'd like to post. Here! Here!
Rick. Good idea. One time registration for your posting name, and no
more hassles.
RE: The current homophobic thread - Sheesh Becca! So what *exactly*
makes you think you have any
'right' to know someone else's personal sex life? Yaknow, if you are
*looking* for gays, there are
entire networks of gay sites, bulletin boards, chat rooms, and
alt.thingies.. Troll there - you're more
likely to find what you are looking for..
RE: Syzygy the actual word.. ummm.. Sherrif Buck, that IS the scientific
astronomical definition - an
alignment of earth, sun and another planet or the moon. The less common
usage is somewhat
arcane and obscure - the metaphysical alignment of exact opposites with
a nuetral body acted upon
as the center. It's sort of an Alistair Crowley kinda thing..
Odds and Ends: It's OK if I still call you finder? Right, finder? Cause
I can't find the ascii code on my
chart for TPFKAF.. Sounds like I-Con was quite the event - good and bad.
I can hardly wait for
pictures with detailed captions.. So why don't you like your cats enough
to take pictures of them,
Mitch? I sent Rick pictures of dirt to finish off the ComicCon roll of
film.. ;-) .. Would stay and chat -
but, dang the stuff to do piles up quick when you are out all day with
the bike enjoying the first good
riding weather of the season..
DTS
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 18:10:45 (CDT)
RICK: I've been posting as DTS for about two years now. I'm the other
guy who reviewed SLIPPAGE
for the site -- and who still owes you the review of MINDFIELDS -- also
known as Dorman Truett
Shindler. (Harlan knows of me, since I send him the reviews and
write-ups from various newspaper
work I do). Since I tend toward typos, I found it was easier to type the
intials. If it's okay with you, I'd
like to keep doing so. Makes it easier on the fingers. As for my email,
I use my wife's (I still don't have
one) when I absolutely HAVE to communicate that way with folks,
otherwise I still rely on snailmail
(that way I don't tie up her space. Hope that clears things up...Out
here, DTS.
Peter
San Jose, CA - Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 17:46:08 (CDT)
Okay. I'm out. I'm really a seventy-five year old hypno-proctologist
from Lichtenstein. I've published
several hundred romance novels under the name "Celia Locosta" and am
heir to a small cork
fortune. This whole engineering student trying to be a writer thing was
merely a ploy to lull everyone
into a false sense of security, so that when the timing was right, I
could unleash upon the world a
heard of savage pomegranates.
Actually, I have no problem with the new id thing. I usually put my
email address in my missives
anyways. Just so long as I'm not punished for those few occasions when I
just absolutely have to post
and don't have the patience to put my email address down.
---Peter
Rick
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 14:24:00 (CDT)
Sure, Cookie. Once I know who you are, I know who you are. BTW, NYC is
now on our "short list" for
the Next Big Move. So maybe we'll be close enough for a visit...
keegan
Ithaca, NY US of A(gony) - Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 14:20:33 (CDT)
Rick, is it okay for regular users who have posted legit email addresses
in the past to dispense with
the email and location fields of the form?
Ever lurking and *thinking* about HE's stories even if I ain't doing a
hell of a lot of reading these
days.....
keegan
Rick
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 13:49:58 (CDT)
ALSO, DTS (if that is your REAL name, bucko) - I said Harlan made the
sammich (name of "Duke of
Windsor"). He didn't actually eat it, though, he gave it to me.
That's not to say he doesn't sometimes eat like a Chicago fireman, but
he does moderate his diet.
Rick Wyatt
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 13:29:58 (CDT)
Becca - just a friendly warning that you're treading on thin ice here.
The homosexual aspects are
immaterial - when you state a sexual relationship between Harlan Ellison
and another person as
fact without having any kind of reference or proof, you're engaging in
unethical and possible
actionable activity. I mean, regardless of how I feel about bestiality
I'd be unhappy if you posted "So
has Rick Wyatt sodomized any Rhesus Monkeys besides those in the San
Diego Zoo? I read he was
thinking about trying it again after moving to Atlanta."
ALSO ON THIS SUBJECT, A NOTE TO ALL: After the "Shaz" incident, Harlan
asked me to be more
stringent about the posting here, basically that he didn't want
unidentified yahoos getting equal
time on his website. I haven't done this yet, but it's obvious I need to
do something now. I can usually
track people down (for example I might yet ask PlanGraphics why someone
there would be posting
unsubstantiated rumors during work hours), but not always, and I
continue to think it's unfair for
people to be able to say all sorts of things and be unaccountable for
the damage they might do.
THEREFORE I am revoking the "anonymous posting" privileges here. If you
can't give a reliable
method under which you can be identified or contacted, your messages are
subject to be removed. If
you do not want others to know your info, you can e-mail me and I will
promise to not give it to
anyone but Harlan.
I still will allow one anonymous post per person on the guestbook, and I
will not delete messages if
the person is playing nice and sharing their toys. If this does not work
I will go to a registered account
only posting structure although I would prefer to still allow new folks
and longtime lurkers to be free
to join in.
Kid Ricochet
Nim Maura, - Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 10:59:47 (CDT)
Becca: You might be referring to an interview with Brian Hodge which was
featured in Deathrealm
magazine nearly three or four years ago. In this interview he mentioned
that certain writers find
themselves, at times, enshrouded with a public persona that exists far
apart from the true reality of
their lives. I seem to remember that he made some off-handed comments
about the living habits
and sexual orientation of certain writers (Clive Barker, Poppy Brite,
Anne Rice, Lovecraft) and stated
that the reading public seems to be hopelessly enthralled with the
rampant spread of needless
trivia, tailored misinformation and material that does nothing but
support Hollywood-hype Culture.
He may have mentioned something about Harlan in this interview, although
I can't say for sure. He
referred a few times to some of the older masters of fantasy (from the
Matheson era) so anything is
possible. I'll try to hunt up my copy of the magazine for you. Later -
KR
Becca
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 10:15:18 (CDT)
BTW that's 4 people including yourself Charlie. Safer for you and your
torch-setting huh?
Becca
Fresno, California - where the trees grow bigger than the men -
Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 10:11:22 (CDT)
Charlie my question was legit i don't know why you're so defensive. I
read an interview or something
in which someone mentioned Mr. Ellison and Ed Bryant having some kind of
relationship of that
kind. So maybe I can't rememver where I read it... big deal. I thought
you people might shed some
light, ya know? I mean you swap unknown quotations all of the time. And
who said i'm the only one
without a email adress? I count four people in the last coupla days who
dont' have addresses either.
Man!
DTS
- Thursday, April 15, 1999 at 09:54:44 (CDT)
RICK: I tried that "Lord somethingorother" sandwich you told us about in
a posting some time ago --
you know, the one Ellison turned you onto: creamcheese, grape jelly,
Wonder bread. It WAS tasty,
but...did you happen to mention to Ellison that a guy who (only three
years ago) had a quadruple
bypass maybe shouldn't be eating things that could make his arteries
look like (to use his words) "the
Holland tunnel at rush hour?" Just a thought. Out here, DTS.
Alex Jay Berman
Almost finished this damned novel! - Thursday, April 15, 1999 at
03:42:03 (CDT)
I'll second the "Fall of Stardust" recommendation; it's really lovely,
and I didn't mind at all that one
of the extra pieces Gaiman threw in for the chapbook was one I'd already
seen in Negative Burn #50
(it's a pantoum--a big wet sloppy kiss [or, should you prefer, a firm
handshake]) to the first person to
define what that is.
Also, hie yourself over to http://www.greenmanpress.com to visit the
Vess's site. It's very good, and it
has work news as well as personal news on the Vesses. From what I can
tell, Karen Vess is really
recovering at a great clip.
Oh--and a side note on that--when I e-mailed Charles Vess about his
excellent Book of Ballads and
Songs (Old Celtic and other story-songs, reels, skalds and such,
rewritten by such luinaries as
Charles deLint, Jane Yolen, Sharyn McCrumb, Gaiman, Jeff Smith and, when
they're able to
resolicit the next books in the series, Emma Bull and others--all
beautifully illustrated by Vess), I
received an extremely gracious--and generous!--e-mail within hours!
Considering how
time-consuming his intricately lined and detailed illustrative style, I
was amazed that he could find
the time to reply to e-mails.
Also--just bought a Dan Simmons novel (Fires of Eden), and love what I'm
seeing of it so far. My
reading of it all may be a bit delayed, however, because I'm desperately
trying to get this chapter
written, I'm reading the writing books by the excellent Lawrence Block,
and I'm doing a ton of other
things, but it WILL be read, and, if what I've already gotten through is
any indication, be enjoyed.
Sheriff Buck
Chapel Hill, NC - Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 23:26:38 (CDT)
Coupla incomplete answers:
Charlie--the gallery of this very website boasts scans of six Bauman
illustrations for the Easton
"Deathbird Stories." Since I don't own the book, I'm not sure if it
contains any other paintings, but
the six here, they's pretty purty.
Barney--I don't know if Sturgeon ever used the word syzygy, having read
very little of his work. But I
do know what it means. The most common (read: least scientific) usage is
the rare astronomical
event of Earth, Sol, and Moon lining up straight. And I have a sneaking
suspicion as to why Mr. S.
chose this alias--in some dictionaries (the American Heritage Second
College Edition, for one) it is
the last word beginning with 's'.
Also, everyone rush to your local comics store and purchase "A Fall of
Stardust." It's a keen collection
of color prints based on Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess' keen graphic
novel "Stardust" with some
fiction by Susanna Clark and Neil Gaiman, and poetry by Gaiman. Some of
the prints are incredible,
particularly those of Dave McKean, Mike Mignola, Paul Chadwick, Michael
Zulli, and Michael Kaluta.
Plus your money goes toward an even nobler cause than feeding the
struggling artists: medical bills
for Vess' wife, who sustained spinal injuries in a car accident last
summer.
Lucas Lives
Mitch
Hazlet (now available in letterbox format), NJ - Wednesday, April 14,
1999 at 22:49:53 (CDT)
Doug - When Cassius Clay changed his nom de guerre, who argued about it?
I'll be more than happy
to send copies of any pics to anyone who wants em, but I only got
halfway thru the roll, so unless I
take a bunch of gratuitous photos of my cats, it could be a few weeks
until I'm ready to get them
developed.
Barney - I think it was Sturgeon's collection 'E Pluribus Unicorn' (the
stories are much better than
the title) where he made reference to syzygy, but I don't know if
Narriman had that in mind. The
term had something to do with connection or coincidence or
fate...something like that.
As for the Sat night fiasco, I was also shut out. It was a
disappointment, and it should be reported,
but I'm not really upset about it, because I caught his other
appearances @ the con. Besides, I got to
eat a real meal and get some sleep, so it wasn't a total loss.
Mitch
Barney [stone cold] Dannelke
Allentown, PA. - Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 17:43:27 (CDT)
*** Charlie *** What he said! By the way, does anybody remember where
the word Syzygy comes from?
I think it's a Ted Sturgeon reference but I am doing this via remote and
so I cannot check.
*** DTS *** John Wayne was a drunk, a republican, and a misogynist - 3
things that I will never be. And
Chuck Norris is an old man who probably couldn't carry my gym bag.
Please. Now if you have any Jet
Li tapes, or John Woo's "Bullet In the Head", drop me a line.
*** Lynne *** You de-lurk well. While getting shut out of a limited seat
venue does happen, that was a
particularly badly handled event. It was almost as bad as the reading in
Atlanta sans oxygen. They
should have at least put Harlan in one of the large lecture halls in
Javitz instead of the single. Had I
known how dire it was I would have personally thrown out the 2 drunks
[crackheads? extasy?
whatever] to accomodate you. Hook up with Diane Brown about how you got
hosed and perhaps she
can do something for you.
*** Doug/Bernie*** DON'T "come out" on my account! :-)
The box, the exchange papers, the chains! It was Beeyouteefull!! Not
enough o's in smooth! Well
done.
Peace out. Barney
Amy
- Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 15:50:11 (CDT)
Chill, Charlie. Maybe Becca was posting a legit query. Her inquiry might
have some merit, so don't go
chasing her off the board just yet.
Charlie
St. Pete, FL - Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 15:29:16 (CDT)
Query- Does anyone have the Easton Press, Deathbird Stories, w/Jill
Bauman's illustrations?
Wondering what the illustrations were like and whether it was worth
seeking? Charlie
Charlie
St. Pete, FL - Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 12:45:34 (CDT)
DTS- The old adage applies: It's not what you say, but how you say it,
in reference to HE's sexual
orientation. Someone, who has never posted here and leaves no e-mail
address, boldly asks if HE has
continued with homosexual liaisons since his days with Ed Bryant. Then
states that Asimov or
Bradbury said so. This was a true flame and inappropriate. Images of
Szyg-a-ma-who-gee all over
again. Charlie
DTS
- Wednesday, April 14, 1999 at 11:49:25 (CDT)
ALL: Though it is four years old (American translation was published
late last year), I think A
WEREWOLF PROBLEM IN CENTRAL RUSSIA by Victor Pelevin (ISBN: 0811213943)
is one of the best
short story collections I've run across in the last ten years. I haven't
been this in awe of a writer since
"discovering" the work of Dan Simmons or Lucius Shepard. From the title
story to others like "Sleep"
(a great social commentary about Russia -- and large parts of the rest
of the world -- in which the
protagonist discovers everyone around him is asleep) and "Prince of
Gosplan," Blevin uses fantastic
literature the way Kafka, Borges, and Ellison do when setting their
sites on societies ills. H