I said I would get around to writing a bit about the BOT podcast with guest Alfred Lehmberg and so I will. Hosted by Jeremy Vaeni, another troublemaker. What can I say though? Al and I pretty much agree on everything, at least so far as what was talked about in the podcast, so I have no bones to pick. I was happy to hear Al bringing Terence McKenna, Rupert Sheldrake and others into the conversation. It is doubtful the true nuts and bolt types will appreciate it, but I did. I also found it interesting that Al tried to explain his writing style. There is some sort of controversy over the way Al writes that I have never quite understood. I suppose poetic verse is not everyone's cup o' tea and maybe not what they expect to come across when looking into ufo subject matter, but they should be pleasantly surprised. I personally think it is much nicer than reading my flair-less babble and the artwork that goes along with it is lovely too. So what is the problem? Damned if I know. Is Al right and they just pretend not to understand it? Quite possibly at least some are pretending, not to mention faking outrage over the way things are written. Those would be the ones who understand it perfectly and just don't agree with it.
Now onto Jeremy's other podcast, Culture of Contact. Jeremy is only getting so much PR because he chose to interview two of my friends (internet friends are friends) and he did a pretty good job of it too. The Live from the Zorgies show was hilarious. Dropping by were Paul Kimball, Tim Binnall and Alfred Lehmberg. It was really funny and I mean that in a good way. The interview with Regan Lee was a bit more serious, but fun as well. I do believe that is the closest I have ever heard a person come to saying they have been abducted without actually saying it. Kudos to Regan on that! It is a thin line to walk. I was shocked to hear Regan say that she doesn't want to see a bigfoot. I would love to see a bigfoot and just assumed that Regan would too.
There you go, enough entertainment for a winter night by the fire.
5 comments:
"Quite possibly at least some are pretending, not to mention faking outrage over the way things are written. Those would be the ones who understand it perfectly and just don't agree with it."
Well -- I think so. There is never a move to discuss what is written, only ever how.
I should be easily derailed given a line for line analysis, right? I could be put aright straight away... an easily too.
Someone should take me to task on what I'm saying if it's in arrears, eh? Challenge me on content where content is not plain; when content couldn't plainer — written as it is to go where angels and their obsequious followers fear to tread. But then that's the issue isn't it?
Exploring fear — disrespecting borders (box limits) not respecting individuals; demanding respect not tendered — a decided reluctance to turn the other cheek or accept rain as an excuse from someone pissing on your leg? For these? The word: the knife that keeps on cutting, eh?
No apologies — I was clear after all. Thanks though, for getting it, Lesley. You're enough, even as there —are— others, it appears.
My detractors can bite me when they cannot lead, follow, or get out of the way.
All that said, thank you for your regard, attention, and respect, Lesley. It is much appreciated.
Onward! Intrepid into the new year!
alienview@roadrunner.com
> www.AlienView.net
>> AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
>>> U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com
There is a good point in that because it seems to me that it would be impossible not to get the basic gist of your posts, even if someone didn't understand it in it's entirety. I am of average intelligence, certainly no genius and I can understand it well enough. It seems to me that if someone wants to have an issue they could come up with something better than not liking the way someone writes. Writing is like any art or any creative pursuit, people have there own styles and there really isn't right or wrong, but I guess there are always critics.
Agreed, to a degree, but a critique on style is not a critique on content. For the so-called critic to blithely write off the latter for the former lacks consistency, relevancy, and courage, IMO.
Why -- such behavior by so-called critics might even partially explain the anger accused, nes't ce pas? [g].
alienview@roadrunner.com
> www.AlienView.net
>> AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
>>> U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com
No critique on style is not critique on content. However, I am sure that certain people feel they have the right to be critics of the style without even considering the content. I don't agree with them, but I am sure they would use that as an excuse.
You're right, the meal _can_ be delivered directly to the throat mounted colostomy bag via a gas operated tube minus any activity of the teeth and tongue or palet... feeling texture, tasting, but appreciating a subtle mixture of these things, still.
Ironic given they are reflections of something I feel I am in contact with while writing... an entity apart from myself. Sometimes I get so close to the word —their resonances with other words— setting up notes in a musical score that sings in a manner believed to be a truth of some kind to me. Like a roomful of persons concentrating on an *om* they're chanting, you know? In contact with the artfully seditious and alternative other... somehow, eh?
The muse says there is nothing for which I have to apologize. I'll be fine as long as I stay an efficacious course, I suspect, and have experience of mighty forces coming to ones aid when one aspires to bravery.
Finally — its no accident that humankind is intellectually being moved further and further away from the the center of anything. Building our intellectual fires as big as we've made them begins to better illuminate how ignorant we really are, eh?
That's a recurring theme of my writing and scary to address. I've worked real hard over the years to be clear about that and I think its the beginning of the reason why some console themselves with dismissals of a style that is exerting itself actually only to be inclusive, clear, and complete in a language that is a paintbox ... words color, lines landscape, and paragraphs are portraits of that which is attendant and inhabiting, right?
I aspire to art at all levels and indicies. What else is a human supposed to do as a child of the universe but perceive the universe artfully and so report back to same... as same! The universe regards itself — contemplates its navel...
It's a contemplation that will not reflexively validate another's religious paradigm, suffer a hubristic sneer, or endure an authoritarianism. That's a problem, always. I won't consider humanity as the best this universe has to offer or the worst... knowing criticism serves where congratulation does not, and we have very little upon which we can be congratulated, I'm thinking.
Huh? What? There he goes again?
Cosi Cosa! No apologies still.
alienview@roadrunner.com
> www.AlienView.net
>> AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
>>> U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com
Post a Comment