Re: Kafka and rilke and Perplexity State University

ouch, Kim
No, I practice great self-censorship. I only object to it being imposed by
snobbish or testy people who think that they are the ultimate rule of what
should be read. Fahrenheit 451 can't be far behind.
tina

>--- Kim Johnson <haikux2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>the writer's part
> > to
> > think *everything* which issues forth from her pen
> > should be read by other people?
>
>
>let me be clear that "her" does NOT refer to tina.
>
>i mean the generic "writer", the inclusive "her/his".
>
>thanks,
>kim
>
>
>
>
> >
> > --- James Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> > > There's a world of difference between asking for
> > > voluntary
> > > self-censorship (which can always be ignored by
> > the
> > > writer -- it's only
> > > followed at will) and imposing an external
> > > censorship (which is imposed
> > > by force against the will of the writer). Kim is
> > > doing the latter and
> > > not the former.
> > >
> > > I've heard of one poet that "He'd be a great poet
> > if
> > > he didn't publish
> > > everything he'd written." A little
> > self-censorship
> > > is a good thing, I
> > > think. I don't think there's any escaping the
> > > feeling of mortification
> > > most writers have when reading their old works,
> > but
> > > perhaps the reasons
> > > for this feeling of mortification won't be quite
> > > as...mortifying...if we
> > > follow Kim's advice.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> > > Kim Johnson wrote:
> > > > --- tina carson <tina_carson@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Oh, Kim, I really must take issue with this one.
> > > >>Ever heard of Walt Witman?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > was he the guy who had that hot three-way with
> > > emilie
> > > > dickinsen and ralph david emersen?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>Sorry, Kim, I still think
> > > >>you're being an advocate for sensorship, and
> > > perhaps
> > > >>a bit snobbish.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > i'm an advocate for as much sensory experience
> > as
> > > > possible.
> > > >
> > > > it's safe to delete "perhaps" and "a bit".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>I
> > > >>don't know about other authors, but even though
> > I
> > > >>would not duplicate it
> > > >>today, I certainly don't regret even the most
> > > naive
> > > >>of my works.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > lucky you. (and, honestly, this is not said
> > > snidely.)
> > > >
> > > > kim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>>is what i'm suggesting below censorship?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>i'm still allowing the smitten creator to
> > > >>
> > > >>buttonhole
> > > >>
> > > >>>any poor fool to hear her latest creation.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>i think the permanency of print should perhaps
> > be
> > > >>>withheld until the muse's visitation is over,
> > and
> > > >>>there can be a more judicious assessment of
> > what
> > > >>>transpired.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>surely any number of writers would, if they
> > only
> > > >>>could, wish back their headlong rush into
> > print.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>even our dear doctor on our very own list, it
> > > seems
> > > >>
> > > >>to
> > > >>
> > > >>>me, if i read him correctly, regrets allowing
> > his
> > > >>>first two books into print. and these weren't
> > > >>
> > > >>books
> > > >>
> > > >>>of mere juvenilia.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>kim
> > > >>>
> > > >>>--- tina carson <tina_carson@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>Sensorship is the death of creativity, Kim
> > > >>>>tina
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>the sheer amount of contemporary poetry is
> > > >>>>>overwhelming. (i'm not sure if i should put
> > > >>
> > > >>poetry
> > > >>
> > > >>>>in
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>quote marks, or not.)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>personally, i feel we (the readers) would be
> > a
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>whole
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>lot better off if there were to be a
> > stricture
> > > >>
> > > >>on
> > > >>
> > > >>>>>publishing poetry. no poems allowed in print
> > > >>
> > > >>until
> > > >>
> > > >>>>>they have survived at least a year in an
> > > >>
> > > >>airless
> > > >>
> > > >>>>desk
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>drawer.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>but you're free to read them to any unwitting
> > > >>
> > > >>soul.
> > > >>
> > > >>>>>kim
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>__________________________________
> > > >>>>>Do you Yahoo!?
> > > >>>>>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > > >>>>>http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > > >>>>>-
> > > >>>>>* Unsubscribing? Mail
> > majordomo@roughdraft.org
> > > >>
> > > >>with
> > > >>
> > > >>>>the message
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > >
> >
> >>_________________________________________________________________
> > > >>
> > > >>>>MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2
> > > >>
> > > >>months
> > > >>
> > > >>>>FREE*.
> > > >>>>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>-
> > > >>>>* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org
> > > >>
> > > >>with
> > > >>
> > > >>>>the message
> > > >>>>* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
> > > >>>
> >
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
>http://sbc.yahoo.com
>-
>* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
>* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Jul 2 22:17:55 2003