Archive for the ‘Assholes’ Category
He Must’ve Been Unconscious
Written by John Erianne on July 10, 2008 – 1:24 pm -The other night I participated in a poetry discussion group. The sort of thing that is part book club and part informal workshop.
A small group of us met in a local coffee house after hours and sat around reading and talking about poetry. The evening was going swimmingly until, about half-way into the meeting, this guy showed-up — late and kind of grumpy. You know — like he had someplace else to be but his car broke down and he just stopped by to use the phone or get out of the rain or take a dump. Anyway, he sits there like a lump and doesn’t say a word until it’s time for him to read his poem. You can tell that he’s one of those poets who thinks every line that drips from his pen is spun from gold and that sun shines from his asshole. He goes into this long tired introduction about how he was inspired to use stream of consciousness in his poem. I’m sitting there thinking, read the fucking poem, already — my balls are falling asleep fer christsakes! So he finally reads the poem. It goes on for about 2 or 3 pages. When he is finished, I comment that I appreciated the rhythm of the poem but that what he has written is not stream-of-consciousness. You’d think I cracked him across the jaw with a Louisville Slugger, because he did this whiplash motion with his head. He starts to argue with me: “No, no. It is stream-of-consciousness. You don’t know what you’re saying . . .” What! Are you addressing moi? I looked around the room and considered the company I was in, the setting, and the old guy’s absolute refusal to listen to reason and came to the conclusion that there is great wisdom in picking your battles. So, I quickly changed the subject and let him sit there in his ignorance, kind of like how a bad parent might let a toddler sit in a dirty diaper because it’s too much trouble to change.
But, here I am 3 days later still pissed about the matter.
I’m sorry, but writers who talk out their ass about writerly stuff they should actually know about but don’t bothers me. And it wasn’t so much that the guy was ignorant — it was that he had no interest in correcting his ignorance. Old grumpypuss was confusing stream-of-consciousness with free-writing. But that’s not even the worst of it. What he had written wasn’t even free-writing. See, what he had actually done was take several different kinds of formal verse and splice it together into a long poem which, I suppose, could be considered an experiment in form. That’s not stream-of-consciousness and it is, most certainly, not free-writing. So, he was not only ignorant — he was doubly ignorant.
Considering the sorry state of our public education system, it’s really no wonder people confuse stream-of-consciousness with free-writing. Hell, I remember back in the 10th grade, my English teacher didn’t know the difference. Nonetheless, it’s something every writer should know whether or not one uses either technique. Because you never know, you know.
So, for the record:
Free-Writing is a guided writing exercise used to conquer writer’s block. The exercise usually has a time limit but otherwise follows no rules other than to keep writing non-stop regardless of mistakes or straying off-topic. You do a lot of this kind of thing in creative writing classes. The technique was pioneered by writing instructors like Natalie Goldberg. This technique should not be confused with stream-of-consciousness or automatic writing.
Stream-of-consciousness is a specific form of interior monologue. Rather than being a straight narrative of thought, it seeks to emulate the randomness of the thought process using fragments, broken syntax, unruly punctuation, wordplay, allusion, etc. The most famous example of this technique is James Joyce’s Finnegan’s Wake, but many other writers have used it to a degree including contemporary novelists such as Will Christopher Baer and Jonathan Safron Foer.
Automatic writing is a form of writing championed by the Surrealists in their day in which an individual entered a trance-like state and tapped into the collective unconscious. Generally, automatic writing is dismissed as a parlor trick today and is not utilized much. But, again, it shouldn’t be confused with free-writing or stream-of-consciousness.
And while we’re on the subject (and just to be thorough and crystal fucking clear on the matter), stream-of-consciousness should likewise not be confused with a dramatic monologue, which is a type of poem where a character either historical or fictional explains himself to an imaginary audience. Examples of this are found in Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach” and Robert Brownings’ “My Last Duchess.”
So, I hope this has been helpful to some of you. And, grumpy old dude . . . please read this blog — preferrably after you’ve had a bran muffin and emptied your bowels.
Vote Smart — Let’s Not Get Bushwacked Again in 2008!
Written by John Erianne on May 6, 2008 – 3:10 pm -Bush: Worst Ever, McCain: More War, Answer: OBAMA!
As voters consider their choices for the democratic party nominee in North Carolina and Indiana, they might want to consider the past eight years under Bush and who is most likely to flip the script on the disasterous policies that have brought us to this point in history.
Oh Yeah? If You Don’t Like it, Sue Me!
Written by John Erianne on April 2, 2008 – 5:34 pm -Okay, it’s not really newsworthy at this point, as I am sure many of you are already aware that David Kuzminski of Preditors & Editors fame is defending himself against not one, but two separate libel suits. The first lawsuit was filed on September 20, 2007 in a New Jersey District Court by literary agent, Barbara Bauer, a woman who has been the bane of many literary sites over the last few years. The second lawsuit was filed on Valentine’s Day in Virginia by Maryland attorney, Victor E. Cretella III, who is employed by PublishAmerica.
I can’t really speak about the second lawsuit, since I don’t know any of the details. Although, I would offer that Cretella’s reputation isn’t being damaged by any perceived libel so much as by his own association with PublishAmerica. The way I hear it, the man had a pretty solid reputation as a litigator prior to his association with that company, so he might want to rethink his employment situation if he’s interested in protecting his reputation.
The first lawsuit is much more interesting to me as it goes to the heart of something I’ve been preaching about for as long as I’ve been involved in the literary life: that there are too many dumbshits out there who know nothing about the publishing business. Inexperienced writers who get taken-in by so-called literary agents because they are ignorant of how the publishing industry works. So-called literary people who file frivolous lawsuits because they don’t understand anything about publishing law.
This lawsuit is a culmination of events which have transpired over the last few years. Discussions and postings about Bauer’s business practices. Cease and Desist letters. Taunting. Threats. The substance of the matter is this: Bauer is alleged to charge upfront fees of varying amounts for services ranging from reading manuscripts to “marketing” them to publishers — something no legitimate literary agency does. It is also alleged that she has a less than stellar track record selling manuscripts to publishers and that she submits manuscripts in less than satisfactory form. This has been widely posted on many literary sites. It is a fact that the watchdog site Writer’s Beware lists Bauer as one of the 20 worst literary agents. I’m not the one alleging this — I have no idea whether or not it’s true. However, many others have made these claims. Certainly, these claims should be easy enough to prove or disprove. Obviously, if these allegations are true, Ms. Bauer cannot argue libel.
Libel is a form of defamation in a fixed medium (usually in print, but also, through video broadcast, visual representation or sculpture) in which a person or organization makes a false claim which causes verifiable injury to a person’s reputation.
There are several defenses for libel — the most obvious being the truth. The truth of the matter is an absolute defense in the common law of the United States and Canada.
Other defenses include:
Privilege: statements made in a court of law or on the floor of a government legislature. or comments made between spouses.
Opinion: Anything presented as opinion rather than fact is generally recognized in most jurisdictions as not being libelous.
Fair comment: statements made with an honest belief in their truthfulness in a matter of public interest are protected.
Good Faith: Statements made in the good faith and reasonable belief that they are true are usually treated as true statements. However, the standards of proof in such cases vary depending on the nature of the defendant.
Consent: The plaintiff gave consent for the defamatory statement to be used.
Innocent Dissemination: when the defendant had no knowledge that the statement was defamatory. i.e. you can’t sue a postal worker for delivering a newsletter containing a defamatory statement or an ISP for delivering a defamatory email message.
Although, not a common defense, if the plaintiff can be proven to have such a low-standing in the community (in Bauer’s case, this would refer to her standing within the publishing industry) prior to the alleged defamation, to the extent that the individual’s reputation could not possibly be hurt any further, one can argue that it’s no longer possible to libel the plaintiff.
If I were one of the seventeen defendants in the Bauer lawsuit (and given that she seems to go after anyone who even mentions her name, that might yet happen), the first thing I’d do is file a counter-suit for Abuse of Process, Malicious Prosecution, and for interfering with my rights under the First Amendment (note that most courts are pretty friendly to bloggers in matters of free speech — I refer you to a 2003 decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which stated that “bloggers, website operators, and e-mail list editors cannot be held for libel for information they republish”). The second thing I’d do is track down as many allegedly wronged clients of the Bauer Agency and get them to make sworn affidavits detailing their experiences with the agency. If there is sufficient evidence of fraudulent behavior I would persuade those (again, allegedly) disgruntled clients to file their own class-action lawsuit against the Bauer Agency. That’s just for starters. if I had to go bankrupt defending myself anyway, I’d do just as well burying the plaintiff in so much trouble that even if the plaintiff could manage a victory (not possible if the allegations are true), they’d have to destroy themselves to achieve it. Indeed, if any of the allegations against Bauer are even remotely true, she’s exposing her skeletons to the light of day. If I were Bauer and I knew that the allegations were true, I’d have to think twice about pursuing legal action. Sometimes it’s better to let sleeping dogs lie.
