http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd5dYQHoZS0






________________________________
 From: raunchydog <raunchy...@yahoo.com>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:46:45 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is Voldemort a hack? (was The Prerequisites for 
Enlightenment)
 


  
You came home! Welcome back, Bob.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price  wrote:
>
> 
> ________________________________
> From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 7:58:43 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Prerequisites for Enlightenment
> 
> >>>And for your information, I dash off things here and send them without
> editing them because most of the time I'm just having fun with them.
> That, and the audience I'm writing for doesn't meet my standards for
> deserving edited copy -- they're not paying me.
> 
> >>>For paying customers, I edit. Non-paying customers who don't like
> my unedited posts can go suck eggs. Non-paying editors who get off
> on editing my posts for me should pay *me*, for providing them with
> something to do on those days when they're off work and thus not
> busy...uh...editing.   :-)
> 
> ******
> 
> I was thrilled with last weeks *posting without limits*,
> it gave me a sense of power and control knowing that I could
> respond to any and all of the 1500+ posts that I just finished reading.
> 
> One of our illustrious contributors suggested that we might consider a *Best 
> of FFL*
> going forward, and with that in mind I set myself the difficult task of 
> picking
> my favorite subject for the week; it was a challenge (how could anyone best 
> Share's attempt
> to prove she speaks in tongues), but a decision had to be made and I'm going 
> with: 
> 
> "Is Voldemort a hack?"
> 
> When I read Voldemort's posts I ask myself: "Where's the art?". For someone 
> with his
> considerable output on FFL, who puts so much effort into selling himself to 
> us as 
> 
> a creative writer, art seems conspicuously absent from his contributions; 
> this might
> be less true if you consider manual (or phonebook) writing a creative act.
> 
> As he makes clear above, Voldemort is a writer of manuals, and, IMO, when he 
> attempts 
> 
> anything more than that, the word "hack" pretty much nails what he becomes.
> 
> For something to be considered art it's imperative that it have the ability 
> to defamiliarize*
> by making the familiar, unfamiliar and *new*; Voldemort's posts completely 
> fail at this.
> OTOH, Judy's choice of the word "hack", to describe Voldemort, is a great 
> example of effective
> defamiliarization---it gave me a new experience of something that was 
> familiar about him.
> 
> I also must agree with Judy that irony is the life blood of creative writing 
> 
> (writing phonebooks, not as much), and reading Voldemort's attempts at 
> writing creatively 
> 
> ---when he is so handicapped in the irony department (narcissism will do 
> that), is like watching 
> 
> someone with no hands attempt to show off his penmanship (no "My left foot" 
> jokes please). He also
> appears to be unable to go beyond cliche and what Martin Amis calls "heard 
> words", which make 
> 
> his offerings, on this forum at least, quite artless. Anyone who considers 
> Voldemort a creative writer
> might consider rereading Hemingway (if you are interested in understanding 
> some of Kerouac's limitations,
> who Voldemort attempts to emulate---without demonstrating any of Kerouac's 
> talent as an artist).
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abc819rT6wI
> 
> 
> The film "The Master" was an example for me of the way art can make the 
> familiar *new*; the whole film 
> 
> delivered artistically, but the scene where Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour 
> Hoffman) "Processes" Freddie 
> 
> Quell (Joaquin Phoenix)---for the first time, felt in some way like the first 
> time I meditated; my experience of 
> 
> the scene was familiar and at the same time completely new; part of it was 
> the suggestiveness of Dodd's
> voice, but more was the scene's transition from Dodd's voice to Quell 
> *living* a previous experience
> as if for the first time, and the familiarity it had to my first meditation 
> and the first superlative 
> 
> clarity of the thought (engram or, if you will, un-stressing) that reported 
> or noticed an artifact of my 
> 
> awareness that had just existed without thinking. 
> 
> 
> The art of the writing, acting, and editing were part of it, but I believe it 
> was the cinematography,
> with its use of 70mm film (which is rare today), that more than anything else 
> was essential to making 
> 
> the experience possible for me. 
> 
> 
> Another component of the film that worked the same way for me was Joaquin 
> Phoenix's characterization
> of Freddie Quell, which allowed me to experience---as if for the first 
> time---character types that I
> met as a child who were friends of my father that had served with him in WW2; 
> JP's characterization 
> 
> of Quell had the same effect on me as a number of characters Jim Thompson 
> (writer of "The Getaway" and 
> 
> "The Grifters") created that felt as new, when I read about them in his 
> novels, but reminded me of some
> psychopathic cowboy's my father socialized with. 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't disagree that Voldemort's posts are full of conflict (more than 
> one detective has found creative
> uses for the Yellow Pages, when interviewing a suspect)---and that conflict 
> is essential to drama, but conflict 
> 
> without art is no more than conflict; Voldemort is also capable of irony, 
> although I've yet to read anything
> ironic in his posts that was not inadvertent and ended up making him look 
> vacuous. I'm sure most of us have
> favorites of his inadvertent irony, my personal favorite is his declaration 
> that he can type as fast as he
> thinks (smile).
> 
> Share, lets imagine that Voldemort is not pushing 70---with the emotional 
> palette of an 8 year old; lets
> imagine he has some class and wants to apologize for his abusive post to you, 
> and lets imagine a song he
> would apologize with:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjZmSkUL6Ws
> 
> 
> *Reference: Victor Shklovsky - "Art as Technique"
> 
> http://web.fmk.edu.rs/files/blogs/2010-11/MI/Misliti_film/Viktor_Sklovski_Art_as_Technique.pdf
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>

 

Reply via email to