SPANX! Excellent - I actually had to cut the crotch panel out to accommodate MYSELF, but other than that, I am svelte!
Yes, you and Emily are almost without thinking, members of the MGC. Dirty little secret: If you could see inside Voldemort's head and heart, there is a crowd of "mean girls" in there, to rival the Pope's last audience at the Vatican. Ssshh, just between you and me, Bob. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price <bobpriced@...> wrote: > > > I can only hope this means Emily and I are being considered > for full membership in the "mean girls", because, frankly, we're > finding being on the boring list---well, you know, pretty boring; don't get us > wrong, we're flattered to be on any list in Voldemort's book of lists, we just > think we've earned consideration for a higher calling. Â And to prove my > personal commitment, I've ordered > my first SPANX Men's starter kit. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK0QVBi112A > > ________________________________ > From: Ann <awoelflebater@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 7:29:33 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is Voldemort a hack? (was The Prerequisites for > Enlightenment) > > > > > May I just say that I can go to bed tonight happy? In fact, I'm positively > giddy. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price <bobpriced@> 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.ÃÂ ÃÂ :-) > > > > ****** > > > > 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:ÃÂ > > > > "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 > > > > ÃÂ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÂ > > > > > > > > > > > >Â Â ÃÂ > > > > > Â >
