Note the editorial comment....critical theory...ment to invalidate your opinion with trite inferrence of your inferiority as a poet....obviously this editor thinks poets should not engage in long sentences...why not?
Obviously you were corrected by your intellectual and moral superior Wally...that's the genetic hubris that maked cultural marxists tick...they are manipulating us for our own good because..well,..they just know better than we do....they just do!
The challenge was to put everything that mattered into a single sentence, to condense and intensify. We started out with 3 sentences (prose) then began the process of lean. The sentence had to contain every element of assertion without being ponderous or pedantic. Such is life in the free domain.
So are you saying that you knew what you were doing and specifically crafted a long sentance for artistic muse? That you knew better (artistically) than your moral and intellectually superior editorial inquisitor?
Is it possible our MSM intellectual superiors are fallible? Say it ain't so Wally! Is there no sacred pseaudo-intellectual dogma that's beyond fallibilty?
How vulgar subjecting our media philosopher kings to the emperer's new cloths syndrome.
Published in the following literary/art journals: PRISM International, pseudonym: 422-902-510; IMPULSE, pseudonym: Peoples Republic of Poetry; WAVES, pseudonym: 422-902-510; The FIDDLEHEAD, pseudonym: 422-902-510; DESCANT, pseudonym: 422-902-510; OPEN LETTER, pseudonym: Peoples Republic of Poetry; RAMPIKE, pseudonym: Peoples Republic of Poetry; OTHER VOICES, pseudonym: 422-902-510; WEST COAST REVIEW, pseudonym: 422-902-510; MACLEANS, pseudonym: Peoples Republic of Poetry; CAROUSEL & MISUNDERSTANDINGS as Wally Keeler;
WALKING ON THE GREENHOUSE ROOF, published by Delta Canada, Montreal, 1969;
1ST INTERIM REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON THE CAUSES AND MANIFESTATIONS OF DIVERGENT THINK PROCEDURE CONCERING THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF THE HISTORY OF THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF POETRY, Samizdata Publications, Toronto, 1981
4 comments:
Note the editorial comment....critical theory...ment to invalidate your opinion with trite inferrence of your inferiority as a poet....obviously this editor thinks poets should not engage in long sentences...why not?
Obviously you were corrected by your intellectual and moral superior Wally...that's the genetic hubris that maked cultural marxists tick...they are manipulating us for our own good because..well,..they just know better than we do....they just do!
;-)
The challenge was to put everything that mattered into a single sentence, to condense and intensify. We started out with 3 sentences (prose) then began the process of lean. The sentence had to contain every element of assertion without being ponderous or pedantic. Such is life in the free domain.
So are you saying that you knew what you were doing and specifically crafted a long sentance for artistic muse? That you knew better (artistically) than your moral and intellectually superior editorial inquisitor?
Is it possible our MSM intellectual superiors are fallible? Say it ain't so Wally! Is there no sacred pseaudo-intellectual dogma that's beyond fallibilty?
How vulgar subjecting our media philosopher kings to the emperer's new cloths syndrome.
;-)
Yep, that's what I done did. Spent a good two or so hours on that single sentence.
Life sentence: everyone has one.
Post a Comment