Wednesday, June 06, 2007


WE'VE SEEN that the literary establishment is hostile to change.

WE'VE EXPERIENCED their censoring.

WE'VE NOTICED that the loudest of their members are the most reactionary.

Why follow the Underground Literary Alliance?

The question is, Why follow the apostles of sameness?

Does anyone really, REALLY believe Francine Prose and John Leonard are the future of literature? Tired; blathering; insulated?

The ULA versus Literature?

No way. The ULA is the AUTHENTIC literature of our time-- ourselves and others like us.

The Status Quo is frightened. It's moribund. It's fossilized. It's closed to new ideas. It has cut itself off from more representative writers and from its own society. Increasingly it stands for and defends a tiny and exclusive-minded minority in this nation. 90% of this country is outside the view of its patrician eyes.

The ULA is the alternative and the answer. The voice of dissent in literature today. We speak from and to all people in this society. No eighty-five dollar-plus admission fees. Our writers are better. Our message is stronger. The literary establishment knows this, which is why it now brings forth various riffs on co-optation; weak reactions to the fact of the ULA. Sure, we're loud and contentious. We're dynamic. We're Xtreme sports of the literary variety. The NBCC crowd and their like are major league baseball.

We can get our books out only through cracks in monolithic conformity. Make an effort to find them. It'll be worth the effort. You'll be participating in an act of Literary Rebellion. Our books vibrate with excitement; the necessary voice of necessary change in its dawning stages.


Anonymous said...

I just posted there

I'll be surprised if they let my post through. But maybe they will. They really should. I think a lot of people seem unhappy with them, including their own members.

King said...

Those who would blackball the ULA and like-minded writers forget one thing: The overwhelming power of our voices.

fdw said...

The gratuitous creation of opposition.
The mask assumed to be the surface and the surface assumed to semiotic'ly repersent what's behind it.
The circular argument widening then recoiling ever closer to the edge of various but adverse idealogies.
The show seeming to inflate the reality of authority but without substance in evidence anywhere.
The lack of critical paradigms of any kind nor the dissemination of enthusiasm peaking from behind the arras supporting the cult-ures of Mideval scholasticism as they know subsist.
This is the situation of the intelligent discussion of today's literature in the mas-acre media as their own ship goes down and there's nothing to take up the cause or for that matter the effect
as no resource or access to resources is left to the alternatives.

"It's no longer a wold of haves and have nots but won of takers and taken froms......"