The one guy who's reinvigorating the ULA, including bringing new blood into the organization, is poet Frank Walsh, through his activities in Florida and Philadelphia. Latest is a reading March 7th which he'll be hosting along with Mark Baird. I'll be there. Stay tuned here for details.
I've gotten the drift that many people see the ULA as going through a stagnant period. This perception can change very quickly with resumed activity. Everything in nature proceeds through waves-- including writers organizations; with lows and with highs. One thing which I believe is necessary is for the ULA's image to change, from being that of merely a collection of old white guys. From what I've heard, the 3/7 reading will go a long way to discrediting that notion completely.
IS THE ULA NECESSARY?
Yes. Now more than ever. I note an article in the current issue of Poets & Writers in which MFA writer Amy Shearn bemoans the lack of writers "behaving badly." She claims that literary historians will have nothing exciting to write about this period.
I suggest she check out what non-MFA writers look like, and get a taste of their energy. She has time before next week to get to Philly. . . .
p.s. I'll be giving my advice to the ULA-- unsolicited by Tin Pot though it may be-- on how to keep the cause moving. I don't know if I have the time or incentive to be any more than an advisor to the organization, but I can at least be that.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Puppets and Stooges
While I've made a strong case that there was an orchestrated campaign to discredit myself and disrupt the ULA, many loose threads remain.
(The campaign was quite successful, to the extent that many, including the ULA's "Tin Pot" leader/non-leader, actually believe that I was the ULA's chief problem. Me! Even though it was my work, my boldness, and my strategy which provided the ULA its great string of historic victories.)
An opportunity to fill in a few more pieces of the puzzle has been provided by Noah Cicero's inexplicable defense of Daniel Handler in a recent posted comment to this all-but-defunct blog, which I've been trying to push into retirement. It appears Mr. Handler is backing-- vocally if not financially-- Tao Lin's new small press venture. (Tao Lin, a seldom-employed pianist, has no visible means of support.)
Tao Lin played a major role in Noah's loud departure from the ULA in 2005. The departure was accompanied by a Tao Lin interview with Cicero, which was applauded at the time by literary preppies.
Yesterday I reread the interview. Four years later, I'm struck by its extreme malice and mendacity. It's a full-scale attack on the ULA; on myself; and on some of the underground's most prominent writers. Was it really necessary? Whatever the perceived grievances and differences, why would two ostensibly underground writers, Lin and Cicero, engage in this kind of all-out attack? Noah could've left semi-quietly. Was more going on than met the eye?
A clue is given in the interview, with Noah's remarks about Daniel Handler. Noah claimed I had attacked Handler and Sedaris. The reverse was the case-- Handler had presented, in the pages of a lit journal, a faked letter that was claimed to be from me.
If memory serves me (one can check this blog's archives), I'd already discredited the fake letter before the Lin/Cicero interview. I'd asked Handler for a copy of the letter and its envelope. One was never provided. Yet Noah took the lie-filled Handler line regarding the controversy. Why?
Were Tao Lin and Daniel Handler tight as far back as 2005?
This was, of course, before I knew Handler and others would conduct a four-year harassment campaign against me-- the knowledge of which now throws upon what happened a different light.
SIDE NOTE: The discussion following the long interview is enlightening. It's claimed in it that I "hate" everybody. Yet, despite endless insults and provocations, I kept my head well in my remarks, maintaining an argument that was tempered and reasoned-- while others spewed vitriol. Interesting.
(The campaign was quite successful, to the extent that many, including the ULA's "Tin Pot" leader/non-leader, actually believe that I was the ULA's chief problem. Me! Even though it was my work, my boldness, and my strategy which provided the ULA its great string of historic victories.)
An opportunity to fill in a few more pieces of the puzzle has been provided by Noah Cicero's inexplicable defense of Daniel Handler in a recent posted comment to this all-but-defunct blog, which I've been trying to push into retirement. It appears Mr. Handler is backing-- vocally if not financially-- Tao Lin's new small press venture. (Tao Lin, a seldom-employed pianist, has no visible means of support.)
Tao Lin played a major role in Noah's loud departure from the ULA in 2005. The departure was accompanied by a Tao Lin interview with Cicero, which was applauded at the time by literary preppies.
Yesterday I reread the interview. Four years later, I'm struck by its extreme malice and mendacity. It's a full-scale attack on the ULA; on myself; and on some of the underground's most prominent writers. Was it really necessary? Whatever the perceived grievances and differences, why would two ostensibly underground writers, Lin and Cicero, engage in this kind of all-out attack? Noah could've left semi-quietly. Was more going on than met the eye?
A clue is given in the interview, with Noah's remarks about Daniel Handler. Noah claimed I had attacked Handler and Sedaris. The reverse was the case-- Handler had presented, in the pages of a lit journal, a faked letter that was claimed to be from me.
If memory serves me (one can check this blog's archives), I'd already discredited the fake letter before the Lin/Cicero interview. I'd asked Handler for a copy of the letter and its envelope. One was never provided. Yet Noah took the lie-filled Handler line regarding the controversy. Why?
Were Tao Lin and Daniel Handler tight as far back as 2005?
This was, of course, before I knew Handler and others would conduct a four-year harassment campaign against me-- the knowledge of which now throws upon what happened a different light.
SIDE NOTE: The discussion following the long interview is enlightening. It's claimed in it that I "hate" everybody. Yet, despite endless insults and provocations, I kept my head well in my remarks, maintaining an argument that was tempered and reasoned-- while others spewed vitriol. Interesting.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Fleet Foxes
Here in Philly I have, in addition ro my duffel bag, some belongings in storage. (Including much of my own writing over the years, and the mass of documents related to the founding history of the Underground Literary Alliance.)
I retrieved among these items a dusty cd player. At my last job in Detroit a goth co-worker gave me a cd she'd burned, but until now I was unable to play it. "Fleet Foxes." I've been listening to it nightly. It's given me great sustenance-- which, after all, is the purpose of art.
The music's simplicity gives it emotion-- for much of it, harmonious voices accompanied by simple guitar. The voices carry echoes of the Renaissance, but also American roots music, with maybe a reminder of the Fleetwoods, and a dash of stripped-down Moody Blues tossed in. For me it's a reminder of the mystery and simplicity of art, something I'd love to happily echo in my own work.
I retrieved among these items a dusty cd player. At my last job in Detroit a goth co-worker gave me a cd she'd burned, but until now I was unable to play it. "Fleet Foxes." I've been listening to it nightly. It's given me great sustenance-- which, after all, is the purpose of art.
The music's simplicity gives it emotion-- for much of it, harmonious voices accompanied by simple guitar. The voices carry echoes of the Renaissance, but also American roots music, with maybe a reminder of the Fleetwoods, and a dash of stripped-down Moody Blues tossed in. For me it's a reminder of the mystery and simplicity of art, something I'd love to happily echo in my own work.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Winning the Battle
IN ONE WAY I've wasted my time on this blog the past couple years, to little apparent effect. But in another way it's been THE key battleground in the fight to change, and thereby save, literature.
The literary establishment believes in this blog's importance. Why else have two (at least) of their best and brightest-- Daniel Handler in San Francisco and another character in Brooklyn-- spent many thousands of hours reading it; making many hundreds of comments, of involved arguments-- so many I stopped posting them all.
They know the reality of what I said at the beginning-- that the literary rebellion was a campaign of ideas more than it was anything else. Books, zeens, actions, and shows were secondary. One couldn't overthrow the establishment without winning the debate with them. Win that debate, and their cause was lost. The floor of their premises would vanish beneath them.
It's a little strange that the establishment has believed in the potential of this rebellion more than have undergrounders themselves. The mandarins have behaved as if literary revolution was inevitable. Witness the comments of Tom Bissell in his 2003 Believer essay on the ULA; Aaron Hicklin in his foreword to the Black Book anthology; and Marty Moss-Coane's 2007 WHYY interview with me. Their concern was that we powerless undergrounders would soon have too much power-- to then begin excluding the excluders. Examine the sources. Their belief in the reality of literary revolution is palpable.
Why is that?
Because the establishment was on the receiving end of our noise. They were present, mainly in New York, when the many Page Six write-ups, and stunning actions like the KGB crash and "Howl" Protest, created for the underground cause tremendous buzz.
***********************
An analogy to this blog is what happened after D-Day during World War II. The allies achieved a tiny beachhead on Fortress Europe, but for weeks afterward were stalled. Close maneuvering occurred, as both sides concentrated more and more resources on a tiny spot. That tiny spot would determine the outcome of the war. The allies won the maneuvering, of course. They broke out of the trap, and then swiftly gobbled territory as they moved forward.
***********************
I'm only one undergrounder, and can't carry the entire cause alone. BUT-- these blog posts have not been unimportant. They're part of the foundation of ideas necessary to any upstart cultural moveWe can fail everywhere else, but ideas go on. They're in the heads now even of our enemies, and can't be removed.
Some important undergrounders wondered why I was spending time on the Paris Review/CIA matter. It's a crucial issue because it indisputably proves the corruption of the established literary world-- proved not by CIA involvement alone, but by the everpresent cover-up, which now stands full of cracks, on the verge of collapse. If there's any honesty among New York literary folk, they'll acknowledge this, and that I've won the argument.
Once this happens, the game's over.
(See related post at www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com)
The literary establishment believes in this blog's importance. Why else have two (at least) of their best and brightest-- Daniel Handler in San Francisco and another character in Brooklyn-- spent many thousands of hours reading it; making many hundreds of comments, of involved arguments-- so many I stopped posting them all.
They know the reality of what I said at the beginning-- that the literary rebellion was a campaign of ideas more than it was anything else. Books, zeens, actions, and shows were secondary. One couldn't overthrow the establishment without winning the debate with them. Win that debate, and their cause was lost. The floor of their premises would vanish beneath them.
It's a little strange that the establishment has believed in the potential of this rebellion more than have undergrounders themselves. The mandarins have behaved as if literary revolution was inevitable. Witness the comments of Tom Bissell in his 2003 Believer essay on the ULA; Aaron Hicklin in his foreword to the Black Book anthology; and Marty Moss-Coane's 2007 WHYY interview with me. Their concern was that we powerless undergrounders would soon have too much power-- to then begin excluding the excluders. Examine the sources. Their belief in the reality of literary revolution is palpable.
Why is that?
Because the establishment was on the receiving end of our noise. They were present, mainly in New York, when the many Page Six write-ups, and stunning actions like the KGB crash and "Howl" Protest, created for the underground cause tremendous buzz.
***********************
An analogy to this blog is what happened after D-Day during World War II. The allies achieved a tiny beachhead on Fortress Europe, but for weeks afterward were stalled. Close maneuvering occurred, as both sides concentrated more and more resources on a tiny spot. That tiny spot would determine the outcome of the war. The allies won the maneuvering, of course. They broke out of the trap, and then swiftly gobbled territory as they moved forward.
***********************
I'm only one undergrounder, and can't carry the entire cause alone. BUT-- these blog posts have not been unimportant. They're part of the foundation of ideas necessary to any upstart cultural moveWe can fail everywhere else, but ideas go on. They're in the heads now even of our enemies, and can't be removed.
Some important undergrounders wondered why I was spending time on the Paris Review/CIA matter. It's a crucial issue because it indisputably proves the corruption of the established literary world-- proved not by CIA involvement alone, but by the everpresent cover-up, which now stands full of cracks, on the verge of collapse. If there's any honesty among New York literary folk, they'll acknowledge this, and that I've won the argument.
Once this happens, the game's over.
(See related post at www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
What's Happening
When laid off, I hadn't been in Michigan long enough to qualify for unemployment. At the moment I'm an exile in my own country, scrambling for some stability. Ruthless class war has been waged on America's working people the last few decades, from both the Right and the Left. (The Left, after all, have been prime movers behind illegal immigration which has destroyed wages.) Throughout, working class writers have not been allowed to have a voice, as the way this literary movement has been treated has indicated.
PURE EVIL
Think about it. Some of the richest writers in America, led by Daniel Handler-- who's said to be worth hundreds of millions-- have spent their time relentlessly attacking one of the poorest . I own nothing-- nothing-- other than a duffle bag of clothing. My major struggle, like so many Americans-- like many underground writers-- is simply to survive. What was their motivation? To ensure that I and my colleagues have no voice. They didn't embrace dissent. They stomped on it.
PURE EVIL
Think about it. Some of the richest writers in America, led by Daniel Handler-- who's said to be worth hundreds of millions-- have spent their time relentlessly attacking one of the poorest . I own nothing-- nothing-- other than a duffle bag of clothing. My major struggle, like so many Americans-- like many underground writers-- is simply to survive. What was their motivation? To ensure that I and my colleagues have no voice. They didn't embrace dissent. They stomped on it.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
More Plimpton
There's an interesting article by Scott Sherman in the current (Feb 2) issue of The Nation magazine, which at least addresses the Paris Review/CIA controversy which the ULA and myself have been covering for some time. (On this blog, on January 7 most recently.) Our prodding since 2005 HAS had some effect in bringing to light this important story.
Sanders still accepts too much at face value. Plimpton's magazine living "on a shoestring" in the 60's? Come on! George himself came from a very wealthy family, and found support for the project from beginning to end from billionaires like Aga Khan to Jean Stein to Drue Heinz. Surely it wasn't THAT expensive to put out a literary journal. (The ULA has cranked out publications with its members all living in poverty or near-poverty.)
Also, the notion that George Plimpton didn't know from the start of his involvement with Paris Review about the CIA connection remains-- given his background-- a ridiculous idea. But if we keep pushing the literary establishment on this and other questions, maybe eventually they'll get it completely right.
Sanders still accepts too much at face value. Plimpton's magazine living "on a shoestring" in the 60's? Come on! George himself came from a very wealthy family, and found support for the project from beginning to end from billionaires like Aga Khan to Jean Stein to Drue Heinz. Surely it wasn't THAT expensive to put out a literary journal. (The ULA has cranked out publications with its members all living in poverty or near-poverty.)
Also, the notion that George Plimpton didn't know from the start of his involvement with Paris Review about the CIA connection remains-- given his background-- a ridiculous idea. But if we keep pushing the literary establishment on this and other questions, maybe eventually they'll get it completely right.
No Place to Stand
It was Archimedes who said, give him a place to stand and he'd move the world. I believe that. But what if you have no place to stand?
A Cultural Artifact
"Why don't you behave like the others?"
"Because I'm not like the others."
************************************
There's an interesting acknowledgement of class, for a moment, in a pretty bad movie from 1963, "Palm Springs Weekend." The movie's about frolicking college kids of the day. A jarring moment occurs when a gang of lower-class types crash a house party-- an incongruous, shocking scene, in a way. An incident of class war dropped into a piece of fluff. The disgust at wealth by the unnamed interlopers is palpable: Revolution lurking even then under the surface of dreamworld America.
"Because I'm not like the others."
************************************
There's an interesting acknowledgement of class, for a moment, in a pretty bad movie from 1963, "Palm Springs Weekend." The movie's about frolicking college kids of the day. A jarring moment occurs when a gang of lower-class types crash a house party-- an incongruous, shocking scene, in a way. An incident of class war dropped into a piece of fluff. The disgust at wealth by the unnamed interlopers is palpable: Revolution lurking even then under the surface of dreamworld America.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Inauguration Note
The "poem" read as part of the ceremonies was an embarassment for someone like myself who takes joy in listening to poetry-- to the music of poetry. The trend of simple-minded prose masquerading as poetry has to end! "Poets" themselves seem to forget that the art at one time was strictly memorized and spoken-- and so it depended on "Music"-- rhyme, alliteration, meter, euphony-- in order for it to be remembered. To be memorable, which the execrable poem read at the national celebration was not. Such a missed opportunity.
I was reading a bio of FDR by Conrad Black. The most memorable part of the book is when FDR quotes from an American poem-- as a message to be delivered by Wendell Wilkie to Churchill affirming solidarity to his cause. Churchill responded with some stanzas from a famous British work. What a literate age that was!-- when poetry could truly represent the best of a people and a culture.
The postmodern academy has given us nothing but quackery in poetry and prose alike. I envision this halting when a flood of new poets who understand the unbeatable power of the art form at its best take the stage.
I was reading a bio of FDR by Conrad Black. The most memorable part of the book is when FDR quotes from an American poem-- as a message to be delivered by Wendell Wilkie to Churchill affirming solidarity to his cause. Churchill responded with some stanzas from a famous British work. What a literate age that was!-- when poetry could truly represent the best of a people and a culture.
The postmodern academy has given us nothing but quackery in poetry and prose alike. I envision this halting when a flood of new poets who understand the unbeatable power of the art form at its best take the stage.
Monday, January 19, 2009
"Ode to Global Warming"
Penguins and polar bears in the streets of Detroit;
Mountains of white, snowmen on skis;
The skaters on Woodward look like the Red Wings!
You tell me there's global warming.
Ice-covered windshields that won't defrost;
River is frozen, sun has got lost;
Thermal underwear rising in cost!
Now you tell me there's global warming.
Oh bring back the sweat and the melt and the heat,
Rising temperature, 100 degrees;
So we can take off our coats and our shoes,
and snuggle our feet
in the burning hot sands of the closest beach!
Bring back to us global warming;
Oh, yeah, global warming,
Yes we must have again global warming!
Mountains of white, snowmen on skis;
The skaters on Woodward look like the Red Wings!
You tell me there's global warming.
Ice-covered windshields that won't defrost;
River is frozen, sun has got lost;
Thermal underwear rising in cost!
Now you tell me there's global warming.
Oh bring back the sweat and the melt and the heat,
Rising temperature, 100 degrees;
So we can take off our coats and our shoes,
and snuggle our feet
in the burning hot sands of the closest beach!
Bring back to us global warming;
Oh, yeah, global warming,
Yes we must have again global warming!
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Who's Right?
MANY "literary" writers dismiss this blog and myself as being too extreme-- "off the deep end"-- for their genteel tastes. This is chiefly because they don't like to be caused to think about discomforting things. They prefer the lit-world as it once was-- placid; immobile; unstimulating: "Where seldom is heard, a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day."
That I'm a fanatic for literature who strongly believes in what he's doing compounds the situation.
Yet who's been wrong, and who right?
Who's been right from the beginning about the Paris Review/CIA revelations?
Who was right about an established Insider author (Daniel Handler, it turned out) being the long-time demi-puppet attacker "Jimmy Grace"?
One could go point-by-point over the issues which have involved the underground rebellion and this blog the last eight years and see that I've usually turned out to be on the right path.
-Right about the grants corruption involving author Rick Moody and others.
-Right to want to discuss the oncoming Iraq war at Housing Works in 2003.
-Right about the Daniel Handler fake letter affair.
-Right about the Harpers plagiarism controversies.
-Right about the Big Money takeover of a small press organization.
-Right about the literary divide between rich and poor.
And so on, and so on.
With each tactical victory the establishment has become more hostile and abusive, lit-bloggers more closed-minded, and underground types more panicky.
IN THE WILDERNESS
The last anonymous demi-puppet to "amend" and distort my wiki bio portrays me as currently being "in the wilderness." I suppose I am.
Which leaves me to continue posting my ideas on my blogs and elsewhere, and hope that other writers catch up to me.
(See www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com for more.)
That I'm a fanatic for literature who strongly believes in what he's doing compounds the situation.
Yet who's been wrong, and who right?
Who's been right from the beginning about the Paris Review/CIA revelations?
Who was right about an established Insider author (Daniel Handler, it turned out) being the long-time demi-puppet attacker "Jimmy Grace"?
One could go point-by-point over the issues which have involved the underground rebellion and this blog the last eight years and see that I've usually turned out to be on the right path.
-Right about the grants corruption involving author Rick Moody and others.
-Right to want to discuss the oncoming Iraq war at Housing Works in 2003.
-Right about the Daniel Handler fake letter affair.
-Right about the Harpers plagiarism controversies.
-Right about the Big Money takeover of a small press organization.
-Right about the literary divide between rich and poor.
And so on, and so on.
With each tactical victory the establishment has become more hostile and abusive, lit-bloggers more closed-minded, and underground types more panicky.
IN THE WILDERNESS
The last anonymous demi-puppet to "amend" and distort my wiki bio portrays me as currently being "in the wilderness." I suppose I am.
Which leaves me to continue posting my ideas on my blogs and elsewhere, and hope that other writers catch up to me.
(See www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com for more.)
"Climate Wars"
Last night I listened to a program on a national Canadian station (CBC) about global warming, "Climate Wars." The narrator spoke about, among other things, "climate change denial." He spoke about how hot the planet was becoming. After the show the Canadian news came on. "Canada is still locked in a deep-freeze." The entire country has been blanketed in ice for months.
I was reminded about the classic Twilight Zone episode about a woman trying to survive as the sun moves closer and closer to our planet. It's an unprecedented heat wave. Just as conditions reach a terrible climax she wakes up. It turns out the sun is in fact moving away from us, and she's in an unprecedented deep-freeze.
Regarding experts: either they're misreading the data, or they're receiving flawed or gimmicked data.
Curious that scientists make "unarguable" predictions about thirty years out, but couldn't predict what's happening right now.
Scientists are not immune from gullibility. I recall the case of psychic Uri Geller, who could bend spoons and such with his brain waves. He passed with glowing reviews endless panels of scientists. "Experts." Then one day a magician caught his act and exposed him as a quack.
******************************************
What does this have to do with literature?
The "experts" are clearly wrong in that case also.
I was reminded about the classic Twilight Zone episode about a woman trying to survive as the sun moves closer and closer to our planet. It's an unprecedented heat wave. Just as conditions reach a terrible climax she wakes up. It turns out the sun is in fact moving away from us, and she's in an unprecedented deep-freeze.
Regarding experts: either they're misreading the data, or they're receiving flawed or gimmicked data.
Curious that scientists make "unarguable" predictions about thirty years out, but couldn't predict what's happening right now.
Scientists are not immune from gullibility. I recall the case of psychic Uri Geller, who could bend spoons and such with his brain waves. He passed with glowing reviews endless panels of scientists. "Experts." Then one day a magician caught his act and exposed him as a quack.
******************************************
What does this have to do with literature?
The "experts" are clearly wrong in that case also.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Playing the Price
In many ways the literary underground is stronger than it's ever been, with two organizations now carrying, in different ways, the message of change. (I have tangential relations with the more historic organization; no relations with the other.)
The dilemma remains what it's always been, for the two main groups and for the many stray actors like myself who operate largely outside them. That is: Marketing. How do you let people know on a large scale what we're doing? How does our kind of writer stand out against monster publishing companies with huge resources, or scores of small presses with SOME resources, or many hundreds of other writers groups with their own lit-journals or books or web sites?
Few people in either underground group will acknowledge that I solved the problem. The solution involves paying the price in getting the word out. This means, STANDING OUT from the literary mainstream in every way possible-- in ideas, products, actions, attitude, and energy. (Ideas first.) This was accomplished when I was active in the ULA. As contention was the cutting edge of the campaign, the strategy was not for the squeamish! At the outset in 2000 I quoted a pioneer slogan I'd seen once on the historic Oregon Trail: "The weak didn't make it. The timid never set out."
ONLY if we represented the most kickass balls-to-the-wall writers ever seen did the campaign have a chance to accomplish its goals. We were that! For a time we were.
Our most exciting action-- the KGB Crash-- was also the most notorious. It also created the greatest buzz, sending shock waves through New York which put our movement on the map. Should we have not done it?
I know what WON'T work. That's to refuse to stand out. To refuse to criticize the Overdog competition. To neglect to differentiate ourselves from other writers. (Indeed, we have to be not writers but zeensters, taking writing to another level.)
If, for instance, we refuse to write "negative" reviews about competitors as a way to say, "We're better!" then we may as well take every Marketing 101 book and every text written on the subject and toss it into a dumpster, and admit we're idiots.
The question comes down to whether you're a serious player, or just playing around.
*****************************************
See www.happyamericaliterature. blogspot.com for more underground thoughts-- and watch for my latest poem going up soon on my "Happy Writing" blog.
The dilemma remains what it's always been, for the two main groups and for the many stray actors like myself who operate largely outside them. That is: Marketing. How do you let people know on a large scale what we're doing? How does our kind of writer stand out against monster publishing companies with huge resources, or scores of small presses with SOME resources, or many hundreds of other writers groups with their own lit-journals or books or web sites?
Few people in either underground group will acknowledge that I solved the problem. The solution involves paying the price in getting the word out. This means, STANDING OUT from the literary mainstream in every way possible-- in ideas, products, actions, attitude, and energy. (Ideas first.) This was accomplished when I was active in the ULA. As contention was the cutting edge of the campaign, the strategy was not for the squeamish! At the outset in 2000 I quoted a pioneer slogan I'd seen once on the historic Oregon Trail: "The weak didn't make it. The timid never set out."
ONLY if we represented the most kickass balls-to-the-wall writers ever seen did the campaign have a chance to accomplish its goals. We were that! For a time we were.
Our most exciting action-- the KGB Crash-- was also the most notorious. It also created the greatest buzz, sending shock waves through New York which put our movement on the map. Should we have not done it?
I know what WON'T work. That's to refuse to stand out. To refuse to criticize the Overdog competition. To neglect to differentiate ourselves from other writers. (Indeed, we have to be not writers but zeensters, taking writing to another level.)
If, for instance, we refuse to write "negative" reviews about competitors as a way to say, "We're better!" then we may as well take every Marketing 101 book and every text written on the subject and toss it into a dumpster, and admit we're idiots.
The question comes down to whether you're a serious player, or just playing around.
*****************************************
See www.happyamericaliterature. blogspot.com for more underground thoughts-- and watch for my latest poem going up soon on my "Happy Writing" blog.
The Anti-Dissent Campaign
You know the worst part of Daniel Handler's "Jimmy Grace" behavior? As Grace he castigated me on this blog every time I shut off comments or deleted a post to get a break from his relentless sophistry. I was "censoring" him. Me! A pretty-much blackballoed writer who gets his voice out on the margins, through blogs and zeens. Handler is backed by a giant publishing company and has no difficulty getting his words into society, whether through his children's books or novels or writing essays for the New York Times. He may be the most widely circulated writer of today. (The current condition of literature: A well-rewarded cretin.) His own success didn't stop this mega-millionaire from carrying out a harassment campaign against an outcast writer who frankly lives in near-poverty.
Handler has droppped out, but I'm still being barraged by another character who lives on the other end of the country, and likewise screams when I don't allow every one of his onerous one-note comments against my existence as a writer. Is he another oft-published success story?
Handler has droppped out, but I'm still being barraged by another character who lives on the other end of the country, and likewise screams when I don't allow every one of his onerous one-note comments against my existence as a writer. Is he another oft-published success story?
Monday, January 12, 2009
Responsibility
NOTEWORTHY is how those who inhabit establishment literature will take no responsibility for it. Yes, some will admit the System is corrupt. But don't blame the individuals who make up the System! They have no choice; can change nothing. It's all too-powerful, you see-- which was the attitude of the go-along-to-get-along crowd in the Soviet Union.
It's a hallmark of the apparatchik mentality.
It's a hallmark of the apparatchik mentality.
The WASPy Overclass
As America wakes up to hard times-- its nostalgic global-warming glow a thing of the past-- is there anything more anachronistic and irrelevant than the literary establishment? "Rick" and "Dave," "Miranda" and "Jon" and "Jay" continue to circulate moodily through their successions of wine-tastings and cocktail parties, as isolated and bovinely stupid as a forgotten powder-wig aristocracy. Events of our times are passing them by. The preppy writers resemble the plastically-preserved residents of a defunct museum. They represent a corrupt and dwindling Age of Money. How long will they be able to get by on their quaint charm and childish posturing?
On Authenticity
"Authentic" in the age of the virtual is not a bad word-- there's nothing wrong with promoting this aspect of a writer. Underground writers HAVE to emphasize their differences from the standard prep school/trust fund/Ivy Leaguers who dominate the literary mainstream.
Undergrounders live more authentic lives, in that
A.) they've been knocked around by life a little, or a lot;
B.) they're more in touch with the lives of ordinary Americans.
To me they're the AUTHENTIC voice of America now. Nothing to be ashamed of about that!
Undergrounders live more authentic lives, in that
A.) they've been knocked around by life a little, or a lot;
B.) they're more in touch with the lives of ordinary Americans.
To me they're the AUTHENTIC voice of America now. Nothing to be ashamed of about that!
Truth versus Lies
THE POINT about the Paris Review/CIA story is that American literature degrades itself when it distorts its own history. If it can't be believed about this, then how can it be believed about anything?
There are writers out there whose brains are so diseased by postmodern philosophy that truth has no meaning to them. They disqualify themselves to speak as America's voice.
Daniel Handler, one of America's most successful writers-- bonded member of literature's Inside game-- posted hundreds of comments on this blog the last few years under his "Jimmy Grace" identity trying to squelch the PR/CIA story, and this campaign against corruption which led to its revelation. If the story is unimportant, why the bother? Why did James Linville send me over 100 crazy emails on the topic, and travel from London to NYC in 2007 to consult Paris Review editors on how to play it?
If it was unimportant, why did they not from the beginning admit the claim?
To them it's very important. The George, Being George book worries over CIA "contamination" of the journal's reputation.
The matter is important for what it says about what American literature became.
(Watch for some quotes at www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com which give an indication of the sea change in perspective and focus undergone by American literature over the past six decades.)
There are writers out there whose brains are so diseased by postmodern philosophy that truth has no meaning to them. They disqualify themselves to speak as America's voice.
Daniel Handler, one of America's most successful writers-- bonded member of literature's Inside game-- posted hundreds of comments on this blog the last few years under his "Jimmy Grace" identity trying to squelch the PR/CIA story, and this campaign against corruption which led to its revelation. If the story is unimportant, why the bother? Why did James Linville send me over 100 crazy emails on the topic, and travel from London to NYC in 2007 to consult Paris Review editors on how to play it?
If it was unimportant, why did they not from the beginning admit the claim?
To them it's very important. The George, Being George book worries over CIA "contamination" of the journal's reputation.
The matter is important for what it says about what American literature became.
(Watch for some quotes at www.happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com which give an indication of the sea change in perspective and focus undergone by American literature over the past six decades.)
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Eggers' Puppet Empire
SOMEDAY I want to do a report for this blog on the vast marionette empire ruled by The Dave. Anyone who examines American literature today runs into his delusionary flunkies everyplace-- brainwashed acolytes goose-stepping in their metaphorical uniforms across the literary landscape.
At the top of it all stands the Dictator, whose every gesture from his San Francisco fortress sends followers into paroxyms of emotion and screams. "Seig Heil! Seig Heil!" They give him unquestioning obedience. He's surrounded himself with the biggest collection of crackpots seen since the Third Reich. Creepy children's author Daniel Handler certainly is one of the most fanatical, a loyally subservient dog eager to destroy his scant integrity in service to his master. The women of the Eggers Reich, Vendela Vida and Heidi Julavits, severe creatures with pulled-back hair and purple lipstick, are no less fanatical. Beneath this layer is a conglomeration of stooges, sycophants, and marginally coherent psychopaths, from cryptopuppet plagiarist Tom Bissell to plagiarism apologists Roger Hodge and Jon Lethem, mad scientist George Saunders, insane idiot John Hodgman, groveling uberfan Matthias Schwartz, and the rest of the jumbled postmodern menagerie. Someone like Rick Moody is more-or-less a propped-up equal, Duce to Dave's Fuehrer, wearing a brighter uniform with more phony medals and shiny buttons on the front but less substance inside it.
At the top of it all stands the Dictator, whose every gesture from his San Francisco fortress sends followers into paroxyms of emotion and screams. "Seig Heil! Seig Heil!" They give him unquestioning obedience. He's surrounded himself with the biggest collection of crackpots seen since the Third Reich. Creepy children's author Daniel Handler certainly is one of the most fanatical, a loyally subservient dog eager to destroy his scant integrity in service to his master. The women of the Eggers Reich, Vendela Vida and Heidi Julavits, severe creatures with pulled-back hair and purple lipstick, are no less fanatical. Beneath this layer is a conglomeration of stooges, sycophants, and marginally coherent psychopaths, from cryptopuppet plagiarist Tom Bissell to plagiarism apologists Roger Hodge and Jon Lethem, mad scientist George Saunders, insane idiot John Hodgman, groveling uberfan Matthias Schwartz, and the rest of the jumbled postmodern menagerie. Someone like Rick Moody is more-or-less a propped-up equal, Duce to Dave's Fuehrer, wearing a brighter uniform with more phony medals and shiny buttons on the front but less substance inside it.
"Walking Man"
BECAUSE of the hectic nature of my life trying to survive in the current economic climate, I've been tardy with many of my planned undertakings, including getting my review blog under full steam.
Among the books I have yet to review is Walking Man by Tim W. Brown-- so I'll review it here and now on my main blog which anyway has a bigger audience.
Walking Man is a satirical novel about the "zine" print underground of the last decade; the story of a prototypical zinester named Brian Walker whose DIY publication, appropriately enough, is about walking. Appropriate, as a nod to the quirky essence of DIY with its emphasis on authenticity. The publication is an amalgamous nod to legendary zeens, most reminiscent to me of "Pathetic Life." The character himself is from Midwest "underdog origins":
"--Brian Walker came of age in a time and place where declining expectations comprised the norm."
The novel documents Brian's brief celebrity and subsequent decline. Tim W. Brown pokes fun at the zine scene of the day but at the same time celebrates it, focusing on a variety of crazy personalities and the intramural disputes intrinsic to the scene.
It is, in fact, a history of the zine phenomenon, and explanation of same. THIS IS THE ORIGIN of the Underground Literary Alliance, and the literary Rebellion, to the extent that the six founding members of the ULA were all zeensters who'd discovered one another's work through the networks and review publications Brown ably satirizes.
If I have any quibble with the book-- a minor quibble-- it's that he focuses on the 1989-91 time period, when to me the peak of the phenomenon came four or five years later.
Walking Man is a fun read and great background to underground literature of today.
Click on
www.bronxriverpress.com
for more information.
Among the books I have yet to review is Walking Man by Tim W. Brown-- so I'll review it here and now on my main blog which anyway has a bigger audience.
Walking Man is a satirical novel about the "zine" print underground of the last decade; the story of a prototypical zinester named Brian Walker whose DIY publication, appropriately enough, is about walking. Appropriate, as a nod to the quirky essence of DIY with its emphasis on authenticity. The publication is an amalgamous nod to legendary zeens, most reminiscent to me of "Pathetic Life." The character himself is from Midwest "underdog origins":
"--Brian Walker came of age in a time and place where declining expectations comprised the norm."
The novel documents Brian's brief celebrity and subsequent decline. Tim W. Brown pokes fun at the zine scene of the day but at the same time celebrates it, focusing on a variety of crazy personalities and the intramural disputes intrinsic to the scene.
It is, in fact, a history of the zine phenomenon, and explanation of same. THIS IS THE ORIGIN of the Underground Literary Alliance, and the literary Rebellion, to the extent that the six founding members of the ULA were all zeensters who'd discovered one another's work through the networks and review publications Brown ably satirizes.
If I have any quibble with the book-- a minor quibble-- it's that he focuses on the 1989-91 time period, when to me the peak of the phenomenon came four or five years later.
Walking Man is a fun read and great background to underground literature of today.
Click on
www.bronxriverpress.com
for more information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
