Another guest's opinion - Are the Times A Changing?
from Deb O'Connor
"Sitting here listening to Bob Dylan singing his timeless old classic, performed by the master fairly recently, my handsome spouse decided that Bob was injecting a note of cynicism into his vocals, suggesting that maybe the times weren't changing, or at least not quickly enough or in the right direction.
From my vantage point of three score years, I got to thinking about the song and how passionately I believed in its truth back in my youth, confident that Dylan was right, and waves of new thinking and understanding were about to sweep away the old ideas and prejudices. A new tolerant world would emerge, where humans looked after each other and together solved the problems facing us.
So what happened? Change has certainly overwhelmed us since then, but much of it has only hurt our common humanity more. To make it worse, the dire predictions of ecological ruin are coming true in our own lifetimes.
But the Powers that Be thought we had all the time in the world to make things right: technology would fix our mistakes and after all, poverty would always be with us, so why bother trying to cure that.
There's an old saying that might apply here: Too soon old, too late smart. Yep, that's us alright. We know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
I suspect my spouse is right and old Bob is as discouraged as I am about now.
"Sitting here listening to Bob Dylan singing his timeless old classic, performed by the master fairly recently, my handsome spouse decided that Bob was injecting a note of cynicism into his vocals, suggesting that maybe the times weren't changing, or at least not quickly enough or in the right direction.
From my vantage point of three score years, I got to thinking about the song and how passionately I believed in its truth back in my youth, confident that Dylan was right, and waves of new thinking and understanding were about to sweep away the old ideas and prejudices. A new tolerant world would emerge, where humans looked after each other and together solved the problems facing us.
So what happened? Change has certainly overwhelmed us since then, but much of it has only hurt our common humanity more. To make it worse, the dire predictions of ecological ruin are coming true in our own lifetimes.
But the Powers that Be thought we had all the time in the world to make things right: technology would fix our mistakes and after all, poverty would always be with us, so why bother trying to cure that.
There's an old saying that might apply here: Too soon old, too late smart. Yep, that's us alright. We know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
I suspect my spouse is right and old Bob is as discouraged as I am about now.
29 comments:
When you cast your mind back to the way things were at the time the song was written, it is clear that much upheaval has taken place.
A massive sea-change has happened overall in attitudes towards women, people of different ethnicity, people with a different sexual orientation, people with life-difficulties, whether a physical or a mental handicap, etc. The way parents treat children has been rigorously overhauled, too.
One problem, as Deb indicates, is change happens soooo slowly and in such incremental steps that it is almost imperceptible moment to moment, day to day but viewed as the last period of 40 years compared to the previous period of 40 years, yes, a lot of change has happened.
And yes, it is something over 45 years ago that the song was penned.
The other problem, which is again one Deb has identified, is that there is still a long way to go --some of the desired change has not been implemented or not fully enough, and, there have been setbacks --some change we successfully effected has been snatched back from us.
Then, there is the fact that we were young and naive. We did not see the full picture in a lot of instances. Some change we brought into play would be serve as examples of "Be careful what you wish for." Some of it brought unforseen side effects that were worse than what we were trying to change. As a single example: when people were singing the praises of smoking a little weed, dropping some acid, no one foresaw the huge drug cartels, the massive levels of drug-addiction (to other kinds of dope than marijuana or LSD like crack, hillbilly heroin, etc), the resulting devastation to families, rising levels of poverty and crime, etc. We thought it would be more blue skies and pretty fluffy clouds than that.
Also, there are some problems that we only saw as a tiny sliver of their full reality and so idealistic fixes seemed much more possible than they ever really were or will be. In the realm of the machinery of political power, I would say the 60s rose-coloured glasses seriously underestimated what could be changed, how it might be changed and, perhaps most importantly, how much new idealistic people might be easily corrupted in all those ideals once they actually achieved any degree of power -- just like the "old" people. Power corrupts, young and not-so-young, new and old.
The Beatles, The Stones, The Who, etc all sang against the system created by capitalism that makes only The Few sinfully rich while keeping The Vast-Many poor -- all the while being some of The Few who were getting sinfully rich.
Much of their "counter-culture" quickly became a smoke and mirrors trick to cover hypocrisy. It is interesting that the 60s generation and the change-minded folks infected by it have made the biggest inroads into the culture that is mass-consumed -- much more than any other area of life, like economic systems or political power.
I think the solution to the problem Deb ponders here is to keep fighting for change, guard the change we have won through hard-fought struggles, recognize where we were wrong through being over-idealistic, see where change is called for that we never envisioned back then and not degenerate into being overly cynical or lazy about doing what we can. Negativity about the possibility of change is the enemy.
And I have great hope for the generation that is coming up. People I know who are 14 to 35 years of age have very energetic views and are very excited about seeing the world differently than those they label as "older people" do, just as things were back then, with us having our excitement about seeing things so very differently than our elders did then.
Which brings me to my final point: eventually we learned that there was much to be learned from those with more experience. Writing off anyone "over 30" was foolish, empty twaddle then and it still is now.
How's this for a "timeless classic"? From 'Modern Times'. A particular favourite of mine (DJC):
There's an evenin' haze settlin' over town
Starlight by the edge of the creek
The buyin' power of the proletariat's gone down
Money's gettin' shallow and weak
Well, the place I love best is a sweet memory
It's a new path that we trod
They say low wages are a reality
If we want to compete abroad
My cruel weapons have been put on the shelf
Come sit down on my knee
You are dearer to me than myself
As you yourself can see
While I'm listening to the steel rails hum
Got both eyes tight shut
Just sitting here trying to keep the hunger from
Creeping it's way into my gut
Chorus:
Meet me at the bottom, don't lag behind
Bring me my boots and shoes
You can hang back or fight your best on the frontline
Sing a little bit of these workingman's blues
Well, I'm sailin' on back, ready for the long haul
Tossed by the winds and the seas
I'll drag 'em all down to hell and I'll stand 'em at the wall
I'll sell 'em to their enemies
I'm tryin' to feed my soul with thought
Gonna sleep off the rest of the day
Sometimes no one wants what we got
Sometimes you can't give it away
Now the place is ringed with countless foes
Some of them may be deaf and dumb
No man, no woman knows
The hour that sorrow will come
In the dark I hear the night birds call
I can feel a lover's breath
I sleep in the kitchen with my feet in the hall
Sleep is like a temporary death
(chorus)
Well, they burned my barn, and they stole my horse
I can't save a dime
I got to be careful, I don't want to be forced
Into a life of continual crime
I can see for myself that the sun is sinking
How I wish you were here to see
Tell me now, am I wrong in thinking
That you have forgotten me?
Now they worry and they hurry and they fuss and they fret
They waste your nights and days
Them I will forget
But you I'll remember always
Old memories of you to me have clung
You've wounded me with your words
Gonna have to straighten out your tongue
It's all true, everything you've heard
(chorus)
In you, my friend, I find no blame
Wanna look in my eyes, please do
No one can ever claim
That I took up arms against you
All across the peaceful sacred fields
They will lay you low
They'll break your horns and slash you with steel
I say it so it must be so
Now I'm down on my luck and I'm black and blue
Gonna give you another chance
I'm all alone and I'm expecting you
To lead me off in a cheerful dance
I got a brand new suit and a brand new wife
I can live on rice and beans
Some people never worked a day in their life
Don't know what work even means
Sheeesh! So much bland gland debris for such little insight.
==============================
BOTTOMS UP TO THE BOTTOM LINE BOTTOM FEEDERS
“Rave reviews have followed improvements to the twice-yearly survey of employee engagement.”
-- financial industry newszine
Imagine that. . .
the suits are stark raving glad
management gone manage mental
pouring over delightful details of data
percentiles exceeding Excel expectations
by a disorder of magnitude.
Bottoms up to the bottom-line bottom feeders!
Digitally distributed
over prairies and mountain ranges
wildermess and urban ranges
in the bling of an i
or double-crossed t
“The impact will resonate throughout the business sector
& adjoining neighborhoodlums”
gushed the SVP, Dept of Expansionary Efficiencies.
“This is paper cutting edge stuff,”
asserted the AVP, Dept of Dynamic Inaction
“This will impact deeper than the thorn in our competitor’s side,”
trumpeted the Chief Excretory Officer.
It’s concise
to the point
to the Power Point
of impoetency
the communicult of communication
the ejaculatté of banality boners
It’s not about life.
It’s about bottom.lines@the-end-of-the-day.com
Human Resources has no language
It communicates in binary code
It’s
neither
black
nor
white
0000000000000000000
nor
1111111111111111111
but
1010011101010010010
blends
of
gray
the pasty pallor of cadavers
on stainless steel
in florescensual rooms
Dumpster the diversity
of 2’s, 3’s, 4’s,
jagged 5’s
spicy 6’s
cutting edge 7’s
the upright infinity of 8’s
and flaccid 9’s
Everything is
off or on
no or yes
0 or 1
dead or alive.
Discouraged? Just be happy that you aren't picking bananas in Costa Rica. Here's a link to a story about a London (that's UK) retailer who is doing something to help those folk.
Time now, I imagine, for someone to pop up with some version of the-market-knows-best baloney.
As opposed to those who espouse the state knows best baloney
DJC, I'm worried about your mental state. Listening to "Modern Times" too often is likely to induce a dark depression unbefitting a cheeky wit like yourself.
May I recommend "Love and Theft" as an alternative? Much more upbeat, and the swinging "Summer Days" always gives me a boost, although that may be related to my ever growing appreciation for his drummer, Jim Keltner.
I find it admirable, Deb, that you persist in posting these interesting guest entries plus your comments on other entries in face of the unfortunate fact that every sighting of your name, your initials --and your ideas-- sparks personal invective and untoward insult from one particular person.
I am sure this must make it personally difficult at times even though you must be aware that this is just one individual going off on tangents with no agreement from others.
I encourage you to continue.
What you have to say is interesting and welcome.
My mental state is more affected by modern times than it is by Modern Times, Deb.
That said, remember Dylan's cheekiest witticism, one I doubt anyone else could have gotten away with: I'm liberal -but to a degree/I want everybody to be free/ But if you think I'll let Barry Goldwater/Move in next door and marry my daughter/ You must think I'm crazy.
At first glance it appears anti-Semetic, Goldwater being Jewish. But then Bob Dylan (nee Zimmerman) is Jewish too so (a) the edge of the slight -if there is one- is dulled and (b) the possibility emerges that all it is is a left winger saying he'd never let a right winger (Goldwater was front and centre with Gen. Curtis LeMay in the "Bomb the hell out of North Vietnam" crowd) move in next door and marry his daughter -a sentiment many Americans of the time held when it came to blacks and Jews.
Goldwater's grandparents, on one side, were Jewish. As to Barry himself, Goldwater was an Episcopalian from birth. He did acknowledge that Jewish ancestry, though, with pride.
On Americans of the 50s/60s not wanting to live next door to blacks and Jews:
Do we have something similar today:
..in Colborne, some people don't want any more "soup kitchen" families with parenting issues;
.. in Port Hope, the Deputy Mayor himself expresses a worry that "affordable" housing will bring down property values.
This article in today's Star makes the point that poverty is not only an economic crisis, but also a human rights crisis, suggesting that strategies must focus not merely on enrichment, but also on empowerment.
Thanks to the anonymous poster for the encouraging words. I'd like to assure him/her that after 20+ years working in the anti poverty movement, arguing social policy with politicians ranging from lowly municipal councillors up to several provincial and federal cabinet ministers from all 3 major parties, that I am not scared off that easily.
As Churchill said - Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead!! At least I think it was Churchill, sounds like something he would have said.
Isn't Bob Dylan a Christian convert? He has a Christmas album out & has been known to sing gospel. But the word "Jewish" is overloaded - it can mean a religion (something you choose) or a culture/ethnicity (something you didn't choose)
A couple of decades earlier than Churchill:
"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!"
"Admiral David Glasgow Farragut (1801-1870). Aboard Hartford, Farragut entered Mobile Bay, Alabama, 5 August 1864, in two columns, with armored monitors leading and a fleet of wooden ships following. When the lead monitor Tecumseh was demolished by a mine, the wooden ship Brooklyn stopped, and the line drifted in confusion toward Fort Morgan. As disaster seemed imminent, Farragut gave the orders embodied by these famous words. He swung his own ship clear and headed across the mines, which failed to explode. The fleet followed and anchored above the forts, which, now isolated, surrendered one by one. The torpedoes to which Farragut and his contemporaries referred would today be described as tethered mines."
No, I think that was Roadrunner.
It might be noted that the feminist ideology over the past few decades have created a situation of future impoverishment.
Boys are dropping out of school in unprecedented numbers. We know where this will lead. And why is it happening.
For decades I have heard the mantra that women are "nurturers." Well OK, the vast vast vast majority of elementary school teachers and day care workers are females. There is a large proportion of female teachers in secondary schools. If they are nurturers, as many claim, have enormous influence over males in their formative years, then why are they unrelentingly negligent towards boys in the educational system.
In virtually every undergraduate program in universities accross the land, females are in the majority. The feminist ideology espoused equality, not supremacy. The idea was to dismantle the patriarchy, not replace it with an equally repressive matriarchy.
There has been a enormous increase of single parent families, predominantly consisting of single women. Why are they failing to nurture their sons to excel at school? Why are they perpetuating their poverty.
Unlike some self-appointed anti-poverty activists who grew up with advantages that I could only dream of in my own upbringing, I lived in poverty.
My father was a cobbler who committed suicide by sucking off the exhaust pipe of a 49 Chevy when was 13. (this is a father who failed to be a father by betraying his own son. Depression? Give it up. The man was selfish and spineless to the ultimate degree) So my mother became a dishwasher at the Ontario Hospital.
I know what impoverishment is.
Nevertheless, it was not an impediment to my life, or to what I wanted to achieve. I had to endure petty people who would yell across the Cobourg street, "You're as crazy as your old man."
Anti-poverty activists are largely self-appointed whiners with a bloated sense of entitlement from everyone else except from themselves.
If poverty is increasing, then it reflects a pathetic picture of the failure of anti-poverty activists to be imaginative and creative in bringing the poor up to a higher level.
It's the same mantra -- more money, the poor want more and more -- from others, of course.
Speaking of bloated sense of self, it appears objective reality does not exist; rather the world is only there to the extent it can be filtered through this man's particular experience. How odd.
You, sir, behave so much like all you describe yourself as disliking that it is astounding.
According to the criteria of social activists, I grew up in a disadvantaged family, and in spite of that, I didn't fall onto the welfare rolls. I didn't suck anyone's tax money, unlike some other parasite on this blog.
It seems that no one on this blog could care less about the message implanted in that blowhard's posting: that boys have been abandoned in the educational system. This couldn't-care-less-attitude doesn't make anyone any better then he is. Shoot the messenger, bury the message.
I do have a son in elementary and I am concerned about the feminization of the curriculum to favour girls to the detriment of girls. And what is the ratio of female teachers to male teachers in the elementary schools? Does anyone know? Does anyone care?
Columnist, Matt Gurney, in the National Post: "According to an official I spoke with at the Ontario College of Teachers, roughly 70% of teachers in Ontario are women.
That 70% includes both elementary and secondary schools. As far as elementary school is concerned it is a virtual lockout for male teachers. Boys have no role models.
And the women readers of this blog have expressed more concern about the size of a man's genitals than the dismal educational prospects for boys. Where are all the caring common good socialists -- beating up poets.
Regarding a gem of insight being hidden among a torrent of blow-hard words: I am reminded of the old saying that even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
It is not just in the school system that a lack of good male role models manifests itself. It is true of a larger percentage of families than it was in that different society of the past. It is true of organizations like Scouts, Big Brothers, sports teams (have you noticed more women coaches for boys teams and less men coaches?)
The women's liberation movement was not the only societal upheaval in the past 40 to 50 years. Unforseen side effects of fostering liberalized attitudes to "recreational" drug use is equally to blame for the absence of good male patterns for kids to follow. I would say the same for the absolute day-to-night reversal of boundaries around sexual modesty and propriety: it was good to change staid, repressive sexual attitudes but we have now seen that the pendulum can swing too far in the opposite direction.
TV is the most pervasive of all mainstream cultural forms. How many positive role models are there on TV? Is that something that molds societal attitudes or do societal attitudes form what is presented on TV?
Challenging the unquestioning attitude towards patriarchal authority whether in government, the family, schools, sports teams, our cultural forums or anywhere else was overall a positive thing but there are unexpected consequences that are clearly undesireable.
Many men are unsure of how to show strength and be manly without being offensive to sensibilities, etc. In my mind, being seen as an affront to "political correctness" should never slow anyone down. Aside from that, though, there is the need to find a balance between showing all that is positive in male strength without falling in with all that is negative in male dominance, which, as a man, I definitely see as male weakness.
I like the view summarized nicely in the saying, "A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child."
There is a nice balance there between being male, being strong and having a sensibility that should be highly valued.
It is a reality of attitude-change gone too far that any man who is actually helping a chilld, whether as a teacher, a neighbour, a coach, a mentor, a "Bib Brother" etc is viewed as suspect to a degree that many, many men simply steer clear of those roles.
It is always amusing to observe the behaviour of those who are always quickest to shriek "Hypocrisy" at others.
There is no hesitation on this person's part about equating "beating up" this individual (singular) with beating up on poets (plural). However, no one is allowed to extrapolate this individual's unceasing, unwelcome, untoward, coarse, vituperative attacks on multiple women (plural) posting here as an indication of an overall poor attitude to women (as generalized).
Coming at this a different way, I don't think the extension to "beating up on poets" has any foundation for at least two reasons.
1. I am only aware of one person publicly identifying as a poet here. In fact, there might be more poets posting here but if they haven't self-identified that way, it can hardly be concluded that they are or are not being beat up for that. So, perhaps, "beating up on a poet" might be a somewhat understandable conclusion. However, see point 2 below.
2. I have read what this person labels his "poetry." Few -- except he himself -- would be tempted to call him a poet. Scribbling rambling, repetitive prose and then breaking it up into separate shorter lines is not the same as composing poetry. Saying nothing original in more than 40 years has nothing in common with being creative. The targets might be different but the insults are the same. The same catch-phrases have been used over and over again for decades; endlessly regurgitated are the same things first said in high school. I doubt any of it was original even back then but if it ever was, being stuck in the rut of doing the same schtick over and over again makes it boringly predictable. Such dire predictability is the death of art.
Last Nov 5, the Toronto Star reported that a mere 10 percent of elementary school teachers are males. (Recall that feminists past and present espouse equality, not supremacy or dominance).
Last October 22, the Globe & Mail reported that the "Education Ministry says it has no publicly available research on the reasons that boys score 21 percentage points below girls on the Grade 6 writing exam (78 per cent of girls reach the provincial standard, compared with 57 per cent of boys). The girls excel, the boys scrape by, and yet no one apparently has asked the question why. Nor does the gender gap rate a mention on the two-page “highlights” document on provincial test results. Why? Is it possible to imagine a similar gender gap with girls lagging being similarly buried?"
The answer? Women on this blog are noticably silent on this issue, except, of course, their abiding interest in genital size and laughter at a woman betraying and cheating on her husband. Pathetic.
Over the past 40 years of feminist ideology, the curriculum has been altered to favour females. Textbooks are selected for their feminist favouritism. What is there in school that would interest males? Do the 90 percent of female teachers (nurturers as feminist ideology has it) know how to bring out ther best in males, or do they send out the underlying message that boys are not good, that they grow up to become men, and men, as we all know from Grahame Woods, the mental health specialist, in his column published last year in Northumberland oday, asserted that Montreal killer, Marc Lepine represents all men.
The Financial Times, Nov 5, revealed that "Men make up half of the workforce but have shouldered more than three quarters of the 5.1m job losses since the recession started... Women have lost jobs, but at a less calamitous rate. They tend to be employed in areas such as white-collar clerical work and hold three quarters of the jobs in education and healthcare, sectors that have expanded slightly this year."
So why don't the unionists and socialists like Ben Burd and his ilk not address this increasing problem? -- scared to death of feminist?, or just too soaked in their ideology to notice? This is a serious labour issue. Who cares?
Over the past year I have read three news articles written by women about how many women suffer from depression. They flout statistics which prove that far more women suffer from depression than men, and that this discrepancy deserves to be addressed.
Canstat also indicates that four times as many men commit suicide as women. Who cares? Obviously, not feminists, nor women in general. Men are expendable. Men are to be nagged about their lack of eagerness to do housework. Yep that reflects the skewed priorities of too many women.
Why is this important to me? (because it obviously is of no importance by any of the practitioners of the so-called common good) Because my cowardly father committed suicide, that's why.
Oh yes, I expect to hear the same whiners complaining that I view the world through my own experience. They are right. They are also the same kind of common good folk who tormented me in this small town, yelling "You're as crazy as your old man." And still I have to put up with the scurrilous yelling of "Wally is a Woman-Hater who beats women in back alleys."
Why would any woman dare post a comment knowing that the Poet will then villify her with charges of being a woman hating feminist for months to come?
Not worth it - life is too short to waste a moment of it playing his stupid games.
Trouble is that his rants effectively silence us, a classic technique used by so many woman hating, insecure men like him.
Obviously it works as I seem to be the only woman who dares to continue posting in the face of this abuse.
Geez I hope this thread dies a natural death soon!
Deb's Guest Posts always produce the longest threads.
Good for her.
Leaving the Poet completely out of this, I hope my point is not lost that when women are attacked on a personal, unrelenting basis, they tend to withdraw; their participation and insight lost completely.
It is a well known technique to silence those one disagres with, and it is particularly effective when used on women, who were mostly raised to be "nice" and turn away from conflict.
I really do believe women hesitate to post on blogs for reasons like this. I know it has stopped me in the past when I've felt particularly intimidated.
If the Burd Report values the opinions of the female half of the population this might be worth thinking about before being dismissed so casually.
Deb: Wally probably believes -nay, labours under- the splendidly fanciful and delightfully pleasant- delusions of the splendidly fanciful and delightfully delusional Richard Florida, futurist, artistic promotionist, nonsensical nonsensinist advocate of the childish idea that an economy can be based on abstract art, jangly architecture and, of cours, lousy poetry.
Celebrate Wally's continued efforts at recovery, Deb. Dance. Make things out of tin pie plates and call it art. Strain your gullet in street dub. Learn macremae using cast of remnants of of our land-line heritage. Dig out that old O-Peech-EE yo-yo and teach Third World orpahns to Walk-The-Dog. Engage. Unite. Interact. And above all -Network.
And for God's sake Deb, do it all before Wally turns what I've just written into yet another who-let-the-dogs-out piece of doggerel.
Thread dead. Agreed?
Merkin Muffley is a character played by Peter Sellers in Dr Strangelove. (Merkin = slang for female pubic area or pudendum; muff = a woman's pubic area or genitalia, or specifically, the pubic hair/fur/wig for the female crotch.)
Merkin Muffley’s comments on this blog reflect his animosity towards my poetic manifestations. They also reflect inadequacy in artistic comment. Nevertheless, the pseudo-pseudonym disparaged my work, so I exercise the right to defend my good poetic name.
Let me begin with these comments by Dr Alec Lucas former head of the English Dept, McGill University, written in his Introduction to my first book of poetry, Walking On the Greenhouse Roof.
“He writes with gusto and sincerity. His poems are characterized by an intensity that may owe something to the neo romanticism of the age, but that owe most, directly to Keeler's own experiences in life. Gusto and intensity do not of course make art, but when they are combined, as in his poetry, with an unusual gift for creating images the results are striking … Perceptive and sensitive as a human being, Keeler is still fully conscious of the exacting demands placed by the formalistic on the artist, of the need for pattern in structure and rhythm in movement, of imaginative insight harmonized by tone and vision through image as substantive and symbolic detail. Yet, for all that, in writing of Walking On the Greenhouse Roof, I have to fight a tendency to slip into paying tribute to "untutored genius" and "native wood notes wild," for it is the poet's naivete that seems to give his work much of its distinction. I use the word in no pejorative sense, but simply to indicate one of the over riding qualities of the verse … There is nothing here of a fear of words…”
Governor-General Award (Canada’s highest literary award) recipient, Joe Rosenblatt, recently had this to say about my recent poetic work: "Wally Keeler is the only poet I know who lives so much in the realm of the imagination that he actually anthropomorphizes poetic devices in minutiae, to the extent that metaphor becomes a living morphism with human attributes, similes become bystanders in a bank robbery, rhythms turn into rivers, and other auxiliaries of poetics, metamorphose into a social organism called The Peoples Republic of Poetry. Even the title of a book has no defense against the barbed and serrated witticism of Citizen Wally.”
Governor-General Award recipient, bill bissett, recently had this to say about my work, “hey wally xcellent love yr book [1st INTERIM REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON THE CAUSES AND MANIFESTATIONS OF DIVERGENT THINK PROCEDURE CONCERNING THE 1ST 10 YEARS OF THE HISTORY OF THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF POETRY] n ium workin my poetik licens thanks love bill hope yr raging n totalee xcellent nyes”
Multiple book poet, Robert Priest, recently had this to say, “His poetry abandons nothing and sings everything. He's a trickster, a subvert, a secular angel and a most inventive rascal.”
Just for good measure, Lionel Kearns, wrote, “Like any great word-mechanic, Wally Keeler ratchets up language to the level of revelation, as he cranks out a singular testament that is simultaneously familiar and absurd. Warning: this book could realign your vision.”
So if fraudster Merkin Muffley, or anyone else wants to disparage my creative, poetic work, they had better be prepared to back up their IDIOTIC and IGNO-RANT assertions by milqtoast rhyme schemsters. I couldn't care less about the unassaible fact that I am a far better creative writer than anyone else in this community and I see no reason why I should be ashamed or have to hide my talent from the abundant mediocrity this blog by a large number of leftist-oriented commentators that permeates this blog.
That's it, this is the last post. Quite frankly if a pair of posters want to disparage each other do it with PMs not this thread, it is closed
Post a Comment