A revolution in thought

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Fear not, the non-glandular homo-sexuals will be compelled to fall by the wayside. This is the true word.

I am shocked -- SHOCKED -- to find that peacegirl straight up lied about who authored those comments regarding homosexuality! It looks like the only material peacegirl wrote was the stuff in this thread likening homosexuality to crime, hatred, war and poverty.

Ah well, the undeniable fact that peacegirl is a lying sack of shit and entrails hardly matters. The important point is that when the Golden Age arrives we're all going to have a jizz-soaked, prescious-cunted, clown-punching, pud-pounding, bishop-beating, salami-slapping, baloney-bopping, gherkin-jerkin, knob-polishing, five-knuckle-shuffling good time!

[davidm]

What's so nice about Lessans' original text is that it really does have that same cheesy, breezy, egomaniacal tone that Miller honed to money-making perfection, along with the identical juvenile cunt-juice-soaked fixations and obsessions. And then peacegirl went ahead and fucked it all up! No wonder she can't sell any copies; it would be as if some editor had got hold of Tropic of Cancer and bowdlerized it to a boring Dick and Jane reader

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

I am shocked -- SHOCKED -- to find that peacegirl straight up lied about who authored those comments regarding homosexuality! It looks like the only material peacegirl wrote was the stuff in this thread likening homosexuality to crime, hatred, war and poverty.

I didn't remember that excerpt at the time of my writing. I was just extending the knowledge. There is nothing wrong with that statement. He did not liken homosexuality with hatred, war and poverty.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

What's so nice about Lessans' original text is that it really does have that same cheesy, breezy, egomaniacal tone that Miller honed to money-making perfection, along with the identical juvenile cunt-juice-soaked fixations and obsessions. And then peacegirl went ahead and fucked it all up! No wonder she can't sell any copies; it would be as if some editor had got hold of Tropic of Cancer and bowdlerized it to a boring Dick and Jane reader

I never tried to sell any copies.

[Vivisectus]

I have to say, I too am glad we have found an unadulterated version of the Tome of Tomes. I mean the sexy jacket and translucent robes were pretty good, but the precious cunt and the glandular homo-sexual? Truly awesome.

Hey so what is the last word on where light needs to be in order to see? Is the real book any clearer?

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I never tried to sell any copies.

Muh? You're trying to sell copies now; they're just the wrong copies. You're trying to sell your version of the book, which you completely mucked up and fucked up. Your father really did have a talent for yarn-spinning, baloney-peddling picaresque nonsense, just like Miller. If you want to make money, sell the original stuff before you fucked it up!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Muh? You're trying to sell copies now; they're just the wrong copies. You're trying to sell your version of the book, which you completely mucked up and fucked up. Your father really did have a talent for yarn-spinning, baloney-peddling picaresque nonsense, just like Miller. If you want to make money, sell the original stuff before you fucked it up!

Nope, the concept remains the same. I am the steward of this work and I made absolutely sure I didn't fuck up. My father was not Miller and his intentions were not Miller's. Like I said, anyone can buy the original from me, but my version is quite good due to my added examples.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Nope, the concept remains the same. I am the steward of this work and I made absolutely sure I didn't fuck up. My father was not Miller and his intentions were not Miller's. Like I said, anyone can buy the original from me, but my version is quite not nearly as good due to my added addled examples.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Nope, the concept remains the same. I am the steward of this work and I made absolutely sure I didn't fuck up. My father was not Miller and his intentions were not Miller's. Like I said, anyone can buy the original from me, but my version is quite good due to my added examples.

IOW, you admit you rewrote the whole book and took out all the good bits! Wow, you are just phenomenally stupid. Based on what I've read so far of what Lessans actually wrote, he was still of course a goon; but, like Miller, he had a lot of talent in a twisted sort of way. You might have made a lot of money selling what he actually wrote; as it is, nada!

I must add that there is something deeply offensive about rewriting an author's text without his consent and then claiming it is the author's own work. It's sort of like plagiarism in reverse, and it would make any honest person's skin crawl. But we know you are immune to such sensations because you have no honesty in you.

[davidm]

Let's also recall you have repeatedly indicated that the author's words are infallible; strange, then, that you apparently decided the infallible words were so fallible you had to change them all!

[davidm]

I’m suddenly wondering if there is a word to describe rewriting an author’s text without his knowledge or consent and then claiming the rewritten text is what the author actually wrote. Rewriting bits here and there, and correcting errors, in collaboration with the author, is simply called editing, but what peacegirl did isn’t even close to that. Maybe there is no word to describe what she did, her behavior being sui generis.

The great irony of course is that I was rollicking at what Lessans wrote; hell, if I could be assured I was getting the original text, the real deal straight from the Messiah’s mouth, I might actually buy the book, if for no other reason to see how it stacks up against the great works of he-men literary egotists like Miller and a number of others whose heyday was the mid-20th century. Peacegirl, since you are so greedy, why can’t you get it through your thick skull that Lessans’ actual text, before you fucked it up, might actually become a best-seller?

Oh, I guess I have answered my own question. You can’t understand this because you have a thick skull!

[Stephen Maturin]

Rafael

verb

To rewrite an author’s text without the author's knowledge or consent and then claiming the rewritten text is what the author actually wrote.

noun

A text rewritten without the author's knowledge or consent that the rewriter falsely claims is what the author actually wrote.

[Angakuk]

As I have said before, what peacegirl has done is more a matter of redaction than it is simple editing. However, in light of this recent disclosure it might better be described as literary fraud.

[Angakuk]

Rafaelized? Is that something like Bowdlerized?

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This entire chapter cannot be fully understood until you understand why categorizing people as intelligent and unintelligent, beautiful and ugly etc. leads to the kind of difficulty that we're seeing today in finding a mate. He was showing that when looking for a marriage partner, romantic attraction is paramount which has to do with SEX. I'm not saying this is always the case (so please don't try to argue this point), but sex is an important element in the male/female union.

The steward corrupts the Authentic Text again. This nonsense about "paramount" and "an important element" is an editor's invention.

The Authentic Text provides that there is no difference between sexual desire and having a lifetime mate.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

The steward corrupts the Authentic Text again. This nonsense about "paramount" and "an important element" is an editor's invention.

The Authentic Text provides that there is no difference between sexual desire and having a lifetime mate.

People will not have sex without a commitment of marriage, for the reasons given. I did nothing to corrupt the Authentic Text.

[ChuckF]

Does the Corrupted Text include the part about "freaks of nature" born without sex organs?

[Vivisectus]

I love how this deals with the issue of date-rape. By simply always assuming the rapists point of view.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

As I have said before, what peacegirl has done is more a matter of redaction than it is simple editing. However, in light of this recent disclosure it might better be described as literary fraud.

This is so ridiculous, I have to laugh!

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Does the Corrupted Text include the part about "freaks of nature" born without sex organs?

I think PG remained orthodox on that point. They cannot be loved. Not really.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

I love how this deals with the issue of date-rape. By simply always assuming the rapists point of view.

Huh? Assuming the rapists point of view? What the hell are you talking about now Vivisectus? This whole discussion is so distorted, I don't even know what to say.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Does the Corrupted Text include the part about "freaks of nature" born without sex organs?

Do you even know what he was saying, or did you just search the text for something to laugh at?

[davidm]

What I’m trying to explain to you, peacegirl, and in all sincerity — since I suspect you’re totally unfamiliar with this, as you are with pretty much everything — is that there really is, or at least was, a market for peddling picaresque, self-centered, sex-soaked baloney. Miller did it expertly; so did a number of others like Kerouac. Like those authors your father was a product and exemplar of early to mid-20th America; in that era the literary and artistic fashion was driven to a great extent by blustering he-men misogynists and homophobes in the thrall of the delirium that they had the final answer to everything.

The literary root of this modernist phenomenon might be traced to Rimbaud, who was indeed a great poet, but in the thrall of a messiah complex. When he rudely discovered at age 18 that he was not a messiah and the world didn’t give a shit about his poetry (great as it was and is) he abruptly dropped poetry like a hot potato and got a real job: running guns and trafficking in slaves. Sort of like selling aluminum siding, I guess. Sometimes I see limitless beaches in the sky covered by white nations full of joy. A great golden vessel, above me, waves its multicolored flags in the morning breeze. I’ve created all the feasts, all the triumphs, all the dramas. I’ve tried to invent new flowers; new stars, new flesh, new languages. I believed I’d gained supernatural powers. Ah well! I must bury my imagination and my memories! Sweet glory as an artist and story-teller swept away! — from Une Saison en Enfer: Adieu

The modernist canon developed further under great writers like Joyce, most of whose work really is finally just about himself and how coruscatingly grand he is — Welcome, O life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race.

Based on this sneak preview of what your father actually wrote, I find him to be in this literary line; he did not have the talent of a Rimbaud or Joyce, of course, but perhaps he gives Miller a run for his money. Notwithstanding, it remains doubtful there is much of a market for this modernist stuff any longer; postmodernism took hold long ago and still steams on. But then, as Fitzgerald wrote: So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

Lessans was not a great philosopher or thinker. But I’ve suspected from the first that your father was some kind of weird genius; just not the kind of genius that he thought, or you think. It’s now evident that you have smothered and mutilated his true genius by rafaelizing his authentic work and stifling his true voice. If I had to categorize your father’s genius, I suspect it is most closely allied to that of self-taught visual artists who also happen to be insane, and who in spite of or probably because of this produce works that are often scarily sublime. The crank as genius, or the genius as crank.

It’s too bad that you have smothered your father’s crank genius with your own prissy and pedestrian anti-emendations. The world shall someday cry out against your blasphemous desecrations!

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

The steward corrupts the Authentic Text again. This nonsense about "paramount" and "an important element" is an editor's invention.

The Authentic Text provides that there is no difference between sexual desire and having a lifetime mate.

Actually, this is just another of many instances in which peacegirl fails to comprehend what's in her own Corrupted Text. There, the Messiah clearly states that sex and marriage are identical ("same difference" is the term He used). Thus, if a gentleman is not munching on lady's "prescious, prescious cunt" right this goddamn minute, that gentlemen is not actually married.

So yeah, the sex=marriage stuff is in the Corrupted Text, as is that delightful date-rapey stuff about how saying yes to a date is automatically saying yes to fucking.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Huh? Assuming the rapists point of view? What the hell are you talking about now Vivisectus? This whole discussion is so distorted, I don't even know what to say.

Accepting a date is the same as accepting sex.

Hmm that reminds me - is asking for a date then asking for sex, verbally? Without special clothing? And not just oral sex, which is apparently fine to verbalize a desire for?

That makes asking someone for a date advance blaming!