You who read this mail
Must have a bank code you can launder cash by
And I, a Nigerian widow,
Against my husband, they formed a coup by
Keep my children well
Their father's wealth will quickly go by
And keep your 10%
Of 30 mil -- the deposit you'll know by
Don't you ever ask me why
If I told you, you would cry
So just send me your account and sigh
I'm a Nigerian widow
And you, a Nigerian widow,
Can't know the coke my 3 million will buy,
Or that 10 percent of your wealth
Is my reward for which Jesus did die
Teach me AOL
1000 free hours will slowly go by
And read each and every spam
The one I pick's the one I'll go by
Don't you ever ask me why
About my weapons stockpiled roof-high
If you saw it you would have to die-eye-eye
Don't be a pinko
Am I the only one who sees Elvis Costello as the background music for the Nigerian widow spam?
Once upon a time I had a little money
Nigerian widow took it long
Before I could mail it to you
Still, you are the only one
I never should have given my account away
So if a mother with thirty mil
Needs to launder it
Well this is what I'm gonna say:
Your son will be slain
Don't blame it on me
Oh, oh, it's nobody's fault
The civilian regime needs somebody to burn
Chat with a college girl from her dorm room
Generic Viagra and discounted Cialis
She's really a guy, his friends call him Lou
Add to your length at least one to three inches
Simon and Garfunkel, Scarborough Fair
Doctor's prescription isn't needed to buy
Generic Viagra and discounted Cialis
Keep your girlfriend's hand roaming your thigh
Add to your length at least one to three inches
(line still works with a little modesty)
Are you going to enlarge yourself there?
Generic Viagra and discounted Cialis
Lonely housewives at webcams you stare
Add to your penis at least one to three inches
I revised to mention the father was killed overseas, then drop the name of the union in the next chapter. After that, I mention the symbol one more time and refer to only the ring there after. Not sure if that has the effect you had in mind, but yes that has helped. I also acted on Jack's advice if it needs mentioning. And as much as Teresa modified Jo's advice, thank you too.
You've been playing with fire here. Bear in mind that for a while yet you're going to be oversensitive and hot to the touch.
Some of us live in burning houses. I have no interest in setting fire to anyone else's house. I am sorry.
Maybe I'm thinking about this backwards, but it seems to me the the tao te ching could be fairly described as a guide for moving away from banality. And as far as it was meant to be followed, it was meant to be followed purposefully. The poetic verse wasn't meant to be vague or ambiguous, but to allow for spontenaity -- for action. It doesn't say "just say no to banality."
In order for what I wrote to be interpreted as anything other than "just say no to torture," I felt it was necessary to address torture as an agenda. The wife is in jail, but she isn't isolated.
I've talked about this just about as much as I need to. I said thank you before, but I really am pleased with the story, so again thank you. Please tell your friends.
re: banality of evil:
For the Eichmann's, the evil was banal. But someone somewhere made a decision to reserve the right to torture. I wrote the story to address that issue specifically.
Maybe some of you are taking for granted that torture is wrong, but how does what you take for granted, being unspoken, address the specific resolve to torture or to reserve it as a right? The first rule in the art of war could be summed for us as "you must attack resolve first." How can I not apply that in this case?
My writing credentials are irrelevant beyond any merit in what I actually write. I think this is a good thing and I'm trying to help. I could shut up if that helps more.
They are only relevant to me in that writing for me still considers those "things writers do" much like the characters in the story -- specifically engaging an audience in a craftspersonlike manner. Not saying this to continue this train of thought, but to address why I brought it up.
Your suggestion was to use the 9/11-justification for itself, and I want to avoid the reader's preexisting position on that event -- and creating an allegorical event that is received unevenly among the characters lends itself to being personal to those who feel its impact the most. However much you not shutting up helps me address points that need solving or minimizing I welcome. I can take it if you can.
There is no standing for me to ask anyone to trust me on this, other than watching Bush win reelection on a campaign that can be summarized as "we know we are strong from our dominance" -- with most voters feeling they'd been given no alternative choice to vote for. I feel that it's kinda been left to me to write this, however unfortunate for the cause. (And who knows how messed up that is more than I?)
I've done one military enlistment, and I've only come across one noble reason to become a soldier -- to be worthy of the company of the brave who die.
Now that I think of it, that's paraphrasing Joseph Campbell too.
No hero walks alone. He walks with every hero in history.
[Joseph Campbell, scribbled in the third stall of the restroom at Penn Station, 03 October 1927]
This is my station and I will stay and give them air as long as the guns are going.
If you take his words literally, they are nonsense.
They justify staying in a burning house, because he is the owner. Clarke, sometimes what people say has nothing to do with the good that they do.
I've done one military enlistment, and I've only come across one noble reason to become a soldier -- to be worthy of the company of the brave who die.
Fuck duty.
When Campbell cites a cop who rescued a suicide attempt, he doesn't say the cop felt he had a duty to save his life. He quotes the cop, if I let that kid die, I couldn't have lived another day.
The cop made it personal was personal. Even you qualify duty as intensely personal -- that even makes my point, so I don't even know on what basis you have to call me foolish.
Jo criticized my story for making the interrogator's agenda personal rather than dutiful -- so what do you want from me?
I think you terribly mistaken to conclude Nobody is obedient or compliant so we will like ourselves, in the bargain, but I don't think there's any profit to that line of reasoning...
...you certainly benefit from mentioning it easy enough, no hypocrisy there.
...(or the question of how it is agreed where duty lies) if you're going to hew to the notion that duty is necessarily a pejorative concept.
Is there anyone else besides Graydon who doesn't know who Joseph Campbell is, or doesn't think much of him also?
Duty is what you do so that you can like yourself in the future.
But we often have to be told what our duties are. There's very little intuition involved. Nobody is obedient or compliant so we will like ourselves. There's a huge element/aspect of performance in what we typically consider duty.
(...He's interrogating because he's an interrogator, because he's following orders and interrogating is what he does. If he's doing it because of his father it actually makes too much sense.)
What one is resolved to do may be wrong, but I don't believe anyone is resolved to do anything because it's the wrong thing to do.
I can't match your cred as a writer, but I think people who cite duty as a reason for doing anything are out-and-out lying or deluding themselves. No one is resolved to fulfill a duty -- other than to tell you they fulfilled a duty and coerce you into doing something unpleasant they can paint the same. Imagine all of the unfulfilled duties they walk by everyday, it's a wonder they can cross the street. Everyone else personalizes their reasons.
Along the same lines, I don't think any torturer has a motivation that isn't personal, whether its some form of gratification or not. For my story it doesn't matter. I just wanted the story to avoid playing any "cards" people have already made up their minds on. I think I'm going to have to disagree with you on this issue, even to the detriment of the story. The topic may just not be suitable for me to express.
Does my last post qualify my participation here as "splitting the baby?" How intellectually lazy and dishonest does that make me today?
John, I remember we had an argument over reserving the right to be a snob, and we haven't talked since.
I just wanted to say I really, really dislike hidden agendas to the point of classifying snobbery as such an instance. Not saying this to reopen the debate, but to update my point.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 119 |
Total: 119 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Mike:
Show all comments by Mike.