Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Poem: A configuration of a stale situation
I have mixed feelings about repetition in general too, nan--that's quite a topic to explore, isn't it? ;) I suspect this poem is more just a lark for greenkat; perhaps venting at the end of a relationship when, as you hint with your hamster wheel image, a person eventually gets tired with those repetitive thoughts? I remember a poem I tried to write once, with the narrator flipping obsessively through a book, trying to exorcize repetition, which won't be defeated, and simply nests itself into the flashes of words flying by on the flipped pages. As always, a great idea, but the poem? Not so much. :) Anyway, however you might try for a sense of being stifled in relentlessness, you still have to let a poem breathe. Sometimes Sylvia Plath (fave of yours, too) did repetition in this way, creating a closed bell jar-like space, but in order to define that space, to even look at it, you have to be able to separate it somewhat from yourself, and she also did that distance very well--balancing it, without compromising the sense of suffocation. Do you know what I mean? Nan, I like what you did, adding the parts of speech, and feel like it accomplished a little better what I'm trying to describe (late in the eve). I think there is something to be said for creating a little aesthetic distance from the object or subject of the poem; it allows the reader to feel there is something more to do, too... Then again, adding a squoil here or there never hoits ;)— June 28, 2010 11:57 p.m.
Michael....
Grasca, I have nothing to do with whatever you are referencing, and in fact do not even know who this hostile presence might be, but this is how it is online. There are crazy people, angry people, sad people, all kinds. I've had to learn to develop a thicker skin, too. However, I would like to separate out this issue of critiquing work and your opinion: "I think one should not critique another in ways that they would not want done to themselves and their writing" That simply isn't the way it goes in the world of writing and literature, any more than it is anywhere else. Again, if this is our moral guideline, then how do you have any real conversation generated? You don't. It is squelched. I have seen this time and again in in-person writing groups. The moment someone decides that s/he doesn't want his or her writing subject to being picked apart, it compromises everyone's. It is also a very real way to shut down criticism and invalidate its activities through misunderstanding and intolerance (ironic?). Anyone expresses discomfort with my commentary on his or her writing? I'm gone. We were not meant to hang out and talk books and writing. In this way, I vow to not comment on your blogs, to be sure, and you can trust that I will keep my word. I'm really sorry you have felt unwelcome here, and hope that you feel more comfortable soon, but I also hope that after further thought, separate the issues. Criticism is valid, and it turns the wheels of literature--always has, always will, in my opinion--not that it needs my opinion to validate that fact. On the other hand, this art, and it most certainly is an art --does need my opinion--and yours--to survive. ;)— June 28, 2010 10:40 p.m.
Michael....
re: #33: Grasca, I meant to respond to your carefully chosen, thoughtful words earlier; especially well taken are the comments about dialing back. You are certainly right, but in our defense, I think that some of us have been trying to invite others, as they appear on the site, into the 'group.' We are free to critique each others' blog entries (usually) without taking offense. I point out gringo's misspellings, and he can tell me about my comma splices if he wants. Everything is good-natured enough, but you are right that perhaps a certain amount of trust should be established first. I've spent a goodly amount of time in writing groups and study groups, as likely have you, and we know that feelings can be bruised, no matter how deserving the writing is of the critique, and it all deserves 'criticism,' in the sense of plain old discussion, not just evaluation or judgement of merit. There is also the matter of a writer not necessarily having requested criticism. Here, I'll have to say that besides the fact of the compliment leveled at a writer in the form of simple attention to the writing (to be presumed "worth it"), this is a very public space in which people are presenting their writings in order to be read, and in the case of the neighborhood blogs, to be rewarded in a monthly contest. The Reader does contain a lot of content involving evaluation and critique--of food, film, writing (some), music, theatre, art, cultural events of all kinds. If you put it out there in public, you are putting yourself in the mix. We are invited to sign up and comment, and this means to interact with all of the content, including that which we readers generate. My personal agenda is to also try to change a little the erroneous perception of literary critique as something negative; I like to do this by making it more visible as a dialogue about work that does not involve only useless (and potentially insincere) compliment, however enjoyable. My stuff has received far less commentary and dialogue on the site than I'd like; I'd rather have honest but accurate commentary on its flaws than compliments that don't encourage dialogue, or any thought about its content. I don't feel that the Reader is an inappropriate venue for criticism because it goes hand in hand with writing, and think that a group of contributors going around commenting fosters this real sense of "neighborhood" that would otherwise be lacking. However, you are right to point out that the approach could be a bit less intense at times, especially as it no doubt has the potential to actually further misunderstanding, or overwhelm a writer new to the site. Thanks again for your thoughts. ;)— June 28, 2010 8:25 p.m.
Michael....
re: #81: "Persecuting? I defended the innocent woman who was attacked on on this blog. Really, SDaniels, what Josh said was right. "For someone who reads a lot of books, you sure are stupid."" Persecution, anyone? Ok, I usually resist responding to Mindy because she is still a bore with unfortunately little going aside from complaints and expressions of over-the-top vitriol over perceived slights. Of course you can perceive nothing in this situation but that you or someone is being persecuted. Mindy, you should be careful who you quote--another example of your choice to remain spiteful and very much on the surface of things. For those unfamiliar with recent local history, Mindy is quoting someone who was fired for twittering (tweeting?) racial epithets against a small child to the child's mother. Out of a sense of social responsibility, I spent more time than I really had arguing against this "writer's" constant attacks on people of color, women, and adopted people, and taking apart his main thesis, which amounted to perceived links between intelligence and race worthy of a 19th-century cropshare foreman. "Stupid," besides "idiot," was this person's favorite word, lobbed frequently against others in the hopes of drawing attention away from discovery of his abysmal writing, shallow personality, and petty, mean spirit. You know, Mindy, it makes sense that you would maintain a relation of some sort with him, since you are just as profoundly socially limited, and perhaps even more misanthropic. That's all. Now I go back to ignoring you, while you presumably go back to outlining or editing your next paranoid rant or hateful message for yet another Reader blogger. We should establish an entire site to hold all of those. Toodles.— June 28, 2010 7:40 p.m.
...festive friday...
Wow, this is getting Harlequin! You should start drinking double Scotches, smoking "cheroots" and continue to say things like: "Silly little girl, I can’t stay mad at her." We actually have not much idea what this lil' gal is like; she isn't even a loose configuration of puzzle pieces, as she is allowed no personality beyond feeling guilty for something or acquiescent to something. One thing slipped out that interests this reader in particular: Narrator lets out that'She' tends to use the phrase "low budget," which, while originating in urban hip hop culture, could suggest something youthful of her person and personality--possibly, though not necessarily an orientation toward money and materialism. Perhaps related to why she finds herself in the strenuous situation of being married, yet carrying on with one man who represents some authority in the office, while stringing another along yet another, with carefully apportioned sexual favors, attempting to exert some power herself. We know this is how she budgets her time, anyway, and our narrator seems to (mostly, when he gets his way) suppress a hatred of her for it, all the while pining for her because she is usually right there, but juuuust out of reach ;) Grant, help me out here?— June 27, 2010 8:25 p.m.
One Ugly Thirst
Beermonkey, good job getting the text in--now you'll find that it's those damn html tags that really bite it. And you know we were just passin' time, waiting for your blog entry with baited breath! re: #6: You're coming in late, Grantie. refried and I were only gently teasing beermonkey, whose blog entry read only something like "ftwrwrwrwrwrwth" for a couple of days. Now, as to the actual entry! Beermonkey wrote: "There is no light that shines from me." Oh yes, there is. You bet there is. ;)— June 27, 2010 5:23 p.m.
Michael....
Hey LPR, good to see you around! And thanks to Grasca and LPR for bringing up those pesky vanity presses. Though what they do is legal, and give some people a way to make believe to themselves and others that what they are doing is real publishing, I agree that there is something inherently dishonest about them, and the product they deliver. As for the stringers, Grasca says: " on this site often use 2 forms in one submission and mix the journalistic genre and style" (at least as I was taught in my journalism classes) with fiction. This is where things get sticky in my opinion." There is one stringer in particular who clearly adds strong elements of fiction in his reportage, and all who read him should know what they are getting--if they don't, they simply need to sharpen their eyes. I agree that where it gets sticky is when you cannot tell whether or not this is happening--vis. those stringers who rehash headlines from, let's say, major Mexican newspapers, adding fictionalized details. It goads refried and Jayallen to no end, and well it should. I love this activity as literary strategy with a lot of potential, but not as propagandizing. There's yer difference, and that's why SD on the QT is ok and some stringer work is not, and should come with a note of caution, I suppose. I'm not sure if that was the gist of concensus on the two threads flooded with discussion on this very subject a couple of months ago (sorry, can't remember where--Jayallen's threads?), but rest assured, Grasca, peeps were properly troubled. However, interestingly, nothing seems to have changed...— June 27, 2010 5:08 p.m.
Michael....
"As far as writing. I had one class in 9th grade. One semester" Right on, lee! Very impressive. You appear to take it well, and understand what it is. I would appreciate your take on my stuff anytime. As for Hallmark, let me know if your friend reports they are hiring. I have a lifelong dream of being paid to secret strange messages, maybe even just a word skewed here and there, into the cards undetected, in lieu of the usual shlockensmear verses. A kind of performance art, forcing customers looking for the commercial experience to buy AND read something quite different. Re:61: I have a serious question for Mindy/storyteller: I am fairly sure you are capable of a non-polemical take on life and ideas in your writing, but are you capable of it in regular conversation? Why do you always drop down with a knife in your teeth, stabbing into the air while shouting that we are on your back, persecuting you? None of us are, and contrary to your past claims, none of us follow you around, though there is direct evidence that you have taken this activity to the extreme--you know what I mean, and I will not repeat it again here. Again and again, you bring it to the extreme, resorting to schoolyard epithets about other posters' looks (why this, exactly?), or with me, you exaggerate or distort my words and intent. Why do you do this? Did you realize that if you didn't, most others would never reply similarly, and would treat you with the respect you claim to want? It's interesting that the one person who dropped to the gutter level of namecalling with you every time, Pete--against whom I actually attempted to protect you a few times--is the only one you decided to categorically 'forgive' for a perceived trespass. Can you adjust and expand your perception of others, and allow them the complexity you want them to understand in you?— June 27, 2010 4:52 p.m.
Michael....
Nan decreed: "NOW FOR MY SPECIAL DECREE" Yes, M'am! Shake them bells, lady! And don't forget that bikini along with your cap! ;)— June 27, 2010 4:30 p.m.
Dream a Little Dream of Fear
Ze plehn, ze plehn! Ehhh, merde alors, un "flying boat!" Really, Ponz? Is that a technical term? What about those light planes that land on the water? Or are they really landing on sandbars? In that case, what kind of falsehood has been perpetrated on Fantasy Isle fans and non-jetsetters everywhere!?! And upon pain of late night death, don't answer, "This is what happens, refried." ;)— June 27, 2010 1:08 a.m.