Mything Out On Love
ìSurvival and healthy psychological functioning do not necessarily require that one be loved. People are programmed during childhood to believe that their future happiness (and even their survival) is dependent on their finding their ëone true loveí and preserving this love in a long-term, exclusive couple relationship or marriage. This expectation is based on unrealistic notions regarding the nature of love and often leads to disillusionment and misery.î
--from Fear Of Intimacy, by Robert Firestone, PhD
The PhD is so right. In fact I cover this and other relationship myths in my article, Relationships:The fifth paw
at liberator.net
it's just another mythology that we incorporate into our lives to bring us as much pain and suffering as possible.
chris
Chris Volkay at December 22, 2003 8:01 PM
For most of my adult life, I've been doing pretty well without a primary love relationship -- especially since I stopped yearning for one!
A question to all bloggers: Does anyone know of any books or other material to help single folks find ways to cope better with the occasional ups and downs of singlehood? Sometimes I feel like a undesirable freak for not having a partner. Being at home alone in the evenings can get lonely, but the alternative of sitting in a bar or a bingo hall isn't exactly my idea of quality time either.
Lena the Spinster at December 23, 2003 12:22 AM
Dear Dr. Firestone,
Whew!
Jim Treacher at December 23, 2003 6:11 PM
If there's a book for singles to help them better able to cope with the ups and downs of single life, there ought to be one for marrieds, too. Both lifestyles have their ups and downs.
Imagine coming to your home every night to someone who actually has the right to know how your day was, what you were doing, what you're thinking about, who you spoke to, etc. Domestic partnership is an incredible sacrifice of privacy. There is literally nowhere in the home that you can go for those moments when you want to be completely alone. Which is why Don and I maintain separate homes. He's certainly welcome any time, but no one, not even him, has the right to come over unannounced, except in extraordinary circumstances. There's a kind of awareness of someone else, even if not in the same room, which makes you curtail your impulses in ways that you wouldn't have to if you could come to your home, confident that you're alone in it.
Besides, being single means no obligation to anyone. You can wake up next to someone knowing that he's not staying. You're free to pursue continuing involvement or kick him to the curb.
Simply put, living with someone means that you can't come and go exactly as you please or do what you want every time. That someone else has at least a minor vote on what you do. That's such a hard concept for me to grasp, which is why I can't bear the idea of sharing my space with a permanent resident. I live my privacy too much.
Patrick at December 23, 2003 7:58 PM
Patrick, you're a lone sane person in a world of absolute delusionals. Well, actually -- not lone. I think it's barbaric to live with anyone.
Amy Alkon at December 23, 2003 8:51 PM
Patrick -- I think your situation with Don sounds ideal. As for kicking men to the curb, well, they always seem to beat me to the punch on that one.
Lena at December 23, 2003 11:14 PM
By the way, Chris, I read you piece on liberator.net and really liked it. But why all the typos? It sends a kind of "I don't really give a shit" message to your readers.
Lena at December 23, 2003 11:17 PM
Hi Lena
Thanks for the kind words about my story.
As you might guess, I've had this discussion
with literally dozens of writers about typos.
Even got blocked off authors den when I took on virtually the whole site on this topic. I don't know about others, and I'm not trying to sway anyone to my opinion, I simply state it and people can either agree or not.
When people read one of my pieces, it isn't rare for them to say it's great, brilliant, I've even had some use the word seminal, and then they go on to complain about the typos or not using proper cases. To me this is like someone breaking through the velvet ropes at the Louvre, walking up to the Mona Lisa and then complaining that the brush strokes are all one inch long, instead of 1.5 inches long, as an art book they once read said they should be. The world is full of writers
who can spell and arrange their syntax swimmingly, but they have nothing at all to say, they are merely good typists. Their, what we would refer to as minds, have been strangled and straight-jacketed by the conventions of academia. I don't fit into that category. What makes a writer great, if one is great, are his or her thoughts, ideas, concepts, not their typing proficiency. In my case, I generally leave it up to the editors and publishers, for the same reason that Enrico Ferrari doesn't fix flats and give lube jobs. Most writers stridently disagree with me. They are entitled to that view as I am to mine.
And finally, not to be too serious, but....
I have always had a very powerful anti-authority, anti-everything philosophy from a very young age. When someone says to me "Oh dear boy, you're dangling your participle" I say, "yes but have you seen my participle, it richly deserves to be dangled".
chris volkay at December 24, 2003 12:17 AM
Content is key, but how it's written is extremely important as well. For example, in the post above, you said "Enrico Ferrari doesn't fix flats." Well, it's not "Enrico Ferrari," but "Enzo Ferrari," unless you're talking about some other Ferrari who owns a garage in Queens or something. It stopped me from reading what you wrote, made me wonder about the Queens garage thing for a second, and then I went and looked up Ferrari on Google to make sure I wasn't wrong. Typos do the same thing. They stop people from getting your point. So does bad or boring writing (not that I'm accusing you of either). Recently, I posted something from David Corn, and I got a few complaints from people who found it too dull to get through. To leave typos in your work is like serving a steak without cutting off the fur first.
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 1:43 AM
for starters you refer to a post
a post in my mind is held to a different standard than a published article
if this was a published essay of mine
I would have looked up ferrari as well
a post i dont
riddle me this
in the above I dont capitalize I and dont use the apostrophe in dont
that throws a reader off from getting my point
my how delicate the readers are
all rules of grammar and syntax construction are simply agreed upon customs. There is nothing inherently or innately important about capping the i, it's only a matter of custom and convention
There is nothing good or bad, it's our thinking makes it so. This is one of the reasons Picasso and Dali, among others chose to break ranks with the conventions of painting. Would one say to Dali, "arms don't grow out of a woman'a head, you stop that right now"!
Or look at modern music. Virtually all music is an english nightmare, from rock to rap to country. And yet, it becomes coded into our language and dictionaries incorporate new words in common usage, simply because they are the custom of our time, as opposed to an earlier time. The language itself changes. Perhaps 1000 years from now, virtually all of the words we currently use, all the rules of grammar and syntax will have been rewritten.
I frequently coin new words in my writing as well.
You won't find them in any dictionary. I know this is a no-no, I don't care. Let's just agree to disagree on these points.
P.S. We all know the ABC's- If someone came along tomorrow and said from now on it's going to be
ACBDEFG-what would it matter? Why does the B have to be 2nd?
chris volkay at December 24, 2003 7:42 AM
It's one thing to challenge an accepted way of doing things, and another to be sloppy and use "creativity" as a justification. I want people to get my message (when I write my column, especially) and I take great pains to translate Amyisms (in creative thought) into ideas coherent to other human beings. I always consider the reader because my desire is to communicate -- not, as it was in my early 20s, to show that I'd read Socrates, or knew a lot of verrrry impressive words. Making up words is something I do as well. But within a context. The context of people's understanding. I keep what I do tethered there at all times, because otherwise, I'm just talking to myself.
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 9:26 AM
Chris: "To me this is like someone breaking through the velvet ropes at the Louvre, walking up to the Mona Lisa"
Chris, I liked your piece, but it ain't the Mona Lisa.
You think that typos are radically creative and contribute to the evolution of language. Fine. However, if you don't announce this position at the beginning of every piece you write, most readers are just going to think you're too damn lazy to run a spell check. That's going to make them feel like you don't give a shit about your audience, and pretty soon you won't have an audience. How then will our language evolve, typos and all?
Lena at December 24, 2003 9:31 AM
"A writer is somebody for whom writing is more difficult than it is for other people." --Thomas Mann
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 9:37 AM
What a great quote! Gotta tape that one to my computer.
Lena at December 24, 2003 10:33 AM
That was a great quote. I do agree that living apart sounds ideal. But what about if you have kids? Also, my blog isn't prefectly edited, but I try to make it as coherent as possible. If you're writing a long piece or manifesto, it is nice to spend the time editing it. I agree with part of what Chris said, but I think he went too far. That whole Mona Lisa comparison would only work for someone who was a brilliant writer, but hadn't been educated, etc. But even that would require a different comparison. It is one thing to be stylistically unedited, but Chris sounds a bit arrogant in his take. I agree it's annoying when people nitpick, but it's also annoying for someone to be really lazy or ignorant and have a million errors.
Tiffany Stone at December 24, 2003 11:59 AM
I just read Chris' piece and didn't find it annoyingly unedited.
Tiffany Stone at December 24, 2003 12:22 PM
Just because married (or "together") parents generally live together doesn't mean it has to be that way. Two of the best parents I know, who are in a relationship, live separately. He lives on Mulholland; she, in OC, with their daughter. They don't want her to have Hollywood values, so their daughter goes to school down behind the Orange Curtain. They all get together on the weekends, and sometimes during the week, the dad will come down, or they'll come up. Additionally, these parents have something I consider very important: individual, one-on-one relationships with their daughter.
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 12:49 PM
"I agree it's annoying when people nitpick,"
Allow me to annoy you some more! Reading over these comments, I remembered something that a lighting designer for dance companies once said to me: "If the audience notices your lighting, you've done something wrong. Your job is to help them see the dancing, that's all." Why do people want to call so much attention to their styles? I went to a fancy restaurant recently and ordered duck with mashed potatoes. Unfortunately, the chef couldn't resist being clever and creative, and I was served something that looked like a pillbox hat with red jism squirted all over it. Why, why, why?
Grammar and punctuation rules should be applied consistently, so that we can give our full attention to the content of what's being said. Face it: None of us is Gertrude Stein or James Joyce. When we go to great lengths to call attention to our styles, it's just not that interesting.
End of lecture. I promise.
Lena the Grammar Nazi at December 24, 2003 2:08 PM
Thank you Tiffany Stone
the piece isn't annoyingly unedited
it only is for, just as you said
nit-pickers.
it's a matter of degree in my view.
virtaully any piece can be nit-picked if that is
what you want to do.
Lena's initial response to me had typos too, but they didn't distract one tiny bit from my getting her point.
But now once again the typo police have caught me
SCENE:
Pennsylvania Farmhouse:
Lots of trees, chipmunks and cottontail rabbits bounce happily along the trails
Suddenly jack-booted troopers begin closing in on
said farm house. Their harnessed pit-bulls snarl as the agents yell through their bull horns:
THEM: "Okay Rocco, we've got ya surrounded. This is the FBPEU(Federal Bureau of Proper English Usage) stop typin' up typo's or we send in the dogs".
ME: "The typo police! You dirty screws will never take me alive. You gave it ta my brother in the back, see!
THEM: Boy we don't like your kind!
ME: I got my keyboard in one hand and my heater in the other, you send the dogs, just remember I bite too(Laughs maniacally as the scene fades)
chris volkay at December 24, 2003 2:16 PM
"virtaully any piece can be nit-picked if that is
what you want to do."
Ah, but that's not what we want to do. We just want to read and not be stopped by grammatical and syntactical errors. Sure, they slip into everyone's writing, here and there. But cleaning up your work before others read it is like cleaning the house before company comes. It's a nice, considerate thing to do. Leave the moldy dishes on the coffee table, and your friends might not be too eager to drop by again anytime soon.
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 2:51 PM
ha, ha--Amy, you crack me up!
Tiffany Stone at December 24, 2003 4:28 PM
Amy
we can go back and forth endlessly on these points
at some point let's end it and move on to more important material
having said that
yes of course, to use Tiffany's term, a piece shouldn't be annoyingly edited. But in Tiffany's opinion and in mine the piece in question isn't annoyingly edited.
so in the end it becomes a matter of perception, different people having different levels of perception. the piece in question is edited to where it is not annoying or distracting in my opinion. and that is what i will go with
you also state that we readers don't want to nit-pic(hahahahahahahahahahaha) with many readers it's all they want to do. They see the trees but not the forest. Does one spend hours and hours pouring over every line so that all possible typos are removed. No. One sets a bar for themselves of reasonable editing, and goes with that. My piece has that, in my view. if others disagree I honestly don't give a shit as Lena so eloquently puts it. Also somewhere along the line you said that the typo factor is very important. Again I understand what you're saying I just don't agree. The content factor is 95 % of it in my view. The typo factor is very small and insignificant, maybe 5%. Again I understand what you're saying I just don't agree.
I think people make far far too much out of typos. In the end, no matter what high purpose people may ascribe to these actions, it strikes me as simply being trivial, silly, inane and nit-pickingly nitwitted.
christopher Rocco at December 24, 2003 5:10 PM
"Does one spend hours and hours pouring over every line so that all possible typos are removed. No."
As Lena is my witness...yes. If you'll just revisit the Thomas Mann quote above: "A writer is somebody for whom writing is more difficult than it is for other people."
Here are a few quotes on the subject, from:
http://fmwriters.com/Visionback/Issue9/true.htm
"Harry Shaw, in Errors in English and Ways to Correct Them (HarperCollins ISBN: 0064610446), says, 'There is no such thing as good writing. There is only good rewriting.' Science fiction novelist Michael Crichton agrees: 'Books are not written--they're rewritten.'"
In this bit above, I copied the quote, then put " " quotation marks around it and went to the trouble to change the quotes inside the quote to ' ' quotation marks. It's easier to be lazy, but I want people to read the words, not notice that it's incorrectly punctuated.
By the way, I wasn't referring to your piece in my comments here -- a piece which I haven't had time to read yet (because I was up practically all night, Monday night, writing my column, and all Tuesday from 5am to noon, doing the same)...then went out to help my boyfriend with his Xmas shopping. And this after working all weekend on my column. I slave over every word -- sometimes numerous times. That's the difference, to me, between being a writer and a typist of scattered thoughts. PS Even after I was done with the column, I went back and added two words I regretting omitting.
Perhaps it's your opinion that I'm a little too crazy and perfectionistic. Well, that crazy perfectionism has gotten me in 113 papers. If I sent out work I just banged out, without that level of attention to detail, I think there's a very good chance I'd instead be asking you if you'd "like fries with that."
Amy Alkon at December 24, 2003 5:21 PM
NOTE TO THE TYPO POLICE:(THE FOLLOWING MAY CONTAIN TYPOS-PROCEED WITH EXTREME CAUTION)
I am thinking of adding that warning to my material
I do think it would be nice to actually read the piece in question before commenting on it-so far you only have Lena's perception of it.
About 10 yers ago I worked as a comedy writer for a nationally known comic for about ten minutes.
Me: see what you think of this material
Him: It's funny but the audience won't like it, it will offend them.
Me: good
Him: we can't work together
Me: I agree
For starters, we don't all have the same aspirations as writers. I honestly have no interest in becoming an advice god. For one thing, to make it into national publications on a regular basis one must bend shape and kowtow their writing to the whims dictates and fancies of corporate owned and controlled newspapers. I have many times had editors tell me things like
"personally I like the piece, but it will never go, its too controversial". I can only be honest in my assessments, just as you are. What I see in national newspapers is almost always the blandest, safest, most sterile conformist brain dead writing imaginable, because it's all the lap dog editors are allowed to approve.(I've had some basically tell me this)
So when you frequently write in the areas of debunking religion, the paranormal, talking cure psychology, the power of positive thinking, the pc world, relationship and love nonsense etc. etc.
you know going in you are going to be wildly unpopular to begin with.
I like your writing because I find you both funny and intelligent,(the pink rambler is a great story) but as to the advice- I think that is one of the primary problems we face in the world today-quite seriously
The idea of dispensing advice to anyone perpetuates one of the primary problems with humanity. Give a man a fish, or teach him to fish.
Briefly-from an early age-with religion underlying it-we are told we are weak, sniveling, in need of salvation-in need of others advice-and so it begins, our lifelong quest of indecisive weakness-we are told that our thinking isn't good enough and we must seek the advice of others, of gurus, of therapists-now this is all nonsense-nobody can see our lives through our eyes but ourselves-virtually everything in our culture serves to weaken and disempower(typo police may want to check this out) One of the primary problems with this world is that people-being what they are- have abdicated the notion of actually thinking for themselves, so they hire others to do it-and thus have their little noggins implanted with the thoughts of others instead of actually having the courage to think thoughts for themselves-This is one of the primary reasons we have such an idiotic, weak, cowardly snivelling populace. Follow me, pray to me, let me advise you Ha...The best thing people can do is try to think for themselves, this is how you strengthen and embolden people-not by leading them around by their weak little noses.
If I were writing and advice column-not likely is it- I'd have only one column-
You've got all these problems-that's what life is friends-think for yourself-get up off your trembling shaky Oprahesque knees and begin thinking for yourselves-this whole idea, puts you my friends, in a master-slave relationship with you as the slave-are you looking to me for answers-ha-it's just an illusion-a role I play in public- I don't know anymore about life than you do-and even if I did-it's up to you to seek and find your own answers because all of us are different and we must find our own way and our own answers- so as of today I set you free dear readers-it's time to stand on your feet and use your own brains- you're not quite as stupid and weak as others have led you to believe-
-Rocco the typo felon-
chris volkay at December 25, 2003 8:43 AM
I wasn't critiquing your piece, first of all -- the discussion here is simply about the merits of writing in a way that best conveys ideas. Regarding my column, I'd be in many more newspapers if I "kowtowed." I don't. My column challenges the status quo in relationship thinking, and points out how people can use reason to help themselves. PS I only skimmed the post from the fish part on down, because it was too much work to read one long, run-on, unpunctuated sentence. Regarding the "it's too controversial" label -- really? I have probably a dozen friends who are investigative reporters who publish on extremely controversial subjects. Moreover, there are places that look for stuff that doesn't kowtow to the status quo; Reason Mag being one of them. The New Times alternative weeklies are built on controversial stories. Numerous other publications, too. I find it hard to believe that you're unpublishable because you're simply too controversial. I would venture, if you've actually had "many" editors turn down your pieces, it's due to your laziness in adhering to basic standards in grammar and syntax. Regarding the "major national comedian" -- you're getting a bit Jesus on the cross here. Some people want stuff that's out there; others don't. You work for the people who want what you've got to sell -- grammatically and syntactically sloppy good ideas; perhaps well thought-out, perhaps as sloppily thought out as they're written. That's probably what editors assume, looking at ungrammatical, poorly-expressed ideas in paragraph one -- that it's too much trouble to read and probably not the result of too much effort. It's interesting that you keep coming back to defend sloppiness in writing, putting much time into that, when you could simply put a little effort into writing readably and diminish the need for defensiveness ten-fold.
Amy Alkon at December 25, 2003 9:19 AM
Hey Chris --
Who are your favorite writers or books? I'm not asking you this in order to start a fight! I'm just curious. "Bad" syntax and punctuation does indeed have a place in literature (if not journalism).
Lena
Lena at December 25, 2003 11:24 AM
for starters you refer to a post
a post in my mind is held to a different standard than a published article
if this was a published essay of mine
I would have looked up ferrari as well
a post i dont
riddle me this
in the above I dont capitalize I and dont use the apostrophe in dont
that throws a reader off from getting my point
my how delicate the readers are
all rules of grammar and syntax construction are simply agreed upon customs.
Aside from the fact that this looks like an E.E. Cummings poem, I have to agree with Amy and Lena. You have a spell check, Chris. Use it. It's called courtesy. I appreciate the fact that inspiration often comes so quickly that we don't have time to dot our Is and cross our Ts, but there's no reason we can't go back and do so when the inspiration has run its course. And the Mona Lisa comparison is either a bit irreverent or extremely egotistical. I think you're a terrific writer, but hardly what Da Vinci is to painting.
Shakespeare, of course, was a brilliant man, but could not settle on the spelling of his own name in his will. But on the other hand, spelling was not standardized in his time so a few stray "errors" was more "creative license." But I am a bit persnickity when it comes to spelling and grammar. The flow of ideas are interrupted when I stumble across typos. If the rules of grammar are followed, I have an easier time taking in what I'm reading. When I come across certain "inventive" words, spelling or phrases, my estimation of the writer immediately takes a downward turn, and if I need to actually "translate" poor grammar into incoherence, my "flow" of absorption is slowed, and much of the beauty of the writer's message is lost.
A few pet peeves of mine, personally? Redundancies mostly, such as "irregardless." The term is redundant and "regardless" works just fine. "Tuna fish." As opposed to what? Tuna cow? "Untapped potential." Is there a way for potential to remain merely potential and be tapped? On an AOL message board I participated upon, I had a field day with a poster who wrote "carcinogens that cause cancer." It's been two years and I still won't leave her alone about it. I'm so glad she has a sense of humor.
If there's anything I can't stand, abide, countenance, endure or put up with, it is the extraneous and superfluous nature of repetitious redundancy. It distracts, annoys and irritates me no end.
I can overlook one or two misspellings, but when I'm reading a message board and the poster is calling one thing or another "rediculous," I finally have to say something. I try dropping a few not so subtle hints, like saying, "I agree. It certain is rIdiculous." When that doesn't work, I finally have to ask if the author could please spell that word correctly. Then of course, I get jumped on for being too picky. Hehehe... It's fun being anal-retentive!
Patrick J. Colliano at December 25, 2003 11:51 AM
Tuna fish vs. tuna cow. Funny. Very good point.
Amy Alkon at December 25, 2003 12:42 PM
A new Patrick?! Nice to meet you.
In an assignment for a writing class, I once used the term "vertical stack." The instructor wrote in the margin "A stack is always vertical, yes?" I guess she was right -- unless you're talking about big boobs that stick out horizontally.
Lena at December 25, 2003 2:14 PM
Nope. It's not a new Patrick. Just the same one who stupidly decided to include his uncommon and easily traceable last name. Sorry about this. Signature fixed.
Patrick at December 25, 2003 3:01 PM
No need to apologize, Patrick. Very nice last name you've got there.
By the way, I don't have such a problem with "untapped potential." You could tap something's potential, but it could still have some untapped remaining potential for even bigger and better things. I guess I see potential as something on a scale from zero to infinity. You could just keep tapping it forever. Kind of like my ass, I guess.
PS: Yes, I need to increase my dosage.
Lena at December 25, 2003 3:15 PM
am few comments
to patrick yes i do use the spell check, and if amy had actually read the article in question she might discover that. but you think I'm a terrific writer so your perception is actually quite good
to amy I do write readably, period.
to Lena I'm aware you weren't comparing me to the Mona Lisa-I was.
I stand by everything i said about the newspaper business-it is a bar set so low(good typing but brain dead content) only the most limber limbo artists can possibly limbo into it
BUT SINCE IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY
I'm feeling rather biblical
Scene:
Ancient Eygpt:
Lots of pyramids, buildings, temples. Goats and asses are running around all over the place.
We enter the temple of the Pharaoh-Pharaoh Amy Al-Keida
I Chris(Moses-think Charlton Heston)Volkay am being dragged before Pharaoh.
Pharaoh Al-Keida:(purely coincidental, by the way)
You don't like my methods?
Chris(Moses) People must be allowed to think for themselves, to be made strong-not spoon fed your answers to their problems-embolden them-strengthen them-allow them their freedom. We have been captives lo these many years(now this is where it really gets good) Me, as Charlton's Moses, I look down then up at the Pharaoh, and then as I flail my outstretched arms, with feeling in my voice..."LET MY PEOPLE GO...."
But the heart of Pharaoh Al-Keida had been hardened by Pharaoh's husband-
"My minions serve me well-they shall have no freedom- I shall, tell them what to do-
ME/Moses again: "Let my people go..."
With the heart of Pharaoh already hardened, she calls in her Attorney General, wearing jack-booted sandals, Lena Reno...
Al-Keida to Lena Reno, "Take this punk-mother fucker out and stone him"
Reno to AL-Keida, "But there are no children present".
"Can't have everything".
As I am being dragged out, Patrick(who coincidentally happens to think my writing is terrific) the genius, steps forward to defend me
But he is shouted down by the subservient minions.
As I'm being dragged out by my heels my words echo through the temple
"LET MY PEOPLE GO"
"let my people go"
"let my pee.e e..e..e.."
Pharaoh Al-Keida sits back in her thrown and is comforted by her heavily muscled slaves...
She throws her head back and laughs maniacally
The scene fades with the sound of her laughter and goats braying.
Rocco the typo felon.
chris volkay at December 25, 2003 4:13 PM
"Pharaoh Al-Keida sits back in her thrown and is comforted by her heavily muscled slaves..."
That was my favorite part.
Amy Alkon at December 25, 2003 4:17 PM
Looks like this thread might just overtake the first gay marriage thread in terms of numbers. I think that one stopped at 40 posts. Crid had kept several of us such as Amy, Lena, Peggy C. and me going back and forth on an exhilarating debate on the pros and cons of gay marriage. It was a fascinating discussion. As one who once hosted the "Church and Gay Rights" debate on AOL, I must say that Crid was actually the worthiest opponent I had encountered on the issue. Although I don't think even his arguments justified the state's sanction of gay marriage while condemning homosexual marriage, still, he was good, though. I haven't seen him, lately. Crid where are you???
Patrick at December 25, 2003 5:49 PM
Hmmm...taking the Christmas holiday off to marry his gay lover?
Amy Alkon at December 25, 2003 7:04 PM
LOL. Amy, you're too much!
I also liked, "'Pharaoh Al-Keida sits back in her thrown and is comforted by her heavily muscled slaves...'
That was my favorite part."
Lena's too, I bet.
Patrick at December 25, 2003 7:42 PM
By the way, I agree essentially with the barbarism of living with someone. Everyone should have their own space. The only good reason I can see for cohabitation is when there is a person who cannot do for themselves and needs someone in the home to take care of them.
The alternative is a nursing home, and what a terrible idea that is! Sharing your space not with one someone, but with several dozen someones. Ugh. I'll hire a nurse for my mother before I let that happen to her.
Patrick at December 25, 2003 7:46 PM
I love being comforted by heavily muscled slaves. And when they get tired, I comfort them back.
Lena at December 26, 2003 12:23 AM
Just a couple of things folks:
For starters, I have no animosity or defensiveness toward anybody here, these comments are being offered in the spirit of entertainment and amusement, having said that...
To Lena: I believe you asked me who my favorite authors were?
Simple Ms. Smarty pants-
Mickey Spillane
Anything by any of the 3 stooges
George W. Bush
And Amy AL-Keida
As I said, I like your writing
But as to journalism in general
Oh really dear girl, please....
Journalsim is "2" writing
what Luther Campbell and the "2" Live Crew
is to music
Journalism is "2" writing
what Madonna is "2" acting
Journalism is "2" writing
what child pornography is "2" filmmaking.
Journalism is to .....
well you get the point...
Christopher
chris volkay at December 26, 2003 5:40 AM
Note to typo police:
Nobody caught the thrown(throne)
you're all slipping....
for shame...
there are acts of commission and then
acts of omission...
or are my fish just not biting...
chris volkay at December 26, 2003 6:11 AM
Trust me, we all caught "thrown" instead of "throne." (Insert dead horse line here.)
Amy Alkon at December 26, 2003 7:42 AM
Mickey Spillane fucking rocks, Chris. Great dialogue. Great punctuation. Try emulating him!
Lena at December 26, 2003 9:03 AM
Lena:
I'm glad you like Mickey Spillane.
I think this thread has pretty well
played out.
Hint to Ms. Al-Keida
How about posting something about
Bono and his saving the world crusades
Hint...hint..
I could get the party started on that one.
chris volkay at December 26, 2003 11:20 AM
"How about posting something about
Bono and his saving the world crusades"
Like throwing flank steak to the lions.
Lena at December 26, 2003 1:38 PM