Dale Houstman wrote:
>
> Paul Heslop wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I have one of them # things... but to my blurry eyes it just looks
> > like a dead insect on the screen.
> > I knew Dale was only joking re the coffee, and he's probably right about
> > the group going downhill, though I don't recall, in the short time I've
> > been here, it being anything else.
>
> Whether it's "going downhill" or not - of course - depends on one's
> expectations. But since it is a group supposedly dedicated to
> surrealism, and since surrealism DOES have a VERY well-documented set of
> desires and procedures and processes and... on an on...it really doesn't
> take a genius to observe that the group has devolved from its own
> subject matter.
Definitely. I wasn't around when it came out or even for that long... in
fact I think you pointed me in this direction. It has basically become a
group where people who like surrealism talk... and where a handful of
people attack each other none stop.
>
> >I think we did a couple of threads
> > with continuing bizarre writings which as far as I was concerned were
> > surreal, funny and what i expected, then the usual suspects started
> > having a go at everyone and it seems, basically, you can have normal
> > conversations about whatever or you can join in the 'bash everyone else
> > because they don't do what you do' gang.
>
> This is an example of why the group isn't what it might be: surrealism
> is NOT just about "bizarre writings" good or bad: it was (and continues
> to be - on good days) a philosophy of cognition and a revolutionary
> approach to the transformation of life.
Yes, I know. I agree that there was a certain way of life, a lot of
which I don't actually recall thinking too much about. I guess as I
became interested at a very early age I was more concerned with the
visuals than with the philosophy. I've never been a greatly political
person (unless people like chuck or Josh get up my nose) and I'm not
really into destroying people's views on art just because they don't fit
my own.
>
> > I mean keith pisses me off royally, but I'm not going to base my life
> > round his postings. I killfiled him with reluctance when i couldn't open
> > the group without seeing 600 new 'messages' which were just spam. I
> > don't know what drives him or his alter ego nor the people who seem to
> > be totally engrossed in him.
> >
> > This group may aswell be dead.
>
> True: but I enjoyed the stuff about instant coffee, so if we could just
> rename it "alt.bizarrewritingsandriffsonthemistakesofthemodernworld" I
> would have no complaints.
>
> dmh
I don't see why it can't exist as it is, except people come in, read all
the in fighting and bugger off. Someone new enters the group and are
basically drawn into the fighting. Are any of us true surrealists?
--
Paul. (I never agreed to be Your holy one)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not what it seems...
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 |
|