So, what's your point John other than to drag up ancient history and whimper about it? Complaining about it, putting it down is irrelevant. It's there, it's published, and you don't like it. What more does anybody need to know other than you have a propensity to hold grudges and want to carp about things long after it's over and that you can't change. It’s petty and pointless and someday you may realize that doing things like that are lowering your own credibility. So, why start a farting contest elsewhere, drag it here and then continue it elsewhere and here? What a waste of time, effort and talent. You can communicate articulately and intelligently, but you let a lack of emotional maturity foul your spark plugs.
Why do I feel obliged to keep correcting 'arty farty'?
Firstly, NOTHING was voted into the first UKA anthology; I seem to remember everything nominated was published, apart from a couple of items that were withdrawn for various reasons.
Secondly, as far as I know, I am STILL a member of UKA, unless my membership has been terminated by the management without my knowledge.
Thirdly, I do actually write stuff, I just choose not to post it.
Fourthly, I don't give a damn what anyone thinks about anything I write, I do it for me, not others. Whether or not the boy's assessment of the fucking poem is the 'truth' is academic as it could only ever be 'his' truth unless everyone else is in accord. (For the record, it's been read thousands of times over the last four years and I've received email from all over the world about it, not one saying it is crap. As it happens David is right, I have never seen myself as a 'poet' or 'writer' but others have seen me in that light. Whether boy-wonder or any of his mates think I'm crap is immaterial to me. I COULD write a critique of his guitar playing and singing at live do's, but there's nothing to be gained from hurling insults at something that he likes to think is good.)
Whilst I'm on the subject I may as well give you the genesis of the poem and where it fits in my ' crap writing' career.
It was the second thing I'd written, the first being 'troubled Mind' written some seventeen years earlier and is even more embarrassing. I wrote it during the breakup to which it refers, in a state of mental collapse. It took 15 mins to write and maybe that shows. It was also written before I'd ever been on ANY writing site and a couple of months before I joined ABC. It was never intended for publication in ANY form, just a bit of catharsis.
What I would say in his defence is that I would far prefer 'honesty', even his jaundiced honesty to some of the awful sycophancy in the asylum.
Now will someone PLEASE go over there and re-fill the sandbox for the kids.
(Sorry Lofty, but sometimes a guy's gotta do what a guy....)
You're always telling people I think such-and-such a thing, or that I have a superiority complex.
You're entitled to your opinions about what kind of a person I am, but as long as you continue to claim you know my own opinions about myself (however 'implied' you think they are,) you are a liar.
And if it riles your self-image (because your honesty is something you like to preserve, right?) then stop doing it.
It would seem to me that time for "critique" on that matter has long since passed.
John, I invite you to critique my work that's up for nomination at this time. God knows I don't want to hear a bunch of shit about it later if by some small chance any of it gets in and you decide you don't like me next year. (maybe this year...maybe already... who knows...)
Don't be a dipshit, Denver. It wasn't a critique, and my point is clear if you'd bother to read the original post. I was agreeing with Tim, who said that anything open to voting by the authors themselves is likely to be weaker than something with a ruthless editor behind it, due to our bias towards people we like. I shouldn't have to repeat it just because you're too stupid to read the thread properly.
I'll critique your work, if you wish, but first I've got to finish reading Andrew Pack's novel. Which is very good so far, might I add.
Missi - your points about your work and writing habits are duly noted, and I'm glad the issue is immaterial to you.
And for future reference, my name is Jonathan, the shortened form being Jon. Everyone may feel free to go on writing 'John' if they think it will serve as some sort of revenge.
"I may well be, I don't really care..."
Course you do. Or else you wouldn't have started this thread. Or at least, if you cared more about what kind of person you were than how good a writer, you'd have noted that I paid your personality a pretty hefty compliment.
Let me do you another favour and type out your response for you:
"Like fug I care, fugging tosser! I don't I don't I don't. You know NOTHING about me. I am a vault of enigmatic secrets and an honest, basic, normal guy to boot. Did I mention I was honest? Honest-to-God, you know. And I KNOW you love yourself, Jon Stone, because I have great insights into people's personalities and I say what I think, and you make it so clear to us all if you read between the lines and see behind your terrible mask of intelligentsia pretentiousness. Just because you went to University, you think you're so much better than me! Yada yada yada. Meh meh meh. I'm a big stupid twatface with a stick in my craw about everyone on the fugging planet who doesn't love me, and I'm proud of it so there."
Now I've done that for you, you can stop spying on me and do something useful with your life before it's too late. Good luck and godspeed!
Whaling's a good start. Go for it. Live the dream.
They probably cut and pasted it to you to piss you off and stir trouble. Not by any chance one of the same people who emails you asking you to 'make the forums exciting again' whenever a modicum of decency is restored around here, is it?
Also, bathe in the irony, Missi: you who have always criticised UKA for being 'sycophantic' go and throw a wobbly one of the few times someone is brutally honest about some of the work there. Now who needs an asylum?
I don't have any particular wish to hurt your feelings and have never slagged off your work when I thought you might be watching. I know you feel strongly about that poem's content. But as an example of a weaker piece in the first anthology, it was the one that sprung to mind, probably because I've heard you read it out twice.
I suspect your UKA friend prizes causing a scene above guarding your sensitivity. I wouldn't open any more emails from him if I were you.
Yeah you're right Lofty, I really should stop prodding the kids, they ain't worth the trouble.
My parting shot;
I REALLY don't care about the boy's opinions because I think they're worthless anyway. Oh, and I've only ever read the awful poem in public the once.
Ha! I *wish* you didn't care!
Sadly, it's clear that caring deeply about my opinions has become a way for you and SG to go about asserting your fading masculinity. Nothing better than an androgynous-looking boy to condescend to, eh?
I'm mana from heaven to you losers. At least until I'm 30.
No you didn't did you.
You said this..
"I mean, for Christ's sake, you had Mississippi's 'For Janet, Wherever She May Be' in the first one. I challenge anyone to defend that as a quality piece of writing, rather than something they admire because it's the brave and honest confessions of someone they know and respect.
Come on, we're fallible. We need to accept our flaws and play up our strengths, not deny everything and throw cold water on those who dare to bring it up."
Somewhere between credibility and sincerity, you've fallen through a hole Jon.
I'm simply pointing that out. But I really didn't need to. I'll let it rest.
Yours truly,
Dipshit.
Stephen,
Quinten Griffin injured his ankle the third week of the season. He was replaced by Ruben Droans, who is a much better running back. The Denver Bronco's have since been to the playoffs and also been thoroughly trounced by Indianapolis, who also is now eliminated from contention. They may make good cricket players though (Denver Broncos that is). While they wouldn't know much about the rules or strategy of Cricket, they seem to suffer the same with their own sport. They are, however, quite big and smelly and would have little difficulty smashing their opponents into bloody piles of mush. Seeing how they wouldn't be following rules and such. They could then study the rules and declare victory by default.
what a lot of bollocks you speak mr. mississippi. I suppose we should all be thankful that you are trapped on this here forum after beeing rejected by rest of the internet community. make respectable communities much more safe and inviting.
I hope this continues and you remain safely isolated here.
There's no working out to be done, Missi. You routinely tell lies about me, and that's that. You tell people 'Jon thinks this...' with the marked intention of giving the impression that I have expressed that opinion.
You can split hairs all you want, but the bottom line is you lie.
>>They are, however, quite big and smelly and would have little difficulty smashing their opponents into bloody piles of mush<<
only in their GIRLY body armour.
More lies. I come here mostly to defend myself against wayward accusations. And I never tout my writing. I thought I'd mention my site because it's so clearly the most pointless piece of advertising in the history of the game. Like any of you give a fuck.
FYI, I don't think any one thing about myself. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm betting that's pretty normal. When you do something good, you think, "Hey, I'm pretty good," and when you do something wrong, you think, "Damn, I'm a fool". And most of the time you don't think about yourself because there's too much going on around you.
It must be nigh on impossible to hold one constant opinion about oneself (let alone constantly positive,) unless you're on some form of happy drug.
So, I repeat: I'll fuck off when you stop lying.
And you don't have irrefutable proof that you aren't a self-obssessed narcissist. If your theory is correct it would appear that you and I are identical twins! I readily accept that my detractors may have a point, it's just that as they ARE detractors and therefore (as you have oftimes said) hardly sympathetic to me, their criticism is suspect and I'm really not interested in their views.
Saucy, you know one thing that Jon Stone has as an overwhelming advantage over wankers like you is that he 'shows his face'. He isn't afraid to be identified with his views, whereas you and your like are spineless, gutless turds whose views are to be accorded the derision they deserve. Bollocks are something you know nothing about as you have none for observation.
Pages