Previous Index Next
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 15:20:36 CST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: FNORD <bsc835>
Subject: Re: What the...?
In-Reply-To: <9402081839.AAwcjy26392@>; from "THE KIDD" at Feb 8, 9412:43 (noon)
Put simply man....its all FNORD!....it has a meaning, but your notallowed
to be told.. particularly on thursdays in febuary...or for that matterany
time the moon is rising at noon in its third quarter...or after
three o'clock on the birthday of anyone who's name has an R init...never
while the legislaure is in session...and only after being screened
effectively by a commitee that hasn't met since the first geologicalepoch.
However, if you wish for more information there is a variety ofliterature
that will find you eventually..and it may or may not describe anythingat
all....It may contain sports statistics or the recipe for roastHobbit..but
it will find you...or maybe not.
The Mad Fishmonger's sister'scousin's
next door neighbor's former roommate
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 17:40:30 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: El Stupido <TIPPY>
Subject: Re: What the...?
Aw, FNORD, man, you went and let the cat out of the bag, revealing in the
process several closely guarded secrets. Do you have any idea how long it
took us to get that mewling, clawed terror IN the bag. I'm afraid this is
going to call for extreme measures. Ted William's lifetime batting average
is on its way. I trust you shall do the honorable thing.
El Stupido
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 18:13:59 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: El Stupido <TIPPY>
Subject: Re: Oh yeah, I'm a fag, too.
Gee, Kidd, while we're all so down home travelin' and all, I thought you
might want your brain back. I found it lodged in the rectum of one of the
furry denizens lodged in mine. I assumed it was yours, because with the
aid of my trusty magnifying glass I thought I could just make out the
word "obstipation." Kinky, Kidd, very kinky.
El Stupido
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 18:28:23 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: El Stupido <TIPPY>
Subject: Re: True confessions & hope!
Dear Monstruo con el Cerebro de un Atomo (aka el Cabron)
Chingate y muertate!:)
El Stupido
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 20:06:31 -0500
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: John H Noel <NOEL@>
Subject: News Flash! Global Alert Guy Suspended From Job. Read On.
Oh how life imitates art. Remember that listing a few weeks back
from Clarence L. Thomas IV concerning "Jesus is Coming Soon?" Well here's a
little scoop about said individual from an article in my college newspaper.
Appears Fnord was not the only listserv blessed with the message.
What follows are some selections from the piece, with commentary.
"Recently, a system administrator at Andrews University entered
what is ordinarily the domain of attention-starved freshman, teenagers, and
the politically unpopular.
"Clarence L. Thomas IV had been manager of an administrative
computer system when he posted his 5,500 character "Global Alert for
All:Jesus is coming soon" to some 1,200 (sic) newsgroups on USENET, a
network of computers sporting discussion areas on topics such as boating,
philosophy, history, computing, folklore, television, radio personalities,
and other topics ad nauseum." (I guess FNORD fits in the boating category.)
"Users consider posting messages impertinent to a group bad form,
or a breach of 'netiquette.' (Hear that KIDD?!!) In Thomas' case, his alert
was a gross violation. Readers retaliated by sending him electronic
mailbombs, complaining to the Andrews computing center, and leaving
messages on his answering machine.
"Thomas' superiors placed him on a one-week suspension.
"The Jesus is Coming message alone demanded seven megabytes of disc
space from every site with a news feed at least the size of Andrews.
"Thomas pulled a nice trick by posting his message to each
newsgroup individually rather than crossposting."
Jonathon Bell
The Daily Beacon
Now there's some proverbial grist for the proverbial grind. Any
thoughts anyone? Would you do that? Should we laud or loathe the actions of
Mr. Thomas? He has possibly accomplished what no one has accomplished
before him. Just think how many of us impressionable folk were influenced
by his admonitions. Seven megabytes on 1,200 listservs with countless
members is flabbergasting.
The First Noel
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 23:57:06 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: El Stupido <TIPPY>
Subject: Re: News Flash! Global Alert Guy Suspended From Jo
Gee, if his message saves just one soul, it will all have been worthwhile,
don't you think?
Getting all choked up,
El Stupido (Now with improved stain fighting ability)
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 1994 00:15:05 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: El Stupido <TIPPY>
Subject: Eye of the Camel
>From here on out, you can't play it TOO safe. All referents pertainingto
the study of Superboy's canine sidekick should be crouched in the skys.
Flog the camel, and hope for the best. Godzilla vs. Megalith and my money's
on the big green guy. Kimono wrote the script and psychedelia's significance
as anything more than Disneyland should be painfully obvious to even the
casual student of recent history. Why else would the former Mr. and Mrs.Sun-
shine be keeping up with their button-down joneses? Ask the Neo-Science boys
if you've got the time and the lawyers. They may even answer you. THEY put
down their Fleiss-swatter long enough to repress Floyd's reduction theory.
Backwards. With one Hand. But that would be too Telling. The Machine-Mafia
are on track again and the monkeys are not too crazy about it. Start from
scratch and a footnote to the nightmare of history. Who can blame them?Don't
answer that, we all know who could, but maybe they won't. Its origins give
it away. At first. Then it's commodity time. The Chinese curse. We really
would rather just sleep through it all, but there's just too much noise.
Jeerleaders on the sight-lines. Forwards. Gives the whole thing a bad name.
There's no shortage of willing dupes, that's for sure. Higomous Hogomous.
Not Algonquin. And not true. Maybe then, though I doubt it, but definitely
not now. It's a whole new ball game. The Kultzenjammer Kids. The rainyparade.
Fishheads, fearing they're on their way, way out, getting up and trying to
lead the orchestra, poorly trained, in some rousing patriotic waltz, the
majority fortunately overstimulated and incapable of arousal. What if HE was
wrong? the wolf asked, but he wasn't. At least not entirely. No, that was
definitely the last dance. Sorry, but it's not the mirror that's cracked.
El Stupido
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 18:03:12 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: moritorium it boys
This regularly-unsaturated summer-rerun joke season, originally scheduled
for this time slot has been preempted so that we may bring you a new genre
of Thingie by Daniel A. Foss, with the grateful appreciation of the National
Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the
Mobil Corportation that Daniel A. Foss is doing this For Nothing, in every
sense.
Please stand by. There is nothing wrong with your set, but with you, that
you are underlings.
Those present from ANTHRO-L, POMO-TALK (Postmodern Culture), POMO-LIST,
and EJVC-L (Electronic Journal of Virtual Culture), for the sole andexclusive
purpose of studying FNORD-L and its parent corporation and MTV ofCyberspace,
Leri@gossip.pyramid.com, raise hands.
Daniel A. Foss, sheepishly raising hand
---------------------------------------
[Afterword from SUB SPECIE AETERNITATIS:
[Coming: As you may know, we are still weeping over the tragic loss of our
dear departed Sister, Doctress Neutopia, who <sob> hanged herself inher
garage last night. Her legacy to cybercivilization is recorded on numberless
(we can't count) floppies weighing over 90 kilogrammes. On the solecondition
that they be broadcast exactly as written. Fair enough, but who can matchthe
phenotypical oddity of the sixteen-fingered Rumanian, Ion Ascii, co-winner,
with the great Z.M. Ebcdic, of the coveted 1947 Stalin Prize for invention
of the Digital Computer. Neither of whom were women. The latter is highly
relevant.
[We have endeavoured to preserve authenticity by engaging the services of
one who knew her best, in whatever sense you want, if not a hell of a lot
often, and who describes it as "sheer self-sacrifice." This person, with "no
more heart thant the tin woodsman, or so I thought," finds himself "morethan
heartbroken, more than the rest of you are more than heartbroken.<sob>"]
[.sig hoyle,
[CHEATING@SBCCVM.BITNET]
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 08:55:33 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: Aleister Crowbar <TIPPY>
Subject: New & Improved!
Me, I'm here to draw a bead on alt.sects.imagined from a particularly low
vantage point disguised as a cross-dressing one-legged Gypsy fiddler named
Swen. So sorry to hear about the Doctress as good free-floating aggression
attractors are damn hard to come by these days. This damn smug has reduced
the effective (in)visibility but I was tired of extolling the virtues of the
uncounted millenia old elstupido tradition anyway. What's ethics between
meals, anyhow?
Wilt what thou do...
A.C.
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 23:23:07 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: obsession attains epiphany in theoretical analysis Part 1
Written under conditions of *extreme* physical hardship. Now in softship.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 00:04:02 EST
Reply-To: DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: smart people as outliers in cultural analysis modeling
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L<ANTHRO-L@UBVM.BITNET>
A very long post about practically nothing at all.
Did I ever care who or what or if Seeker1 "really was"? Of course not;
howbeit was a trifle irked each time he adduced the claim, "I might be Dan
Foss," aside from the public nonexistence of any "Dan Foss," other than as
a diminutive of "Daniel C. Foss," acknowledged as "the real one" in all OECD
nations. Mysterious Lawyers From Outer Space descend when catching mereferring
or getting reffered to as all but Daniel A. Foss; *serve* me with something
just expensive enough to hurt; and disappear before Daniel A. Foss candocument
their existence to the indisputably Real Dr A.(1) That Seeker1 was notDaniel
A. Foss would be established in the fullness of time. Much less, thatSeeker1/
Steve Mizrach was is will ever be Jewish; for what, really, were/are/arethey?/
will be "the Jews"; for lo it is it not written in the collectedlaserprintout
of Daniel A. Foss that Peoples are not discrete billiard-ball-like entitiesin
history.(2)
This is how I saw it in a daily installment of my very first, uh, unwork
(where "work" was what was paid for by WEINTRAU's research grant) ofe-fiction
[The year is 532 - a year before the invention of AD by the monk Exiguus -in
the reign of Justinian The Great.]:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 87 17:40:14 EDT
From: "<<<?>>>" <WEINTRAU@>
Subject: missing the bus
To: Al Adler <ADLER1@>
....
-------------------------
The good thing about slavery was the job security. The bad thing was what
might happen to one's private parts to qualify for a secure job in theSacred
Palace. The OTHER (Specify) recalled that the Corpus Iuris Civilis, or the
Codex Iustinianus as it was popularly known, prohibited castration of Jewish
slaves for eunuchistic purposes, as Mosaic law decreed....
....
The hairy part would be convincing six learned sixth century rabbis thathe
indeed was Jewish. By sixth century standards, it's funny but he didn't look
Jewish....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[The principal achievement of this bit of timewasting was an in-passing
tale of senseless massacre of contemporary Maya by the contemporary Mexican
Army. Because I knew just enough to assume this is what the Mexican Armycould
be expected to do, commonsensically. Didn't all of you? (Foss to Adler, Wed,30
Sep 87 14:16:57 EDT)]
-------------------------
In a post of Tue, 18 Jan 1994 23:18:07 EST, "a triviality perhaps of
decisive significance," I complained, in effect, but so as to obscure thefact
to all but myself, that: "I play tricks. Why or wherein do people notconsider
the possibility that I am being disingenuous, or rather, *sneaky*, at timesfor
Educational purposes; at times for the sheer hell of it; and therewith helpme
out immensely! Some people write crossword puzzles; no mistaking that.There's
no use just the trickster playing the trick without consideration that the
trickery is persent. (The inference heuristics precluding the desiredawareness
were of course already known to me and demonstrated to my satisfaction as
certain.)
"In the meantime," I said, we learned that Seeker1 was, in fact, Jewish.
Because he *looked* Jewish; don't ask me." In the spirit of the fictioncited
above. What I was mulling over at that point was the comparable importance,if
comparable it was, of Seeker1's Jewishness and Yee's query, accepted asvalid,
as to Bob Graber's reading of fiction.
The aforementioned post was about Experience and Experience ofExperience.
The design of a trick was taking shape whereby an Experience would beinduced
in certain persons of predictable character from partly (or completely)
spurious origins. Or at least, there would be the Experience that theExperi-
ence was Experienced as an Experience by the Experiencer. Whatever thatmeant;
which, precisely, was the explanandum.
The opportunity would come in due time; the immediate task was turningup
the theory-generating machinery to pour icky glop in the mob's path towardthe
What Is Culture precipice; but where there's lemmings, there's a way. On
reconsideration, this looked like a waste of scarce energy, que sera and all
that.
The obscure and chaotic composition of "what's a nice jewish boy doing at
the u fla gainesville," mostly in a mood of giggly mirth, yet with two
intervals of clenched teeth hate, was more incomprehensibly incoherent than
I'd expected to produce; sent out Fri, 21 Jan 1994 05:19:07. Subsequently,
I made a list of at least six major topic-oids in an offline attempt to
prove chaotic incoherence; and there were pointers to preceding posts stuck
in to seem hostile; yet this dissolved should the reader recall thereferents.
Example: "Are you on [Leri] as a *social scientist*, or as a *real kid*?...
Which should recall the final four words of the preceding post, "*othersocial
scientists also posing as devotees*." ["to whom you suppose is thisdiscussion
raw data," Fri, 21 Jan 1994 00:25:23 EST; also, "he's real i'm the social
scientist," Tue, 11 Jan 1994 15:15:55 EST] What was, if anything, Serious,in
the content - meaning, in the intent and affect, not the substantivecontent,
which from my current perspective was as ludicrous as the rest, beingobjective
hence, would you say, lizzy, sexist, was my quixotic infantile-chivalrous
effort to efface Elizabeth N. Hubbard/Doctress Neutopia's self-discrediting;
which is not my doing, only my own self-discrediting is; and will not be
affected by my efforts. (But suppose, just suppose me as a Real Man in a
Real Relationship; an impossibility, to be sure, but suppose, anyway. What's
to do, don't protect a woman at all? Never protect any woman? Sometime, over
the rainbow, women will give the orders on these thorny issues; they will be
engraved on the Temples of the Goddess. Meanwhile....)
The Jewish Question was intended throughout as a *distractor*, yet the
current ambience of tribalistic tensions in New York City, in Oakland and
Los Angeles, and even, as I read the newspapers, in Gainesville FL itself,
was certain to be a potent one. The vague notion at the time was, after
a brief interval, step in and say, "Folks, I want to show you how this post
was worded. For one instance of fakery, look at...."
How about, "[Before the Jews got hold of this place [*sic*],] this USAwas
a savage sinkhole of tribal wars and exclusive obsession with money [gee,you
mean it stopped?]. [Thanks to the Jews,][[padding]: it's now a world-class
civilization,] manufacturing millions of people a year who can actintelligent
[about two lines of padding deleted]; obsessed not with money but with
Socioeconomic Status,..." Anoyone not know what Socioconomic Status is?Good.
Of all of you, is there anyone prepared to deny the centrality of moneywithin
its social construction? Certainly not. Everyone remember taking Englishback
in school, a certain minority of the readership excluded? Look, you have onone
side an image of herd conformity and one of greed. On the other side, animage
of herd conformity, androids manufactured by the millions to *act* - doesn't
say *are* - smart, another of greed.
This might have been more obvious had I said, "Thanks to the Jews, thesun
will come up in the morning." But why bother. If it says anything, it's asan
antinationalist subtext; not all that "sub" either.
Some of the discussion ensuing among some of the Jewish listmembershipwas
explicable, sociologically, as danger evaluation: Sheep hold a staffmeeting,
just one possible analogy, to ascertain probability of wolf-presence. This
was overdetermined by pre-existing bad relations between the odd Jewish
listmember and another odd Jewish listmember, antedating the Jan 21 post and
not relevant to anything of remotely Jewish content; the "free-floatingaggess-
ion," hardly an explanation of anything of course, and not much of a
description, either, which I once characterized as underlying flame-ery as a
whole and in general.
What had been predictable, if trivial, would be that some people would
assume the posture and stance of, "We're all natives, now!" without ever
recognizing that this was what they were doing. Not even some of mydefenders
escaped. The good Mike Lieber, for whose assistance I am deeply grateful,was
alas, himself caught:
"I have the distinct impression, as a member of the tribe well versed in
emic forms of play, that D. Foss was yanking your chains a bit....Lightenup,
guys. If you get an invitation to play, then take it or pass on it, butdon't
get offended at the invitation." ["goy, a clarification," Fri, 21 Jan 1994
12:33::30 CST]
Which fails simply because it approaches the, uh, *cultural gurgle* as a
personal-interactional and semantic-interpretative problem. That is, aslying
within the purview of social psychology and weakly-motivated choice when
individuals are presented with polysemic stimuli; psychology, in otherwords.
The real question in my opinion lies, however, within the competence of
sociology: *What and wherein are the rules governing who may or may notassume,
provisionally or longer term, the trickster role in a given social group,let
us say, a subculture, and specifically, that of ANTHRO-L. (Why is it that
people who deal so much in what-is-culture pretend something else is there,
or nothing is there, anything but culture is governing their denial ofcultural
influence and constraints on behavior? Weird.)
It is plain to this writer, for very elaborate reasons which he will tell
absolutely nobody, due to a sense of proportion between intricacy of
explanation and the, let's face it, *practically nothing* there exists to be
explained, that Daniel A. Foss is *ineligible* for social construction asThe
Trickster; nor are any of the latter's trickster-like activities susceptible
to social construction post facto as mere funny business. (Consider, as the
most trivial instance of this rule application, the post sent by Rafael
Candido Alvarado, "MISANTHRO-L," Sat, 22 Jan 1994 15:23::34 -0500. Alvarado
himself states, as close to overtly as one can get, that he deleted the post
he criticizes before reading it, having perused only the subject line; then
writes, inter alia, "Prior to that conflict, after having detected adangerous
....[sentence broken off]" and "As for the subject heading of this post, it
sums up what I think of Foss, and not really in jest.") Apoplexy is thesystem
default; the laugh track is sparse.
Trust me. Conclusive proof would take a thousand lines. Why, would take
two thousand lines. Generalization, now, this is the interesting issue, but
takes working out by more than just me.
Stephanie J. Nelson alone escapes the sociological framework, with herpost,
"Angry Jewish men," Fri, 21 Jan 1994 09:02:02:55 PST. This post is uniquefor
eschewing the reactive posture; and in taking the initiative in framing my
"offense," as reframed, to suit a wider, invisible, constituency, albeit one
soon to manifest its presence. This constituency is, firstly, least imbuedwith
the extremely localized and recondite subculture of ANTHRO-L. Secondly, it's
intent or "program," insofar as we may apply these words, is the extensionand
intensification of the professional-anthropologist subculture into or within
ANTHRO-L; that is, attenuating the latter's self-generating peculiarities.In
short, her implication is that Daniel A. Foss is a crasher, an impostor, and
one with no legitimate right to speak. (She is of course quite correct; andfor
this reason alone I do here speak up.) She writes:
>This routine is becoming tiresom:
>Dan Foss invents an insult out of (perhaps) sloppy scholarship and elevatesit
>into either a racial slur or a professional one, then commits character
>assassination and issues an ultimatum for either a groveling apologia orexit
>from the list.
>Mellow out, Dan. As Milton wrote, the mind is its own place, and can makeof
>itself either heaven or hell. Does this not fit your theory of culture?You
>theorized it, so dwell in its consequences. And this is not your list,so
>cut the dominance displays..
>And cut the racist Jew thing too. All kinds of races and religions havemade
>this country what it is, for better or for worse. The last thing we needon
>this list is racist chest-beating. For shame, Stephanie Nelson
For whatever motivated its posting, the post in question is a masterpieceof
list micropolitical and propaganda rhetoric. Its thrust is the reinforcementof
academic hierarchicization, and by extension, the prolongation of the impactof
academic hierarchization within the suppositiously magical,tooth-fairy-free,
fun-and-freedom-for-all precincts of what is popularly known as Cyberspace.For
this, above all, is what I have been "theorizing" about on this list. Along
with uncompromising egalitarianism.
The text says to me, even *personally*, "You don't have the stripes?Well,
get out, or at minimum shut the [obscenity] up." And, barring anow-unforseen
social upheaval of stupendous proportions, Stephanie J. Nelson is the waveof
the future, our local Gore. "On the Internet, every-goddam-one knows you'rea
dog." Slovenliness, which allows a few leaks here and there, will in duecourse
get mopped up. If They declare a liberation within the confines ofcapitalism,
it is the rule that, *The fortunate few escape, the unfortunate many are
expelled*.
Daniel A. Foss
(1) Daniel C. Foss was the one who got Tenure; also is a moderately famousif
boring writer. Also like me born in 1940 to a father named Irving. PhD same
year, 1969. Never met him in my life; though it was not easy to avoidMontclair
State College while living in Newark.
(2) Discussion on Race, this list, Sept 1992.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 08:04:57 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: Lord of the Stys <TIPPY>
Subject: Whipping Postmodern
Didja ever open a can of green beans and find corn inside instead?
Didja eat it anyway?
L.O.T.S.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 22:49:16 EST
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: Why end with the beginning when the dreariest Part 2 ever
sent over the air can inundate you with ordure:
===============================================================================
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 00:36:48 EST
Reply-To: DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: cultural currents & crosscurrents buffeting nonexistent&
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L<ANTHRO-L@UBVM.BITNET>
microtrivial quasioccurrences:
------------------------------------
[Continuing "a very long post about practically nothing at all."]
------------------------------------
SPECIAL OFFER: BOHEHEAD COHORT T-SHIRTS, LAMINATED ID CARDS, SEE BELOW
------------------------------------
[We all despise autobiographical posts, don't we, given - but notrestricted
to that - whose autobiography it turns out to have been. Hence this one,sequel
to the abominable, "smart people as outliers in cultural analysis modeling,"as
subtitled and dated below; "cultural analysis modeling" was substituted atthe
last moment for "sociology of knowledge" as properly phonier.]
------------------------------------
It is much to be regretted that stupidity of the genre of the present
post is all you are ever likely to get out of me again. Unfortunately, it
is presumed that the person or persons who provoked it desire exactly the
outcome in question. Yet, in all, I have twisted slowly slowly in the
wind, and have got all due consideration HUMAN GARBAGE has a right to
expect; for this reason only, I CAN DO NO OTHER. (Forget what I used to
be; I already have. Whatever that was. Must have been something better.
Who, though, needs it, ever did?)
------------------------------------
This continues "A very long post about practically nothing at all," Fri,11
Feb 1994 00:04:02 EST. Why don't I just stop right here, go somewhere else,
soak till I croak, or *something*, that I shall need to figure out later,after
finishing up. There's still a portentous professorish heading I chalkedacross
the left half of the blackboard on that night of Feb 10-11, still there,
haunting me:
Decline of the Cyberspace/Virtual Culture
I. Short-Term
II. Long-Term
[Because? As often noted in this column, any idea, notion, or shall wenow
add, meme, commonly enough accepted or believed is almost guaranteed to have
something wrong with it; and what would the Explaining Industry do without
those Seeds of Decadence under your nose had you just looked a teeny bit,which
are inevitably to be found in the most meteorically rising cultural and even-
pardon the expression sociopolitical - Thingies past-present-crosscultural-
yet-to-come. Why do you ask?]
Last time I credited one Stephanie J. Nelson with a piece of advice ofthe
tenor of social bias that, were a resurrected-among-us St Paul to emulate it
in his own variant of our "vivid-contemporary" type style, he could hardly
improve upon it. The interpretation was, inevitably, so conjectural that,with
greatest regret, I have postponed perusal of Friday-Saturday ANTRHO-L mail.One
must anticipate no less severe charges, "character assassination," "racism,"as
aforenoted; but why not escalation, for if the Progressive SociologistsNetwork
resorted to "paranoid schizophrenic," why should present company dawdle
behindhand.
Another nearnonevent, detectable only with the electron-microsociomicro-
scope, arrived dated Fri, 21 Jan 1994 07:50:18 -0500; my sentience hereat
was mostly out of town, partly in New York City; partly in Poisoned-Blanket-
Genocide-General-Town MA; the fragment in this room was fixated on devouring
the ration which blue-helmet-giant-Punjabi would dole out to fortunate few
refugees with craving-hunger so intense we are driven to seize it. Thedocument
was identified by <username>@node>, former part ignored (and lowercasebesides)
but latter provocative, HUSC.-----.---.
------------------------------
Some of you, nay, a whole bunch, an awful-lotta you, have beenmasticating
the squishy cud comprising - with surrounding crumbly gunk - *how*, youknow,
*culture* and *consciousness*, the former we ourselves cannot readily define
but the latter we rest content to presume that some neuroscientistsomewhere,
philosopher as a fallback, has triumphantly defined into the groud be itthat
we ourselves wouldn't have heard of it, *do their Thingie together*.
Culture and consciousness, one and indivisible, yet perforce there areMany
Levels, every undergraduate pseudointellectual in my day knew there wereMany
Levels, rent asunder by reductionism, by levels of analysis, by units of
analysis holistic or discrete as these latter tend in these times to be.
Not to mention that, in the whole issue matter question of thepenetration
of culture into an organism's consciousness and for sure vicing the versa:
Surely this whole la banza would lie in the province of anotherDepartment,
another building's occupant, where floorplans, office numbers, and
denizens-possessors of offices are all alike unknown; and you, dear ANTHRO-L
subscribers, are no dilletantes!
What I'm telling you is how it happens, what kinds of *stupidity* are for
certain going on. Few of you are as much hopeless cases as myself; and *for
this very reason* find it that much more difficult to *observe yourselves*.
Because, as you know, as you assume to the innermost depths, you simply donot
find yourselves Up To Something behind your own backs such that you quite
urgently bear watching.
In this matter, you should be duly thankful, I am here to help you.
------------------------------
It is relevant that I'd just read Arlette Farge, Fragile Lives: Violence,
Solidarity and Power in Eighteenth-Century Paris, 1992. (Conoisseurs ofethno-
racial slurs shold note p. 175, where it is is noted that Frogs, "les
grenoilles," originated as a supercilious-derogatory designation of theParis
poor by the court aristocracy.) Whatever this *aristo* says, there'll be a
lesson taught, come eighty-nine! Harvard becomes the Versailles of academia!
And the poster did write of Daniel A. Foss, dripping with Harvardysarcasm,
"Sometimes HE gets a bit tiresome (i.e., the Jew thing), but I'm alwayswilling
to except this because it usually the LEAST tiresome thing going on at the
moment." There follows an entirely false account of ANTHRO-L customary usage
and practice: "There are those who are occasionally offended by something HE
says. These people are usually shouted down by the MAN himself. Lurkers and
Contributers alike follow by expressing a vote of confidence in the MAN and
the matter is usually settled quickly. I guess the problem with Foss (1) is
that almost everyone is afraid to second-guess his god-like aura, I'm NOT."
I do not mention the poster's name, as we are interested in consciousness*
culture, not the photo-ID cards with validation stickers the local conden-
sations of culture/consciousness carry arround with them. I did not read the
latter-cited passage until just now, and it has set me to wondering whereinand
how the victim who wrote the lines acquired or developed the near-delusional
perspective upon yours truly's [nonexistent] significance on ANTHRO-L which,he
says, does not faze him.(2)
But I didn't bother to read it on Jan 21. The double-usage of "tiresome,"a
word more deadly even than "tedious," had shoved me into the mindset of asans-
culotte of ninety-three; *aristos* must be shown that The People are nolonger
fooled, neither are they fools. You laugh, do you, *monseigneur*? We shallsee.
I strode briskly (physically impossible outside fantasy) toward Marat'soffice;
from that hotbed of class war would I disseminate the Anger Of The People:That
post, "nothing funny about this at all, sir!" Fri, 21 Jan 1994 08:00:20 EST,
was much more rabid than the target of Stephanie J. Nelson's and RafaelCandido
Alvarado's censure, "the vileness of the offense," etc., etc. A parody, in
miniature, of the class warfare I have waged against the ANTHRO-L list as a
whole since 1992. (E.g., "My objections to the upper middle class include,are
in fact headed by, the fact that I am not in it.") And whereto Nelson and
Alvarado are administering, they hope, the definitive squelch.
The true Daniel A. Foss cycle, as it is memorable to Daniel A. Foss, the
present writer, whose successful tenured famous near-namesake would beappalled
at the casual use of diminutives, single-syllables, and other fragmentary
representations of the accurate name (and has been properly condemned herein
anticipation of and exculpation from charges filed by attorneys representing
Daniel C. Foss), is utterly different.
(a) The opening stage is a succession of posts which are written withsuch
extremely time-consuming care, inclusive of embedded humor, usages requiring
extensive search of memory for precise wording necessitated by objective of
inducing, as I once put it, the "experience of having read the ostensibly
spontaneously composed." There is a vast amount of time thrown out rather
inefficiently, since lookups of references or disinterring of printed matter
packed away (the purpose of reading, as I have explained time and timeagain,
is *exclusively* the filling to the brim of cardboard cartons with paperback
books read cover to cover; any acquisition of "learning" or "truth" or such
is a byproduct) require forays from computer room to office and back, using
elevators - saves on hard breathing from emphysema - both directions,includes
search time, and rarely takes less than half an hour).(3)
Writing posts takes a staggering amount of work; this work isoccasionally
motivated by such limited objectives as, "What do you suppose it takes inthe
way of backbreaking toil, to shovel intellectual content of indubitablequality
in a vast stinking pile over the collective lot of them to preclude their
getting sucked into the ooze of yet another 'Well, what *is* culture,anyway'
debate?"
Persons with normal verbal fluency, non-deteriorating cognitivefaculties,
and the mastery of seemingly insignificant, piddling, picayune, and commonly
obliviated social rituals or appropriate behaviors such as "carring on anormal
conversation," "holding forth," and "looking like a professional/authority
figure" never have to worry about or problematize such "trivial nonsense";they
pick it up as if by osmosis. With another not insignificant percentage ofyou,
most of the behavior in question is just "a doin'-whut-comes-naturally,"with
problem areas requiring serious work in order to attain the degree ofpresenta-
bility that gets you hired. (Some have problems with English as a *second*
language; few, with English as a *first* language.)
The time comes from *doing nothing else*.
Practices necessitated for getting words out misfire into irrational,
uncontrolled, unforeseen, and delusional tirades and rage fits. These are
becoming more seldom, but still occur. Nothing of the sort occurred in the
posts censured by Stephanie J. Nelson; but she does apparently retain total
recall, or something like it, of those which did occur. (I would myselfinclude
such embarassments as the Pam Leader mess back in October or November or one
of those months in there, which shocked me into hiding and was entirely my
fault.) In her "Angry Jewish men" post (op. cit., part 1), she charges
"character assassination" as if it were my standard operating procedure and
not something undesirable and frequently accidental; or if not accidental,
takes on an inintended character: When awareness and control is attained(this
pertains to verbal control only, as I do not move my body very much very faror
in any sense rapidly), the remorse evinced is genuine; where as we shallsee,
Stephanie J. Nelson has accused me of fakery and dissembling in that regard.
None of the preceding is applicable to the present dispute. What I didwas,
in my view, work long and hard over a succession of long posts ofindubitable
intellectual content. I then indulged in some Rest & Relaxation with the
contrivedly muddled "gainesville" post (where as I said, even the "angry"parts
get guffaws from my "test audience," named Steve Jacobs, microeconomist).Here
the reaction of the personality of Stephanie J. Nelson is irrelevant to the
cyclic character of the behavior of members of the list.
*It has been repeatedly demonstrated that prolonged backbreaking toilwith
the intent to post theoretical contributions or historical-examples/case-
studies or both HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY MAKING MYSELF THE ISSUE; THEIDEATIONAL
CONTENT OF THE POSTS HAS BEEN IGNORED UTTERLY AND WITHOUT MENTION*. Period.
I have one thousand pages of laserprintout in my office; another fourthousand
pages of laserprintout is stored outside this building. To this I alludeunder
"evidence."
Stephanie J. Nelson said, Mon, 24 Jan 1994 13:37:00 PST:
"And what is this 'evidence' you refer to?"(4, see below)
*That* is the evidence. Which omits private correspondence betweenStephanie
J. Nelson, from the time *she* initiated said correspondence, in 1992, and
Daniel A. Foss; covering the entire period up to the point that Daniel A.Foss
became incapacitated for writing personal letters; with sporadicresumptions;
the last of said resumptions commencing with the futile negotiationscommencing
Wed, 26 Jan 94 23:41:25 EST. Broken off due to exorbitant and escalating
demands for admission by Daniel A. Foss of entire guilt for whollyirrelevant
matters, inclusive of developments on ANTHRO-L instigated by Stephanie J.
Nelson herself; the latter documented and proven by sequences of postings.(4,
see below.(4)
My documentary evidence proves that, on each occasion upon which I madethe
most strenuous effort to introduce my views to ANTHRO-L in all seriousness,and
there was no doubt expressed or articulated as to the quality of saidideation,
the latter was utterly obliviated from the discourse by making mypersonality,
style inclusive of humorous and facetious usages whose intent was to infuse
readability and where possible *compulsive* readability into an otherwise
dreary text or narrative, or even *conformist efforts* the sole andexclusive
admissible topic concerning what I wrote.
Example: In the ANTHRO-L discussion of "race," September-October 1992, I
changed style to the maximum consistent with both readability and "Academic
High Style." The effect was the charge by our departed colleagueSteve_Maack,
<Steve_Maack@>, Internet address now inoperative, to the
effect that my posts were written by "five or maybe even six differentpeople
using the same account." There ensued the most bizarre debate I have ever
witnessed on this list, to whit, as to if I was or wasn't. Similaroccurrences
may be adduced, with lesser consequences if having similar if analogous
effects, for other occasions when I played the "good boy," attempting to
impress - and make no mistake about it, I am an exhibitionist which, given
social isolation at Stony Brook, is a necessity - by content with stylistic
flourishes subordinated. The social norm generalized from these sequences of
events is that the content I believed present was precluded from having
cognizance given to it by the ANTHRO-L community as a whole.
It is this repeating pattern of successions of events, of predictable
outcome, which has imparted to my humor its nihilistic edge; and hasfostered
my transition from utopian-minded egalitarian political radicalism tocramped,
crabby, cynical negativity. This I regret in myself; and despite loss of the
socially critical thrust, with associated intellectual narrowing, promisesto
eviscerate my "contributions" even more, so long as I *need* ANTHRO-L morethan
vice versa.
Culturally, that is, in the local subculture, it is taken for grantedthat
my possession of the faculties of cognition, including Knowing andTheorizing,
is patently impossible, the artifact of my own delusion and that of others
momentarily taken in. This is beyond question. It has induced rage fits,most
of which I now throw off line; then I get back to the pointless grind whenthey
subside.
Steve_Mack or Stephanie J. Nelson, for whatever motives, arespokespersons
for social hierarchization. The social norm which has clotted around me, and
a priorism anent my incapability of formulating any ideation qualifying for
taking up the Valuable Time of the readership, is an artifact of social
hierarchy and the original, John Dollard (Nature of Prejudice, 1940),version
of the "self-fulfilling prophecy": Dominants impose, using such forcible
sanctions as this may entail, negative stereotypes and normativelyprescribed
behaviors taken as evidence of assumed Inferiority, upon Inferiors; then
punish them for violations of prescribed Inferior-like conditions. Thisapplies
here in full feathered finery of fatuity-festooned academic civility. Thosenot
on the career escalator bear presumptive stupidity; stupid means literal
inability to talk (which in the present case happens to be true); andwhether
essential, as for the Retard; or [socially] constructed, for theoccupationally
defective, has the identical effect of the *denial of the social validity of
one's presence*.
It follows that what I wrote last week; what I write now; will make no
difference for the treatment accorded what I say such as I may deem topossess
intellectual content *even if agreement to the effect that it so possessessame
is obtained from isolated members of the list here or there. If or when
annoyed beyond the DELETE-key tolerance point, there will emerge from the
lurker or peripheral constituencies a crescent mutually reinforced angerwhich
will relish, savor, and deploy such evidence of stupidity the members in
question believe has been observed; and even the statement that they cannot
understand it is brandished as the most conclusive evidence of stupidity in
that which is beyond what they are willing to attempt to understand.(5)
There is no fighting social class and its miasmal contamination of
consciousness pari passu with its noxious toxic fumes of ideological
minimization of necessary thinking and time spent thinking it: Both of
the latter, of course, are every bit part and parcel of what makes armenian
civilization such a wonderful thing.
What is to be gained from the position I have taken here and in the first
post, as well as in the posts which led up to the latter posts and merelyhad
the mass-cretinizing effect of further stimulating personal hatreds (whichare
not the *cause* of what I speak of here, but the *social-structurally-
determined effects*) is merely and simply *recognition* that such social
conventions, pervading as they do the wider society, *are present here and
cannot be dissipated by imputing magical powers to academic civility* or any
other form, shape, or manner of *normative idealism*. Secondly, thereshould,
*must*, be constant, invariant awareness of the inference heuristics derived
from the hierarchized outside society, hence present in the localsubculture;
*where their absence would be nothing short of miraculous*.
If this weren't you, then, *how many anthropologists could dance on the
head of a pin*?
Imagine, capitalism without hierarchy. Fantastic.
**************************
(1) Make sure by all possible means that the use of this four-letter-wordhas
been cleared with the attorneys, publishers, publishers' attorneys, and
literary agents representing Daniel C. Foss or acting in his behalf.
(2) Widespread ignoring of my posts should rather be indicative of the
ubiquity of kill files, or failing this, hairtrigger-finger DELETE-key
artistry. Nothing I have yet said on ANTHRO-L has left the least trace.
Only the usage Thingie betrays my sometime presence.
(3) Splendid argument for sitting in this bluish itchy swivel chair forminimum
twelve hours at a stretch, as I have just done for the past twelve hours.The
effort to stir off the chair will most certainly invalidate the Access Code
Number by habitual punching of a '1' instead of the necessary '2', so why
lose things and drop things, rendering it impossible to get back in into the
bargain, just for some normative-idealistic fantasy of exercise, whateverthat
is. Mind you, however, take heed to move ever so slightly, lest motionsensors
report to Headquarters one has disappeared into thin air.
(4) The following is the most venomous slander in the entire loathsomedossier
of the ANTRHOgate scandal, considering merely what is on the public record.
While it is undoubtedly the saner thing that I should have ignored the whole
sickening business and forgotten it, this is not psychologically possible.The
truth must be told, at the cost of ensuring that none of it is ever read due
to the visibly pointless character of the present exercise. It is necessaryto
discuss the paragraph below, cited from "Smears, lies, misses & disses,"Mon,
24 Jan 1994, 16:20:22 PST, line by line, word by word:
>I am loath to be that single dissenting voice, Dan, but sometimes a cigaris
>just a cigar,
Which upon occasion it is not. The freedom of the interpreter to encode the
symbol table and decode specifics is illegitimate even in the cigarstained
hands of Sigmund Freud in the face of prior premeditation as to what should
be taken to mean what; and not much less legitimate elsewise, too.
>...and sometimes a misreading of an ambiguity is just a misreading
>of an ambiguity.
So tell me, did you ever *dare* to operate on this principle in school? Even
supposing you ran into a lot of easy-marker deconstruction freaks, you aresure
to have been *dead wrong*, flown in the face of centuries of scholarship, if
you costrued interpretation reducible exclusively to what you could get away
with! What you are trying to get away with in the present instance,moreover,
is *egregious*, ignoring the words. Even the words, if observedmicroscopically
as on a slide, say, quickly appear farcical when scanned as a paragraph.Where
I myself cannot honestly state what I intended each phrase or clause to"mean,"
yet *did* intend each composite construction to "mean" other than what the
segments meant, which I did not care what they were, you have got *somenerve*
claiming you have some privileged mystical insight which says this meansthat,
not the other thing. Having a load of guilt a mile wide, were I convincedI'd
been serious, however transitorily, about anything mean, nasty, orthreatening,
I'd have apologized straight off.
Or maybe, any time there is anything posted by Stephanie J. Nelson, weshould
all take every single word on the screen/paper to mean "turkey," and alllarger
textual units in the posting should also be taken to mean "turkey." Same
principle. What's even better about this idea than the original by Stepanie
J. Nelson is, Stephanie J. Nelson has been, if you read carefully, been bent
on taking everything I write as indicative or symptomatic of moral andcharact-
erological depravity *FAR LONGER* than I have taken what she has written ormay
henceforth write as "turkey."
>But you and Mr Lieber are trying to change the subject of my complaint.
Just what right did you have to assign the content you did to the so-called
complaint in the first place? Your arbitrary assignment of meanings as you
please to whatever is written or elsewise output by Daniel A. Foss strongly
militates against your confection of a "complaint" as you see fit. Even were
you correct, which you are not as you are diametrically wrong-o, *you do not
know the facts in question*. You not only do not know the nature of my
ephemeral connection with "Doctress Neutopia" as of that time; you do not
know or care to know why or wherein I could well tolerate ribbing of myself
but not of that person. At that time. Which is all academic, so to speak,and
I shall "sit with folded arms" should Elizabeth N. Hubbard/Doctress Neutopia
henceforth get reviled till the cows come home.
*But what gives you the right*, Stephanie J. Nelson, to assert that any
woman *you do not know* but whom *I know* may be reviled at liberty without
consequences for the fun of it in public *in a manner you would most likely
kill before you allowed to happen to you*, Stephanie J. Nelson, by *any male
(more inclusive than man, which, for example, excludes me, Daniel A. Foss)
who so happens to be in a reviling mood*? This is feminism? This is any kind
of morality at all?
No!!! This is sick, depraved, and poseur-posturing pastyfaced plotting!
My position prior to yesterday became the following: Elizabeth N. Hubbard
should have in the past, and should in future, take all steps in her powerto
avoid making enemies. Those enemies not attributable to her formidabletalent
for making enemies hitherto would be considered under separate heading.
>...I complained because you were trying to bully Seeker1 into
>either apologizing to you or leaving the list,
Whatever I'd wanted in this connection from Steve Mizrach I forgot almost
immediately. Trouble was, my test audience laughed his head off, finding it
hilarious (not threatening) as it was, so it stayed in. (Offstage, there was
no intent, aside from waxing wroth, to remove Steve Mizrach from the list, I
could make it rain lots easier). At the time, I did believe he should have
apologized, not to me, but to Elizabeth N. Hubbard; as should everyone who
insults her on Leri@gossip.pyramid.com, hundreds of people. Let her takecare
of herself, all bad things must come to an end, and never more shallElizabeth
N. Hubbard and I exchange aught for aught.
It is a cinch that Stephanie J. Nelson's father's sitcom scripts might have
looked scary typed on plain bond typing paper. Some things whencontextualized
are funny; others when decontextualized are funny.
I swear, chopping up this paragraph into little pieces is just cracking meup,
never laughed so hard in months.
>...and because you said that the Jews were solely responsible foreverything
>good about this country.
See "smart people as outliers in cultural analysis modeling," Fri, 11 Feb1994
00:04:02 EST for canonical interpretation of this passage, which requiresthe
reader to actually read the words, and somewhat closely, too. It means, as I
said, well, I might have "said, 'Thanks to the Jews, the sun will come up in
the morning.' But why bother...."
People today just don't read the words when they read. Atrocious.
>...Your statements were not ambiguous in my view...
Maybe you ought to move into a new apartment with the windows facing inother
directions.
>...nor was my interpretation of them in any way clouded by my self-imageand
>occupational status.
The foregoing exhibits such an overwhelming set of tendencies toself-deception
in locating absolutely everyone or anything in social space that, if in the
least true, suggests that, in accordance with her own admissions, Stephanie
J. Nelson is duty bound to retire forthwith from the social sciencebusiness:
She has literally stated that she can never under any circumstances betrusted
to not fool herself.
>...As for smears and lies, well, since there is no evidence of them inmy
>post,
See "smart people as outliers in cultural analysis modeling," Fri, 11 Feb1994,
00:04::02 EST, it's in there. Furthermore, the observed actions and writings
on this question cannot be abstracted from what is contained on five hundred
floppy disks, in scattered locations of course, and five thousand pages of
laserprintout, in scattered locations. A sufficiently large army of clerical
workers without question can assemble the "smoking gun" wherewith the charge
that Stephanie J. Nelson was prepared to pounce on any remotely likely bitof
fun and games to level charges of the most scabrous moral defalcations canbe
substantiated beyond any doubt, reasonable or otherwise.
>...they must be your projections....
Can the Freud, please. Evidence! Evidence! Evidence!
>...And what is this "evidence" you refer to?
See above.
>...Since when is your interpretation of a text "evidence," and mine aclass-
>bound "bias"?
Those of us who come from long lines of petty clerks and most juniordetectives
in the station house know from putting away little pieces of paper fromyears
ago which just might prove interesting in some entirely unforeseen back then
matter years hence. Patience, pettifogging, paper. That does it, every time.
Best of all when one's possibilities of life are diminished and this is the
most interesting game in town.
>...Don't try my generosity, Dan--
Lo, a threat!
>...unlike others on this list, I respect you enough...
This part of the sentence is known in the Shrinkish profession as "the
sandwich," part of one of a set of practices used in training the "client"
or "patient" in the art of lying or faking out opponents, as in powerlunches,
power meetings, and such. The truth value of any variant of "the sandwich"is
always FALSE, as it is abstracted from the lie wherein it is integrallyembed-
ded.
>...to hold you accountable for what you say and to take it seriously.
A Shrinko usage, meaning, YOU ARE GUILTY AND NOTHING MORE THAN FULL AND
COMPLETE ACCEPTANCE OF FAULT AS DICTATED BY HIGHER AUTHORITY AS YOUR
COMMISSION INTO THE RECORD IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR ADMISSION OF GUILT. Most
commonly known as "take responsibility." There is no negotiation possiblewith
anyone demanding you "take responsibility," hence the confession is either
part of some "therapy" wherefor money is exacted or it is a very seriousthreat
uttered by a highly confident enemy.
>Thus in my book you are guilty as sin of (another) swaggering,over-aggressive
>power play. This also has nothing to do with (your presumptions of) myviews
>on abortion. Don't repeat the infelicity of your original post byattempting
>yet another character assassination.
Translation: I, Stephanie J. Nelson, herewith and with all due solemnity and
finality, pronounce myself the absolute and unquestionable arbiter of factand
truth regarding you, Daniel A. Foss. Consider, carefully, Daniel A. Foss,that,
given the disparity in socioeconomic status, nobody has any reason tobelieve
you, HUMAN GARBAGE, yet has every reason to lend credence to me, a SOLID
CITIZEN! So give up, you have no choice, you must lose, Who the **** areyou,
anyway, to question my infallible judgment for the merest fraction of asecond!
Still, it is false, she lies. (Who cares, though; the truth is true, that'sall
one may say for it.
>It doesn't become you.
Which of course is yet another threat. (What becomes me, around the Upper
Middle Class, is steering clear of it.)
******************
(5) How else is one to take the squeals of pain uttered by one Michael Shere
<mshere@> in "good-bye," Tue, 25 Jan 1994 14:04:12 -0600. The
temporal sequencing, where Stephanie J. Nelson's "Smears, lies, misses &
disses" is dated Mon, 24 Jan 1994 16:20:22 PST, lends support to theproposi-
tion that the latter, that is, of the day before, *most immediatelystimulated
and legitimated* the amorphous feelings of, perhaps, inadequacy roilingMichael
Shere's equanimity hitherto. Which, notwithstanding, he had stifled,restrained
and constrained himself from uttering, found unnameable, or elsewiserendered
himself inarticulate due in part to absent social support or opinionleadership
*which could articulate for him* what he could not so squeal on his ownbehalf.
That is, where previously this Michael Shere might have doubted that hewas
bright enough, perhaps not bright at all, to grasp the flow of thediscussion,
where Daniel A. Foss himself contributed but a fraction of the posts but,most
significantly, *both of the posts flayed by Stephanie J. Nelson* in hers ofJan
21 and Jan 24 (and note carefully, we are not in the least interested in the
"deep underlying motives of Stephanie J. Nelson" in so doing, on whichmatter
Daniel A. Foss has received, unsolicited, one [at least] highly baroque
armchair analysis relating her persecutory mania to Daniel A. Foss' pres-
cription drug consumption, construed by Stephanie J. Nelson as the root of
all evil, according to this fantasist, by reason of her alleged immersion
in the subculture of a California-centered octopuslike conspiratorial entity
- initial character of said entity's name 'S' - whose ostensible goals,
methods, and objectives were directed with approbation at the treatment or
cure of drug addiction, supplanting same with its functional equivalent in
the form of *peapodism*. Those turned into peapods are in popular fancy
regarded as never having shed or escaped their psychic captivity and slavery
(to their programming if not to specific controllers).
Which illustrates what kind of just-about-anything some people believeabout
what Californians are capable of turning into or doing.
On no occasion, at no time, has Daniel A. Foss ever regarded or suspected
Stephanie J. Nelson of having become or mutated into a peapod. This is true,
and beyond question. Stephanie J. Nelson is not a peapod. (Note: This means
exactly what it says, but is contrived as provocative, you damn betcha.)
Rather, the salient motives are intermediate-level or even superficial.The
two posts wherein she mounts her soapbox to vilify Daniel A. Foss on such
ironic and incongruous charges as "character assassination" are *documentsof
list micropolitics*, whose objectives are the mobilization of theconstituency
known to exist, comprising the Michael Sheres (Much less the Dawn Atkinses;the
latter, Dawn Atkins, finds the list boring, who doesn't, why should she be
different); the unknown, the unsung, the silent (not a silent majority; nota
silent anything; just silent), the occupant of the Tomb of the Unknown
Subscriber, and the owner of the Mail Clogged Account. Suchlike.
Thus saith Michael Shere:
>I cannot believe the level of childish squabbling and empty wordplay
>rampant on this list. I have been a member for several months now and
>have found nothing but narcissistic ramblings and empty debate. There is
>the occasional insight, but hardly worth wading through the likes of
>that asshole Foss and his bonehead cohorts. I am still interested in
>finding a worthwhile list concerning things anthropological, and would
>appreciate any help locating such a phenomenon (should it truly exist).
>Please send any reply directly to my address, as I am signing-off this
>list. Thanks and good-bye.
Who are the "bonehead cohorts"?
There is a mostly-facetious offline letter I wrote to a person who cannot
receive this post, where I suggest a possible membership of the "bonehead
cohorts," said group having been fantasized, reified, imagined by Michael
Shere under impetus of *marking* by Stephanie J. Nelson of myself;*suggestion*
impelled by legitimation of Shere's discontents by Stephanie J. Nelson tothe
effect that a *pattern* existed hence might be recognized; and *imputation*to
the correspondingly recognized pattern (where the principle is, you try tosee
Thingies made up of stars in the sky, you'll End Up with Constellations,Zodiac
and all of that stuff in there) of *magical powers of causation and
coagulation*. Where the latter word suggests the well-known Paranoid rule of
thumb that conspiracies which do not clot do not exist. (Millions have metLee
Harvey Oswald; few were in the same meetings.) I wrote:
>Who are these bonehead cohorts? I suggest the social or just plainParanoid
>construction of a clique or cabal of bonehead cohorts out of, given the
>context, the round-robin succession of posts of comments by givenbonehead
>cohorts of prior posts by [DA]Foss or other bonehead cohorts. If thecommunity
>should concur in the suggested list, or add names missing here orsubtract
>those incongruously listed, this would be a great help, most notably inthe
>rigor of formulating a valid boundary definition of the "they" we wishto
>identify, not *qua* they, but *qua* notional they as - presumably vaguely-
>fancied by Michael. The fact that said they have nothing really incommon,
>do not like each other, or would summon police and neighborhood watchers
>should
>their notional leader, [DA]Foss, materialize at their homes is notrelevant.
>
>My starter list would include:
>DAF [ex officio]
>McCreery
>Read, Dwight/D. Read
>Seeker1/Steve Mizrach
>James G. Carrier
>Mike Lieber
>SS51000/Bob Graber
> Due to the usage "bonehead cohorts," women have been a prioriexcluded
>from the suggested starter list, e.g., Susan Love Brown
Daniel A. Foss
<fiat iustitia pereat omnes>
Previous Index Next